Why do people favor NYC firms? Forum

[Aston2412]

But that 1BR will typically come with a doorman and an in-building gym, along with other amenities. Those add up to a lot of money in rent for the more glitzy areas.

Sounds like a 1 BR you could get in downtown DC for 3k.

Why do people bitch about NYC being so much more expensive again?

[unc0mm0n1]

95% of people in this thread apparently have never set foot anywhere in NYC outside of Manhattan below 96th Street.

It makes me want to slam my head against a wall every time someone goes to New York for a summer, works in Midtown, pays three grand a month to live in Kips Bay or something, eats shitty $15 burgers at P.J. Clarke's, and then leaves saying, "OMG New York is so crowded and dirty and overpriced!"

I live in the Bronx (for the summer) and work at a firm in the Financial district and I completely agree with the bolded.

[jarofsoup]

95% of people in this thread apparently have never set foot anywhere in NYC outside of Manhattan below 96th Street.

It makes me want to slam my head against a wall every time someone goes to New York for a summer, works in Midtown, pays three grand a month to live in Kips Bay or something, eats shitty $15 burgers at P.J. Clarke's, and then leaves saying, "OMG New York is so crowded and dirty and overpriced!"

I live in the Bronx (for the summer) and work at a firm in the Financial district and I completely agree with the bolded.

I can't say that SF is not dirty. Bums take huge dumps on the streets. But I have heard this about NYC, butI have never personally seen it.

All I know is rent is insane! I am from the Bay Area and I thought rent was high. 2100+utilities+10% brokering fees for a 1-496 square foot studio in Brooklyn Heights is totally insane. For that kind of money in the Bay Area you could get an amazing apartment with no brokering fees.

[seriouslyinformative]

First Debevoise and now Kirkland. What's with rising 2Ls talking smack about good firms? Keg, focus on your transfer applications.

[keg411]

First Debevoise and now Kirkland. What's with rising 2Ls talking smack about good firms? Keg, focus on your transfer applications.

My information is from my sister, who is an attorney at a biglawl firm that works with K&E regularly and from a friend that worked at K&E. All of my firm information is from solid sources.

[alumniguy]

First Debevoise and now Kirkland. What's with rising 2Ls talking smack about good firms? Keg, focus on your transfer applications.

generally "good firms" = "bad firms" for junior associates.

also, to jump on the nyc love bandwagon. i'm guessing that most of the people in this thread have spent little to no time in NYC. Yes, NYC can be dirty, smell and lacking in green space; however, you can find clean areas and spaces if you know where to look and choose to spend a bit more on your housing. There are parks everywhere in the city. They aren't huge parks, but if you live anywhere on the UES or UWS, you are likely within walking distance/bus ride of central park, which is a great oasis. Living further downtown? Check out the area by Chelsea Piers, again - fairly large swaths of green grass, on the waterfront, etc. There is biking along the entire Westside. You want to live in Gramercy or East Village, check out the parks in Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village. And this is just Manhattan. I imagine it is the same in Brooklyn - McCarren Park, etc.

Further, NYC is an hour train ride from great hiking and incredible beaches. Take a few hours on Saturday and take the train up to Westchester to go golfing. Or go hiking at Bear Mountain. Or take the train to Long Beach for a great white sand beach. Or take the train to Montauk for the weekend. Newbies to NYC generally FAIL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES.

And while housing is expensive, no one needs $20,000 to move into an apartment. First and security + brokers is about 7500 on a $2500 apt. If you are working in biglaw, you aren't going to be considered a credit risk (unless you're looking at tony buildings) and I'd be shocked if most people had to pay more than first and security + broker. You can omit a broker's fee by renting in a large highrise, but then you generally have higher rents (albeit with amenities). And what is the obsession with Murray Hill/Kips Bay/Midtown East...why would any 1st year associate even consider living in that area?

[Kronk]

That's the thing about people from New York. They have way lower standards for cleanliness, smelliness, and green space. You tell them NYC is dirty, smelly, overcrowded and doesn't have any trees and they say you just don't know where to look or haven't taken advantage of the opportunities. Generally the conversation goes "There isn't much nature in NYC." Response: "Have you been to Central Park?" "Have you seen the row of trees on 108th?"

