NY to 200k?! Forum

[ExpOriental]

Baker McKenzie matches DPW.

Edit: nevermind, full match

[Anonymous User]

I doubt things are over. DPW basically guaranteed it by doing the Stub year thing. Cooley and Fenwick (probably WSGR too) at the very least will definitely end up matching final market. But Fenwick has their weird tier level thing. Doubt they will bother with the stub year cheapness since it likely isn't worth the effort of making it fit into their system/changing payroll, so they'll likely need to at least kill that and vring it up to 205.

Nobody cares about stub-year associates and whether they go to 205 or not. I think 205 for a first-year associate is fine. I don’t see the pressure to raise to 210 unless a firm has a big ego. Given Davis was the most likely candidate due to their insane 2020 PPP figures, I think this is likely over. But who knows when egos are involved?

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

[Ultramar vistas]

I doubt things are over. DPW basically guaranteed it by doing the Stub year thing. Cooley and Fenwick (probably WSGR too) at the very least will definitely end up matching final market. But Fenwick has their weird tier level thing. Doubt they will bother with the stub year cheapness since it likely isn't worth the effort of making it fit into their system/changing payroll, so they'll likely need to at least kill that and vring it up to 205.

Nobody cares about stub-year associates and whether they go to 205 or not. I think 205 for a first-year associate is fine. I don’t see the pressure to raise to 210 unless a firm has a big ego. Given Davis was the most likely candidate due to their insane 2020 PPP figures, I think this is likely over. But who knows when egos are involved?

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

I applaud this attempt to bait Latham and Kirkland into putting their money where their mouth is.

[fmrez]

It is confounding that ATL doesn't include a link to the tracker in every single new match article.

[soft blue]

I doubt things are over. DPW basically guaranteed it by doing the Stub year thing. Cooley and Fenwick (probably WSGR too) at the very least will definitely end up matching final market. But Fenwick has their weird tier level thing. Doubt they will bother with the stub year cheapness since it likely isn't worth the effort of making it fit into their system/changing payroll, so they'll likely need to at least kill that and vring it up to 205.

Nobody cares about stub-year associates and whether they go to 205 or not. I think 205 for a first-year associate is fine. I don’t see the pressure to raise to 210 unless a firm has a big ego. Given Davis was the most likely candidate due to their insane 2020 PPP figures, I think this is likely over. But who knows when egos are involved?

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

You shouldn't post art anon.

[Untitleddestiny]

I doubt things are over. DPW basically guaranteed it by doing the Stub year thing. Cooley and Fenwick (probably WSGR too) at the very least will definitely end up matching final market. But Fenwick has their weird tier level thing. Doubt they will bother with the stub year cheapness since it likely isn't worth the effort of making it fit into their system/changing payroll, so they'll likely need to at least kill that and vring it up to 205.

Nobody cares about stub-year associates and whether they go to 205 or not. I think 205 for a first-year associate is fine. I don’t see the pressure to raise to 210 unless a firm has a big ego. Given Davis was the most likely candidate due to their insane 2020 PPP figures, I think this is likely over. But who knows when egos are involved?

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

Since when are Fenwick and Winston & Strawn "crappy" firms? They matched Milbank... and likely legitimately thought it was over, wanted to end it pre second raise, or wanted to immediately stand out to immediate laterals knowing they could just update as things move. People will care about stub years purely because they wouldn't be = / " the leader" if they underpaid while another firm didn't and needing to readjust is an excellent opportunity for additional change/grandstanding attempts. Think you are overthinking profit, it is not like Cravath was the best firm off financially every time it set the scale before (or Milbank ever). Most firms with decent margins can set it if they feel like it, they would just rather not.

[Untitleddestiny]

Dechert matched DPW

[Anonymous User]

I doubt things are over. DPW basically guaranteed it by doing the Stub year thing. Cooley and Fenwick (probably WSGR too) at the very least will definitely end up matching final market. But Fenwick has their weird tier level thing. Doubt they will bother with the stub year cheapness since it likely isn't worth the effort of making it fit into their system/changing payroll, so they'll likely need to at least kill that and vring it up to 205.

Nobody cares about stub-year associates and whether they go to 205 or not. I think 205 for a first-year associate is fine. I don’t see the pressure to raise to 210 unless a firm has a big ego. Given Davis was the most likely candidate due to their insane 2020 PPP figures, I think this is likely over. But who knows when egos are involved?

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

What is with the Cleary obsession on this website

[Anonymous User]

So are we basically just waiting on STB and Cravath at this point? I'd really like us to land on a round number.

[Anonymous User]

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.
[/quote]

my dude the fact that you think PW and K&E are not at the same level as DPW and you include Skadden and debevoise (lol) is the ultimate tell that you don't work at any of these firms. if you're in one of the teams that actually matters - finance, m&a, or cap markets - you already know this.

[Anonymous User]

the funniest thing about the matching sagas is that even if like S&C or CSM didn't match, they'd still get the same size summer class lmao bc law students are prestige whores.

