Tiny Ray of Hope Forum

[2009 Prospective]

While it looks more and more like those who secure SAs for next summer aren't likely to be no offered if they perform competently, OCI looks as if it is still going to be almost just as brutal as last year. Looks like c/o 2013 will be the first to actually reap any real benefit if hiring does indeed pick back up as the article suggests.

Article: There is documented evidence of often substantial plans to increases hiring over last year

2009 Prospective: This year's hiring will be just as bad as last year

TLS: ????

Whoops, I actually misread the article taking it to mean that hiring wouldn't increase until 2011 summer OCI for those working over 2012 summer when it actually meant more people would be hired at this year's OCI for the 2011 summer. In that event, I'll amend my statement and remain cautiously optimistic. Based on pure conjecture alone though, I'm still doubtfull whether those going through OCI this summer will fare significantly better than last summer.

[VA LawDog]

Excellent news...however, it would be interesting to see if this is an actual market trend rather than a correction to over-firing/under-hiring.

[270910]

While it looks more and more like those who secure SAs for next summer aren't likely to be no offered if they perform competently, OCI looks as if it is still going to be almost just as brutal as last year. Looks like c/o 2013 will be the first to actually reap any real benefit if hiring does indeed pick back up as the article suggests.

Article: There is documented evidence of often substantial plans to increases hiring over last year

2009 Prospective: This year's hiring will be just as bad as last year

TLS: ????

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=3243463

[Blindmelon]

I hope this stems the flood of people pushing for PI jobs that don't really want them and are just using them as refuge from the storm. I still don't care about law firm employment directly, but I care about how the immense fall-off has been making it even harder than before to land top PI jobs. More spaces for top law students at top law firms = fewer top law students trying to settle for less money but a stable job.

Amen to this.

[doyleoil]

Excellent news...however, it would be interesting to see if this is an actual market trend rather than a correction to over-firing/under-hiring.

My reading of Cravath's move (probably wrong, but what the hell, my uninformed speculation is no worse than anybody else's) is that this class should be close to the "new normal". They slashed this summer's class to try to smooth things out, because they have a bunch of deferreds coming in about the same time as c/o 2011 will be showing up. They probably won't have to defer c/o 2011, because it's so small. So 2012 should be back on track for what they anticipate as "normal". Of course, they're still shooting in the dark, and if the economy crashed again, they'd prolly be back to the same old stealth/defer/etc. nonsense.

But that's just my reading of Cravath. Donno bout the others.

[270910]

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=3243463

But see --LinkRemoved--

[thebookcollector]

Excellent news...however, it would be interesting to see if this is an actual market trend rather than a correction to over-firing/under-hiring.

My reading of Cravath's move (probably wrong, but what the hell, my uninformed speculation is no worse than anybody else's) is that this class should be close to the "new normal". They slashed this summer's class to try to smooth things out, because they have a bunch of deferreds coming in about the same time as c/o 2011 will be showing up. They probably won't have to defer c/o 2011, because it's so small. So 2012 should be back on track for what they anticipate as "normal". Of course, they're still shooting in the dark, and if the economy crashed again, they'd prolly be back to the same old stealth/defer/etc. nonsense.

But that's just my reading of Cravath. Donno bout the others.

This sounds reasonable. It'll be years before everything is back to 2007-2008 levels; the new number will certainly be an improvement though.

[VA LawDog]

Excellent news...however, it would be interesting to see if this is an actual market trend rather than a correction to over-firing/under-hiring.

My reading of Cravath's move (probably wrong, but what the hell, my uninformed speculation is no worse than anybody else's) is that this class should be close to the "new normal". They slashed this summer's class to try to smooth things out, because they have a bunch of deferreds coming in about the same time as c/o 2011 will be showing up. They probably won't have to defer c/o 2011, because it's so small. So 2012 should be back on track for what they anticipate as "normal". Of course, they're still shooting in the dark, and if the economy crashed again, they'd prolly be back to the same old stealth/defer/etc. nonsense.

But that's just my reading of Cravath. Donno bout the others.

If so, that would truly be a ray hope

[miamiman]

Excellent news...however, it would be interesting to see if this is an actual market trend rather than a correction to over-firing/under-hiring.

My reading of Cravath's move (probably wrong, but what the hell, my uninformed speculation is no worse than anybody else's) is that this class should be close to the "new normal". They slashed this summer's class to try to smooth things out, because they have a bunch of deferreds coming in about the same time as c/o 2011 will be showing up. They probably won't have to defer c/o 2011, because it's so small. So 2012 should be back on track for what they anticipate as "normal". Of course, they're still shooting in the dark, and if the economy crashed again, they'd prolly be back to the same old stealth/defer/etc. nonsense.

But that's just my reading of Cravath. Donno bout the others.

This sounds reasonable. It'll be years before everything is back to 2007-2008 levels; the new number will certainly be an improvement though.

I'd hesitate to peg a "new normal" until c/o 2013 also has ~75 or so summers at Cravath.