Most other cities don't quarantine off their nature. You also don't have to take a train or drive more than an hour to be in some beautiful nature in most cities. In L.A., you can be at the trailhead of a hike that ends in a waterfall in 20-30 mins in addition to having the beach nearby. In SF, you can be surfing in 20 minutes, at Stinson Beach in 20 minutes, on a hike in a half hour, or at Yosemite in a couple hours.

Saying you just don't know where to look in New York is like saying someone who's constipated just isn't trying hard enough. Maybe you're right, but it's going to be as uncomfortable as a motherfucker either way.

[quakeroats]

That's the thing about people from New York. They have way lower standards for cleanliness, smelliness, and green space. You tell them NYC is dirty, smelly, overcrowded and doesn't have any trees and they say you just don't know where to look or haven't taken advantage of the opportunities. Generally the conversation goes "There isn't much nature in NYC." Response: "Have you been to Central Park?" "Have you seen the row of trees on 108th?"

Most other cities don't quarantine off their nature. You also don't have to take a train or drive more than an hour to be in some beautiful nature in most cities. In L.A., you can be at the trailhead of a hike that ends in a waterfall in 20-30 mins in addition to having the beach nearby. In SF, you can be surfing in 20 minutes, at Stinson Beach in 20 minutes, on a hike in a half hour, or at Yosemite in a couple hours.

Saying you just don't know where to look in New York is like saying someone who's constipated just isn't trying hard enough. Maybe you're right, but it's going to be as uncomfortable as a motherfucker either way.

Central park runs from 59th to 110th street. If you're in Manhattan, you're almost by definition a lot closer than an hour's drive/walk/cab/subway to nature.

[Kronk]

That's the thing about people from New York. They have way lower standards for cleanliness, smelliness, and green space. You tell them NYC is dirty, smelly, overcrowded and doesn't have any trees and they say you just don't know where to look or haven't taken advantage of the opportunities. Generally the conversation goes "There isn't much nature in NYC." Response: "Have you been to Central Park?" "Have you seen the row of trees on 108th?"

Most other cities don't quarantine off their nature. You also don't have to take a train or drive more than an hour to be in some beautiful nature in most cities. In L.A., you can be at the trailhead of a hike that ends in a waterfall in 20-30 mins in addition to having the beach nearby. In SF, you can be surfing in 20 minutes, at Stinson Beach in 20 minutes, on a hike in a half hour, or at Yosemite in a couple hours.

Saying you just don't know where to look in New York is like saying someone who's constipated just isn't trying hard enough. Maybe you're right, but it's going to be as uncomfortable as a motherfucker either way.

Central park runs from 59th to 110th street. If you're in Manhattan, you're almost by definition a lot closer than an hour's drive/walk/cab/subway to nature.

Central Park is not nature in any other city's definition of the word, was more my point.

[alumniguy]

That's the thing about people from New York. They have way lower standards for cleanliness, smelliness, and green space. You tell them NYC is dirty, smelly, overcrowded and doesn't have any trees and they say you just don't know where to look or haven't taken advantage of the opportunities. Generally the conversation goes "There isn't much nature in NYC." Response: "Have you been to Central Park?" "Have you seen the row of trees on 108th?"

Most other cities don't quarantine off their nature. You also don't have to take a train or drive more than an hour to be in some beautiful nature in most cities. In L.A., you can be at the trailhead of a hike that ends in a waterfall in 20-30 mins in addition to having the beach nearby. In SF, you can be surfing in 20 minutes, at Stinson Beach in 20 minutes, on a hike in a half hour, or at Yosemite in a couple hours.

Saying you just don't know where to look in New York is like saying someone who's constipated just isn't trying hard enough. Maybe you're right, but it's going to be as uncomfortable as a motherfucker either way.

