NYC to 200k Forum

[Pulsar]

I wonder if Davis Polk associates have to have good attendance in order to get their bonuses

[Anonymous User]

I wonder if Davis Polk associates have to have good attendance in order to get their bonuses

seems like only plausible way to determine "good standing"

[Anonymous User]

I wonder if Davis Polk associates have to have good attendance in order to get their bonuses

They need good attendance just to stay employed. Bonuses certainly require perfect attendance.

[nealric]

The lower down the firm is in the scale the longer it tends to take. It's not totally uncommon for lower v100 firms to announce partial or full matches months after the first movers.

If you look at the above the law scorecard from 2016 only two firms in the top 100 didn’t match within a month. One of those matched in a month and two days. Only 8 firms total that went to 180 for 1st years matched later than a month from Cravath’s announcement. Above the law doesn’t have data from the 07 raises.

I recall some firms taking months to match 160 back in 2007, but my memory could be imperfect. I think 180k was probably a really easy lift for most firms, as it was significantly less than inflation since '07. I also think there are a few 180k firms that weren't in the v100 that went to 180k some time later, although I don't think many did a full match up to senior level.

[Anonymous User]

The lower down the firm is in the scale the longer it tends to take. It's not totally uncommon for lower v100 firms to announce partial or full matches months after the first movers.

If you look at the above the law scorecard from 2016 only two firms in the top 100 didn’t match within a month. One of those matched in a month and two days. Only 8 firms total that went to 180 for 1st years matched later than a month from Cravath’s announcement. Above the law doesn’t have data from the 07 raises.

I recall some firms taking months to match 160 back in 2007, but my memory could be imperfect. I think 180k was probably a really easy lift for most firms, as it was significantly less than inflation since '07. I also think there are a few 180k firms that weren't in the v100 that went to 180k some time later, although I don't think many did a full match up to senior level.

I recall the same. It was actually pretty normal back then for non-NY firms to take their sweet time to match, especially in non-NY offices. Secondary cities didn't even see a bump to 160 for years.

[cdotson2]

I also messed up the dates a little cause I was going fast, I edited my original response with the right numbers

[Anonymous User]

OMM has to match eventually...right guys?

[Anonymous User]

Here is to hoping Katten matches. I think we fly under the radar because of our firm size but our PPP was 1.57m in 2017. On the other hand, CovingTTTon has pretty similar PPP numbers too (1.543m in 2017), so i guess we'll see.

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on Morgan Lewis?

[Anonymous User]

Best city for quality of life is Seattle. No state income tax. Real estate prices are not too unreasonable, especially compared to NY. Fairly mild weather. Not a dusty-looking shithole like Texas.

Only problem is there aren't that many firms that pay market. But I bet that changes in the near future as more Californians realize how terrible their state is and move to the closest alternative.

Southern Californian here, can't put a price on sunshine

You most certainly can and the price is much too high. Fellow Californian.

[Anonymous User]

OMM has to match eventually...right guys?

I sure as hell hope so.

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on Morgan Lewis?

The Ted Cruz of BigLaw

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on Morgan Lewis?

The Ted Cruz of BigLaw

Lol, but I don't get the joke... (seriously)

[Anonymous User]

PPP isn't the relevant metric. Elite boutiques like W&C (because yes, it is elite) have lower PPP because they aren't heavily leveraged.

Example (edited): People say that high PPP firms are more likely to raise salaries, but high PPP firms are the ones that also have to pay more for each incremental increase. Paul, Weiss might have a very high PPP but when leverage is like six associates to one partner, every $10k increase is a $60k hit to a partner. So high PPP firms get hurt more by increases. At an elite boutique where there the ratio is 1:1, a $10k increase is only a $10k hit to the partner, so even though they are less profitable, the increase doesn't get compounded by having a large number of associates dependent on that one partner.

Also, Boies probably has more unprestigious resumes (UCLA, GW, arguably Berkeley) than prestigious ones (HYSCCN). This is not true with elite boutiques like Susman, KVN, MTO, which are truly selective.

[Anonymous User]

Just spotted white and case partners going into a meeting with a display: “Associate Salary Discussion”

[Anonymous User]

profit per attorney the relevant metric?

[Anonymous User]

PPP isn't the relevant metric. Elite boutiques like W&C (because yes, it is elite) have lower PPP because they aren't heavily leveraged.