[Anonymous User]

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

my dude the fact that you think PW and K&E are not at the same level as DPW and you include Skadden and debevoise (lol) is the ultimate tell that you don't work at any of these firms. if you're in one of the teams that actually matters - finance, m&a, or cap markets - you already know this.
[/quote]

I would actually argue he is spot on.

[Anonymous User]

Dechert matched DPW

Where are you seeing the Dechert match?

[ithrowds]

Dechert matched DPW

Where are you seeing the Dechert match?

Saw it as well on @nonequitypartner story on IG

[Anonymous User]

Dechert matched DPW

Where are you seeing the Dechert match?

Saw it as well on @nonequitypartner story on IG

Dammit does this mean I finally need an IG account now

[Anonymous User]

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

my dude the fact that you think PW and K&E are not at the same level as DPW and you include Skadden and debevoise (lol) is the ultimate tell that you don't work at any of these firms. if you're in one of the teams that actually matters - finance, m&a, or cap markets - you already know this.

I would actually argue he is spot on.
[/quote]

First guy: My dude, the fact that you think Kirkland is a peer of Davis makes it clear that you did not attend the target schools of the Wall Street firms, which are HLS, CLS, and NYU. Nobody at the top of those schools’ curve cares about Kirkland. Kirkland hires median and below and rarely above top 1/3. The battle for cross-offerees between Kirkland and New York elite would weigh extremely heavily (90%+) in favor of a firm like Davis, Sullivan, Cleary or even Skadden for anyone who had the options. And you can go from Simpson to Kirkland — how often do you see the opposite?

Don’t doubt Kirkland Chicago is a thing though for UChi and NW, the former of whom are elite.

Second guy. Yup.

[LBJ's Hair]

Kirkland can become DPW's peer by raising to $250K. Would urge them to consider. (K&E lurkers, pls screencap and forward to Andy Calder, thanks.)

[Sackboy]

Pegging your notion of prestige based off where 25 year olds choose to start their legal career is pretty humorous. PPP, non-partner compensation, and actual quality of the work should be what prestige is measured off. By those measures Skadden, Kirkland, and Latham are all easily peers of the classic white shoe firms. Based off news articles, none of these firms have had any problem bringing equity partners from the eLiTe firms. Also, humorous that people are calling firms with $2M+ PPP shitty. This is some next level prestige whoring and delusion. Ya'll are boomers clinging to the old world order.

[Anonymous User]

Edit: The crappy firms moved quickly because they wanted to signal Milbank is and should be market: Cadwalader, McDermott, Mintz, Winston, etc. Everyone knows Davis is the most profitable sub-Wachtell firm, so all of the top Wall Street firms were waiting for them to speak. (Davis’ unquestionable peer firms are Sullivan, Simpson, and Cravath, probably Cleary, maybe Skadden, P, W and Debevoise, and definitely not Latham or Kirkland.) Now that Davis has spoken I don’t see any reason for anyone to raise further.

my dude the fact that you think PW and K&E are not at the same level as DPW and you include Skadden and debevoise (lol) is the ultimate tell that you don't work at any of these firms. if you're in one of the teams that actually matters - finance, m&a, or cap markets - you already know this.

I would actually argue he is spot on.

First guy: My dude, the fact that you think Kirkland is a peer of Davis makes it clear that you did not attend the target schools of the Wall Street firms, which are HLS, CLS, and NYU. Nobody at the top of those schools’ curve cares about Kirkland. Kirkland hires median and below and rarely above top 1/3. The battle for cross-offerees between Kirkland and New York elite would weigh extremely heavily (90%+) in favor of a firm like Davis, Sullivan, Cleary or even Skadden for anyone who had the options. And you can go from Simpson to Kirkland — how often do you see the opposite?

Don’t doubt Kirkland Chicago is a thing though for UChi and NW, the former of whom are elite.

Second guy. Yup.
[/quote]

"DPW hires better first-year candidates than KE in NYC" seems like a weird way to define who a firm's peers are.

[Anonymous User]

Proskauer matched DPW scale.

[Anonymous User]

Proskauer just matched DPW

[Anonymous User]

Need Kirkland to get involved in this thing to light a fire under the collective ass of the Texas firms.

[Sackboy]

Wonder what this does to a firm like Shearman that has been on the rapid decline and already took a massive hit to PPP last year.

[Anonymous User]

Need Kirkland to get involved in this thing to light a fire under the collective ass of the Texas firms.

When KE moves it'll be because they think the bidding war is probably over.

[2013]

Pegging your notion of prestige based off where 25 year olds choose to start their legal career is pretty humorous. PPP, non-partner compensation, and actual quality of the work should be what prestige is measured off. By those measures Skadden, Kirkland, and Latham are all easily peers of the classic white shoe firms. Based off news articles, none of these firms have had any problem bringing equity partners from the eLiTe firms. Also, humorous that people are calling firms with $2M+ PPP shitty. This is some next level prestige whoring and delusion. Ya'll are boomers clinging to the old world order.

MWE and Mintz have gigantic nonequity partner classes that help support their $2M PPP. They’re not shitty, by any means, but I don’t think they could realistically raise much above this without seniors making more than nonequity partners.