And that's the thing about people not from New York. They complain about everything in New York and hold it up to impossible standards while failing to actually acknowledge that there are parts to New York that you simply can't find in any other city. A New Yorker says, you can get to a great beach in an hour by public transport without a car. A non-New Yorker responds, but in LA and San Fran you can get to a beach in 20 minutes, never mind that public transportation pales in comparison to where you can go in New York. A New Yorker says that New York has great architecture. A non-New Yorker responds, but look at Chicago, I mean that is where skyscrapers were born. A New Yorker says, well you have to at least agree that the food in New York is awesome. A non-New Yorker says, but it is too expensive and you can get great food anywhere.

I mean the list of things that NYC has in abundance is very difficult to replicate...incredible restaurants, architecture, theater, music, art, fashion, proximity to great beaches, etc. Yes, you'll find cities that can compete with New York in one or two areas, but combined, no other city offers the breadth of options that New York has. Period.

[quakeroats]

That's the thing about people from New York. They have way lower standards for cleanliness, smelliness, and green space. You tell them NYC is dirty, smelly, overcrowded and doesn't have any trees and they say you just don't know where to look or haven't taken advantage of the opportunities. Generally the conversation goes "There isn't much nature in NYC." Response: "Have you been to Central Park?" "Have you seen the row of trees on 108th?"

Most other cities don't quarantine off their nature. You also don't have to take a train or drive more than an hour to be in some beautiful nature in most cities. In L.A., you can be at the trailhead of a hike that ends in a waterfall in 20-30 mins in addition to having the beach nearby. In SF, you can be surfing in 20 minutes, at Stinson Beach in 20 minutes, on a hike in a half hour, or at Yosemite in a couple hours.

Saying you just don't know where to look in New York is like saying someone who's constipated just isn't trying hard enough. Maybe you're right, but it's going to be as uncomfortable as a motherfucker either way.

Central park runs from 59th to 110th street. If you're in Manhattan, you're almost by definition a lot closer than an hour's drive/walk/cab/subway to nature.

Central Park is not nature in any other city's definition of the word, was more my point.

You've got a weird definition of nature. Parks, especially parks as large and varied as Central Park, should qualify.

[Kronk]

And that's the thing about people not from New York. They complain about everything in New York and hold it up to impossible standards while failing to actually acknowledge that there are parts to New York that you simply can't find in any other city. A New Yorker says, you can get to a great beach in an hour by public transport without a car. A non-New Yorker responds, but in LA and San Fran you can get to a beach in 20 minutes, never mind that public transportation pales in comparison to where you can go in New York. A New Yorker says that New York has great architecture. A non-New Yorker responds, but look at Chicago, I mean that is where skyscrapers were born. A New Yorker says, well you have to at least agree that the food in New York is awesome. A non-New Yorker says, but it is too expensive and you can get great food anywhere.

I mean the list of things that NYC has in abundance is very difficult to replicate...incredible restaurants, architecture, theater, music, art, fashion, proximity to great beaches, etc. Yes, you'll find cities that can compete with New York in one or two areas, but combined, no other city offers the breadth of options that New York has. Period.

Trees are a pretty big deal in my opinion, and NYC is by far the worst of any major city I've been to in that regard. I don't put "slightly better food" on par with trees.

Some people don't care about nature. To each their own. I just find it humorous that whenever you point out that New York is by far the least nature-friendly down in the USA, New Yorkers act like you just don't know where to look. Nope, I understand your geography, getting to anywhere nice is just that much harder in NYC.

[luthersloan]

And that's the thing about people not from New York. They complain about everything in New York and hold it up to impossible standards while failing to actually acknowledge that there are parts to New York that you simply can't find in any other city. A New Yorker says, you can get to a great beach in an hour by public transport without a car. A non-New Yorker responds, but in LA and San Fran you can get to a beach in 20 minutes, never mind that public transportation pales in comparison to where you can go in New York. A New Yorker says that New York has great architecture. A non-New Yorker responds, but look at Chicago, I mean that is where skyscrapers were born. A New Yorker says, well you have to at least agree that the food in New York is awesome. A non-New Yorker says, but it is too expensive and you can get great food anywhere.