[rando]

But see --LinkRemoved--

Signal in italics FTW

[como]

While it looks more and more like those who secure SAs for next summer aren't likely to be no offered if they perform competently, OCI looks as if it is still going to be almost just as brutal as last year. Looks like c/o 2013 will be the first to actually reap any real benefit if hiring does indeed pick back up as the article suggests.

Article: There is documented evidence of often substantial plans to increases hiring over last year

2009 Prospective: This year's hiring will be just as bad as last year

TLS: ????

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

I have a chart of the offer rates for the SA 2009 summer class for all the V100 firms in six major markets. It is here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=CI2yorQJ

[doyleoil]

While it looks more and more like those who secure SAs for next summer aren't likely to be no offered if they perform competently, OCI looks as if it is still going to be almost just as brutal as last year. Looks like c/o 2013 will be the first to actually reap any real benefit if hiring does indeed pick back up as the article suggests.

Article: There is documented evidence of often substantial plans to increases hiring over last year

2009 Prospective: This year's hiring will be just as bad as last year

TLS: ????

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

I have a chart of the offer rates for the SA 2009 summer class for all the V100 firms in six major markets. It is here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=CI2yorQJ

when i see things like this, two things happen:

1) i get really happy that i can just rely on other people to do great stuff for me
2) i get really sad that i'm not in any way visually or technologically inclined

[como]

Haha...unfortunately, using excel is one of the few things I remember from corporate finance I and II.

[dresden doll]

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=3243463

But see --LinkRemoved--

Thanks, dude. I've been aware of Latham, but I know there's more out there that I don't know much about it. For example, this morning someone brought to my attention that Baker Botts didn't extend a single offer at CLS last year. Not the equivalent of lathaming, of course, but it is the sort of info I'd like to be aware of when composing my bidlist.

[como]

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=3243463

But see --LinkRemoved--

Thanks, dude. I've been aware of Latham, but I know there's more out there that I don't know much about it. For example, this morning someone brought to my attention that Baker Botts didn't extend a single offer at CLS last year. Not the equivalent of lathaming, of course, but it is the sort of info I'd like to be aware of when composing my bidlist.

Baker Botts NYC no-offered half the 2009 SA class.

[dresden doll]

I have a chart of the offer rates for the SA 2009 summer class for all the V100 firms in six major markets. It is here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=CI2yorQJ

Just saw this. Thanks, Ryan Reynolds. Nice to 'see' you again.

[dresden doll]

Baker Botts NYC no-offered half the 2009 SA class.

See, that's exactly the kind of info I need to know about. I want NYC specifically, too.

Sorry for the hijack, doyle. I did bump disco's thread to take the discussion there so as to not detract from your article.

[como]

Baker Botts NYC no-offered half the 2009 SA class.

See, that's exactly the kind of info I need to know about. I want NYC specifically, too.

Sorry for the hijack, doyle. I did bump disco's thread to take the discussion there so as to not detract from your article.

Haha...sorry, I was too generous to BB. I see now that it was 1/4 of the NYC office. 52% in total. Let's hope their TX retention rates made up for their dismal post-summer offer rates everywhere else. I could add Dallas and Houston to the sheet. Maybe I'll do that tonight...

[Sell Manilla]

NY to 190: is this referring to starting salary?
[Sorry, 0L]

[rando]

NY to 190: is this referring to starting salary?
[Sorry, 0L]

Yes

[dresden doll]

Fixt per bb 2.1(d)

Subtle "I'm on LR" trolling."

(<3)

[270910]

NY to 190: is this referring to starting salary?
{Sorry, 0L}

Awwwww that's the cutest thing I've ever seen!

In the early 2000s, starting associate salary was much lower. They vegan to raise, more or less yearly, and more or less across the board. Simpson Thacher was the first to raise to 160 in NY / major markets, and most firms followed. People then speculated and rumored and gossiped about NYC's starting salary going to 190.

Then Lehman collapsed, ITE, Armageddon, gnashing of teeth, etc.

[rando]

Unrelated inquiry: mind linking me to the thread you started to remind us all of firms that screwed their associates over when economy went down the drain? I'm doing my bidlist now and I'd like to make sure I avoid them all.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=3243463

But see But see --LinkRemoved--

Fixt per bb 2.1(d)

Questionable.

The link is clearly not in BB format, but the signal isn't exactly being used as the verb in a regular sentence.

Speaking of this tangential rant, is there a BB thread?

[Big Shrimpin]

bestthreadevar

[d34d9823]

NY to 190: is this referring to starting salary?
{Sorry, 0L}

Awwwww that's the cutest thing I've ever seen!

In the early 2000s, starting associate salary was much lower. They vegan to raise, more or less yearly, and more or less across the board. Simpson Thacher was the first to raise to 160 in NY / major markets, and most firms followed. People then speculated and rumored and gossiped about NYC's starting salary going to 190.

Then Lehman collapsed, ITE, Armageddon, gnashing of teeth, etc.

Actually I think they carnivore to raise.