Example: Paul, Weiss might have a very high PPP but when leverage is like 6 associates to 1 partner, increasing every $10k increase is a $60k hit to a partner. At an elite boutique where there the ratio is 1:1, a $10k increase is only a $10k hit to the partner.

Also, Boies probably has more unprestigious resumes (UCLA, GW, arguably Berkeley) than prestigious ones (HYSCCN). This is not true with elite boutiques like Susman, KVN, MTO, which are truly selective.

I’m so not following the PPP bit. If Paul Weiss partners take a $60k hit for raising associates’ salaries by $10k wouldn’t their PPP be more greatly affected by raises than the elite boutiques?

[Anonymous User]

PPP isn't the relevant metric. Elite boutiques like W&C (because yes, it is elite) have lower PPP because they aren't heavily leveraged.

Example: Paul, Weiss might have a very high PPP but when leverage is like 6 associates to 1 partner, increasing every $10k increase is a $60k hit to a partner. At an elite boutique where there the ratio is 1:1, a $10k increase is only a $10k hit to the partner.

Also, Boies probably has more unprestigious resumes (UCLA, GW, arguably Berkeley) than prestigious ones (HYSCCN). This is not true with elite boutiques like Susman, KVN, MTO, which are truly selective.

I’m so not following the PPP bit. If Paul Weiss partners take a $60k hit for raising associates’ salaries by $10k wouldn’t their PPP be more greatly affected by raises than the elite boutiques?

Yes, that's the point the other poster is making. Even though W&C has a lower PPP, he is suggesting they will be less affected by a raise, so if PW can raise, W&C certainly can. (not my words, just explaining to you)

[Anonymous User]

PPP isn't the relevant metric. Elite boutiques like W&C (because yes, it is elite) have lower PPP because they aren't heavily leveraged.

Example: Paul, Weiss might have a very high PPP but when leverage is like 6 associates to 1 partner, increasing every $10k increase is a $60k hit to a partner. At an elite boutique where there the ratio is 1:1, a $10k increase is only a $10k hit to the partner.

Also, Boies probably has more unprestigious resumes (UCLA, GW, arguably Berkeley) than prestigious ones (HYSCCN). This is not true with elite boutiques like Susman, KVN, MTO, which are truly selective.

I’m so not following the PPP bit. If Paul Weiss partners take a $60k hit for raising associates’ salaries by $10k wouldn’t their PPP be more greatly affected by raises than the elite boutiques?

look at you guys talking about your "elite" lit boutiques. How about let me do a deposition as a third year at my V50

[Anonymous User]

PPP isn't the relevant metric. Elite boutiques like W&C (because yes, it is elite) have lower PPP because they aren't heavily leveraged.

Example: Paul, Weiss might have a very high PPP but when leverage is like 6 associates to 1 partner, increasing every $10k increase is a $60k hit to a partner. At an elite boutique where there the ratio is 1:1, a $10k increase is only a $10k hit to the partner.

Also, Boies probably has more unprestigious resumes (UCLA, GW, arguably Berkeley) than prestigious ones (HYSCCN). This is not true with elite boutiques like Susman, KVN, MTO, which are truly selective.

I’m so not following the PPP bit. If Paul Weiss partners take a $60k hit for raising associates’ salaries by $10k wouldn’t their PPP be more greatly affected by raises than the elite boutiques?

look at you guys talking about your "elite" lit boutiques. How about let me do a deposition as a third year at my V50

Tool.

[Anonymous User]

Willkie match + bonus

[Anonymous User]

Screen shot or it didn't happen

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on Morgan Lewis?

The Ted Cruz of BigLaw

Lol, but I don't get the joke... (seriously)

I can totally imagine some loser 24 year old 3L who will be starting at the Hillary Clinton of law firms (Debevoise) giddily typing that "joke" (which as you pointed out has no meaning and makes no sense) and being really proud of himself. This board will be dead after the salary matches when only these kind of posters are posting. SKADDEN TO 215K lets go baby.

[Anonymous User]

Screen shot or it didn't happen

I'm just the big bad troll.

[Anonymous User]

Screen shot or it didn't happen

I'm just the big bad troll.

Since we're really no longer in the waiting/torture era that was late last week/early this week that douchebags loved to exploit, i'm inclined to believe matches. We haven't had a fake one recently no?