I mean the list of things that NYC has in abundance is very difficult to replicate...incredible restaurants, architecture, theater, music, art, fashion, proximity to great beaches, etc. Yes, you'll find cities that can compete with New York in one or two areas, but combined, no other city offers the breadth of options that New York has. Period.

Trees are a pretty big deal in my opinion, and NYC is by far the worst of any major city I've been to in that regard. I don't put "slightly better food" on par with trees.

Some people don't care about nature. To each their own. I just find it humorous that whenever you point out that New York is by far the least nature-friendly down in the USA, New Yorkers act like you just don't know where to look. Nope, I understand your geography, getting to anywhere nice is just that much harder in NYC.

Now I understand why NYC is my favorite city, it has the least trees. Though, really it could have fewer. For starters, I think central park is in serious need of some skyscrapers.

[thecilent]

And that's the thing about people not from New York. They complain about everything in New York and hold it up to impossible standards while failing to actually acknowledge that there are parts to New York that you simply can't find in any other city. A New Yorker says, you can get to a great beach in an hour by public transport without a car. A non-New Yorker responds, but in LA and San Fran you can get to a beach in 20 minutes, never mind that public transportation pales in comparison to where you can go in New York. A New Yorker says that New York has great architecture. A non-New Yorker responds, but look at Chicago, I mean that is where skyscrapers were born. A New Yorker says, well you have to at least agree that the food in New York is awesome. A non-New Yorker says, but it is too expensive and you can get great food anywhere.

I mean the list of things that NYC has in abundance is very difficult to replicate...incredible restaurants, architecture, theater, music, art, fashion, proximity to great beaches, etc. Yes, you'll find cities that can compete with New York in one or two areas, but combined, no other city offers the breadth of options that New York has. Period.

Trees are a pretty big deal in my opinion, and NYC is by far the worst of any major city I've been to in that regard. I don't put "slightly better food" on par with trees.

Some people don't care about nature. To each their own. I just find it humorous that whenever you point out that New York is by far the least nature-friendly down in the USA, New Yorkers act like you just don't know where to look. Nope, I understand your geography, getting to anywhere nice is just that much harder in NYC.

Lol wtf

[APimpNamedSlickback]

.

[Kronk]

i'll be out until 4:30 tonight having a blast while enjoying any number of new york's incredible late night alternatives with any number of my many, many friends that moved here either after college or for 1l summer.

kronk will be making love to a maple tree.

Daresay given what we know about one another that my maple tree will derive more pleasure from the night than any of your TTT friends.

[Kronk]

Regarding thecilent, when I say "trees," I am referring to nature in general. As in, a place where you can walk without looking at concrete and piles of hobo excrement. HTH.

[BruceWayne]

...

[rayiner]

First Debevoise and now Kirkland. What's with rising 2Ls talking smack about good firms? Keg, focus on your transfer applications.

generally "good firms" = "bad firms" for junior associates.

also, to jump on the nyc love bandwagon. i'm guessing that most of the people in this thread have spent little to no time in NYC. Yes, NYC can be dirty, smell and lacking in green space; however, you can find clean areas and spaces if you know where to look and choose to spend a bit more on your housing. There are parks everywhere in the city. They aren't huge parks, but if you live anywhere on the UES or UWS, you are likely within walking distance/bus ride of central park, which is a great oasis. Living further downtown? Check out the area by Chelsea Piers, again - fairly large swaths of green grass, on the waterfront, etc. There is biking along the entire Westside. You want to live in Gramercy or East Village, check out the parks in Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village. And this is just Manhattan. I imagine it is the same in Brooklyn - McCarren Park, etc.

Further, NYC is an hour train ride from great hiking and incredible beaches. Take a few hours on Saturday and take the train up to Westchester to go golfing. Or go hiking at Bear Mountain. Or take the train to Long Beach for a great white sand beach. Or take the train to Montauk for the weekend. Newbies to NYC generally FAIL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES.

And while housing is expensive, no one needs $20,000 to move into an apartment. First and security + brokers is about 7500 on a $2500 apt. If you are working in biglaw, you aren't going to be considered a credit risk (unless you're looking at tony buildings) and I'd be shocked if most people had to pay more than first and security + broker. You can omit a broker's fee by renting in a large highrise, but then you generally have higher rents (albeit with amenities). And what is the obsession with Murray Hill/Kips Bay/Midtown East...why would any 1st year associate even consider living in that area?

The parks are full of homeless people. The rivers are filthy and smell that way. Sure you can do nice things in any city if you leave the city. There are no "incredible beaches" on the east coast north of Virginia.

As for Murray Hill/Kips Bay/Midtown East -- if you work at any of the dozens of law firms in midtown east, there is a huge QoL benefit of living near work. Although on a related note my QoL has gone up several fold since I realized that if you take the S into Grand Central Station from the west side instead of the 7, you can exit through the MetLife building and minimize the amount of time you spend in the filthiest parts of the station.

Re: the things about NYC: "...incredible restaurants, architecture, theater, music, art, fashion, proximity to great beaches, etc." Nobody gives a shit about theater, art, or fashion. NYC isn't particularly known for its music scene, nor its architecture (unless you consider acres of run-down brownstones to be interesting architecture). So that leaves restaurants and lounges, which is really the only thing your average biglaw associate would care about. There is no doubt NYC has more and better night-life than any other major US city. Especially if you're ADD and need to try a different place every week. The question is whether the night life is worth the trade-offs in cleanliness, commute, housing options, and cost. For me I don't think it would be worth it all else being equal, but it certainly makes the rest of the city more tolerable.

[quakeroats]

There are no "incredible beaches" on the east coast north of Virginia.

There aren't really any incredible beaches in the continental U.S., with the possible exception of small slivers of California and Florida.

[NYC Law]

This all is beating a dead horse again...
Different strokes.

If you're big on nature then NYC probably isn't for you.
If you're apathetic to nature and are more into urban environments and culture, then NYC is probably for you.

/thread

[rayiner]

This all is beating a dead horse again...
Different strokes.

If you're big on nature then NYC probably isn't for you.
If you're apathetic to nature and are more into urban environments and culture, then NYC is probably for you.

/thread

Too much of a simplistic distinction. NYC doesn't have the market cornered on urban environments and culture. It's probably the best place in the world if your taste in urban environments runs towards turn of the century tenement living, but I'd say Chicago is a better fit for those with more modern tastes. It's not just "nature versus urban environment" it's "what kind of urban environment?" London and Tokyo are both urban environments, but NYC resembles the former (dirty, old, disorderly) a lot more than the latter (clean, orderly).

[alumniguy]

First Debevoise and now Kirkland. What's with rising 2Ls talking smack about good firms? Keg, focus on your transfer applications.

generally "good firms" = "bad firms" for junior associates.

also, to jump on the nyc love bandwagon. i'm guessing that most of the people in this thread have spent little to no time in NYC. Yes, NYC can be dirty, smell and lacking in green space; however, you can find clean areas and spaces if you know where to look and choose to spend a bit more on your housing. There are parks everywhere in the city. They aren't huge parks, but if you live anywhere on the UES or UWS, you are likely within walking distance/bus ride of central park, which is a great oasis. Living further downtown? Check out the area by Chelsea Piers, again - fairly large swaths of green grass, on the waterfront, etc. There is biking along the entire Westside. You want to live in Gramercy or East Village, check out the parks in Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village. And this is just Manhattan. I imagine it is the same in Brooklyn - McCarren Park, etc.

Further, NYC is an hour train ride from great hiking and incredible beaches. Take a few hours on Saturday and take the train up to Westchester to go golfing. Or go hiking at Bear Mountain. Or take the train to Long Beach for a great white sand beach. Or take the train to Montauk for the weekend. Newbies to NYC generally FAIL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES.

And while housing is expensive, no one needs $20,000 to move into an apartment. First and security + brokers is about 7500 on a $2500 apt. If you are working in biglaw, you aren't going to be considered a credit risk (unless you're looking at tony buildings) and I'd be shocked if most people had to pay more than first and security + broker. You can omit a broker's fee by renting in a large highrise, but then you generally have higher rents (albeit with amenities). And what is the obsession with Murray Hill/Kips Bay/Midtown East...why would any 1st year associate even consider living in that area?

The parks are full of homeless people. The rivers are filthy and smell that way. Sure you can do nice things in any city if you leave the city. There are no "incredible beaches" on the east coast north of Virginia.

As for Murray Hill/Kips Bay/Midtown East -- if you work at any of the dozens of law firms in midtown east, there is a huge QoL benefit of living near work. Although on a related note my QoL has gone up several fold since I realized that if you take the S into Grand Central Station from the west side instead of the 7, you can exit through the MetLife building and minimize the amount of time you spend in the filthiest parts of the station.

I don't even know where to start. Again, you'll notice that you've decided to compare New York beaches to those from Virginia on south. Not sure how anyone could compare them, but to say that New York's beaches are not incredible is just false. My guess is you've never been out to the Hamptons or Fire Island or Long Beach. Just spewing the same old, same old. I would agree that you can do nice things in any city if you leave the city, but my point was that New York can offer all of the same things that the "suburbs" offer with a short commute out of the city, yet there is still the vibrancy of all the things that New York has the other cities don't have. That is the difference in my opinion.

Who needs to be within walking distance of work? Living in those areas forces you to pretty much live with recent graduates and that makes the area feel like one big frat party. Why anyone would move to NYC and pay so much to live in an area crawling with sweatpants and uggs boots is beyond me. Living a 15 minute or 20 minute commute to the office doesn't present any QoL issues in my opinion. Perhaps my experiences in biglaw are unusual, but I've never felt compelled that I needed to get to the office in 5 minutes.

[alumniguy]

This all is beating a dead horse again...
Different strokes.

If you're big on nature then NYC probably isn't for you.
If you're apathetic to nature and are more into urban environments and culture, then NYC is probably for you.

/thread

Too much of a simplistic distinction. NYC doesn't have the market cornered on urban environments and culture. It's probably the best place in the world if your taste in urban environments runs towards turn of the century tenement living, but I'd say Chicago is a better fit for those with more modern tastes. It's not just "nature versus urban environment" it's "what kind of urban environment?" London and Tokyo are both urban environments, but NYC resembles the former (dirty, old, disorderly) a lot more than the latter (clean, orderly).

NYC housing comes in all stripes. There are very modern areas to the city - pretty much the entire downtwon Westside - Hells Kitchn, West Chelsea, Tribeca, Battery Park City that has some of the most modern buildings being built. You're going to pay through the nose to live in these areas (well maybe not Hells Kitchen). Much of Williamsburg/Greenpoint/Long Island City are being filled up with modern mid-highrise buildings as well, but those areas I would agree seem to lack the big city feel.

[quakeroats]

I don't even know where to start. Again, you'll notice that you've decided to compare New York beaches to those from Virginia on south. Not sure how anyone could compare them, but to say that New York's beaches are not incredible is just false. My guess is you've never been out to the Hamptons or Fire Island or Long Beach. Just spewing the same old, same old. I would agree that you can do nice things in any city if you leave the city, but my point was that New York can offer all of the same things that the "suburbs" offer with a short commute out of the city, yet there is still the vibrancy of all the things that New York has the other cities don't have. That is the difference in my opinion.

Who needs to be within walking distance of work? Living in those areas forces you to pretty much live with recent graduates and that makes the area feel like one big frat party. Why anyone would move to NYC and pay so much to live in an area crawling with sweatpants and uggs boots is beyond me. Living a 15 minute or 20 minute commute to the office doesn't present any QoL issues in my opinion. Perhaps my experiences in biglaw are unusual, but I've never felt compelled that I needed to get to the office in 5 minutes.

I love New York, but I wouldn't argue the beaches are incredible. What are your criteria for an incredible beach? I'd argue that proximity to the city is what's made the Hamptons.

This is what an incredible beach looks like: