There is nothing remotely comparable in the M&A field to the depth and complexity of drafting a USSC brief or arguing a complex case at the circuit court level. M&A could basically be done by a well trained monkey, and I am including even the partner level work. And don't get me wrong, I hate litigation and would never do it, and am not a junior, but being a corporate lawyer is an intellectual joke and is easier than graduating from high school.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:56 amAs a V20 5th year M&A associate, I confirm drafting work is intellectually challenging and complicated, but not so much as you described. A lot of it still copying and pasting. So not so simple as that other poster described, but not so challenging as you described either. I still think a high school graduate with good IQ and work ethic can be trained to be a good corporate associate.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:25 amHave you ever read a merger agreement? Your characterization that all M&A work is simple is totally off--sure some of it is at the junior levels, but at the mid and senior associate and partner levels it is absolutely intellectually challenging and super complicated.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:33 amYes, but in corporate biglaw the partners control the client relationships, and it doesn't really matter how stupid or uncharismatic they are, as long as they can get the work done and make the client happy. All they need from associates is warm bodies to grind out basic work, and IQ is hardly that important. Litigation boutiques operate in a very different market, where clients care a lot about how smart and well credentialed the associates are (and the same for the partners), and masses of mediocre warm bodies don't have much value. The nature of grindy M&A and high-end litigation is just vastly different - litigators need to be able to write sharp and coherent briefs, M&A associates need to be able to stay up all night over and over again to put together mind-numbing diligence memos that a trained monkey could do.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Mar 13, 2022 11:12 pmBut associates generally have the same credentials (unless you don't mean school/grades/clerkships) as the partners they're working for.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:46 amThe latter. Biglaw corporate is certainly more profitable, but associates are viewed mostly as replaceable chattel with mediocre credentials, so no real reason to start overpaying them. Lit boutiques actually care about IQ and credentials, so need to pay a premium to get that.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Mar 12, 2022 11:16 pmAre lit boutiques really more profitable than corporate practices? Seems doubtful, considering that lit is the weakest practice in biglaw, and biglaw litigators are no slouches. Or are above market boutiques just more comfortable with sharing the wealth with associates in the name of prestige?
I think the poster that talked about the "grindy M&A" is either a litigation associate or M&A junior associate that has no idea what he or she's talking about.
Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
My life would be so much easier if M&A were as easy and simple as you described. As a matter of fact, it's mind numbingly boring (but much less so than other corporate practice areas) and at the same time, quite intellectually challenging at times. You just haven't drafted and negotiated any merger agreement, SPA, asset purchase agreement, or shareholders' agreement. I felt like M&A was a donkey job until I became a fourth year myself.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:58 amThere is nothing remotely comparable in the M&A field to the depth and complexity of drafting a USSC brief or arguing a complex case at the circuit court level. M&A could basically be done by a well trained monkey, and I am including even the partner level work. And don't get me wrong, I hate litigation and would never do it, and am not a junior, but being a corporate lawyer is an intellectual joke and is easier than graduating from high school.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:56 amAs a V20 5th year M&A associate, I confirm drafting work is intellectually challenging and complicated, but not so much as you described. A lot of it still copying and pasting. So not so simple as that other poster described, but not so challenging as you described either. I still think a high school graduate with good IQ and work ethic can be trained to be a good corporate associate.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:25 amHave you ever read a merger agreement? Your characterization that all M&A work is simple is totally off--sure some of it is at the junior levels, but at the mid and senior associate and partner levels it is absolutely intellectually challenging and super complicated.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:33 amYes, but in corporate biglaw the partners control the client relationships, and it doesn't really matter how stupid or uncharismatic they are, as long as they can get the work done and make the client happy. All they need from associates is warm bodies to grind out basic work, and IQ is hardly that important. Litigation boutiques operate in a very different market, where clients care a lot about how smart and well credentialed the associates are (and the same for the partners), and masses of mediocre warm bodies don't have much value. The nature of grindy M&A and high-end litigation is just vastly different - litigators need to be able to write sharp and coherent briefs, M&A associates need to be able to stay up all night over and over again to put together mind-numbing diligence memos that a trained monkey could do.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Mar 13, 2022 11:12 pmBut associates generally have the same credentials (unless you don't mean school/grades/clerkships) as the partners they're working for.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:46 amThe latter. Biglaw corporate is certainly more profitable, but associates are viewed mostly as replaceable chattel with mediocre credentials, so no real reason to start overpaying them. Lit boutiques actually care about IQ and credentials, so need to pay a premium to get that.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Mar 12, 2022 11:16 pmAre lit boutiques really more profitable than corporate practices? Seems doubtful, considering that lit is the weakest practice in biglaw, and biglaw litigators are no slouches. Or are above market boutiques just more comfortable with sharing the wealth with associates in the name of prestige?
I think the poster that talked about the "grindy M&A" is either a litigation associate or M&A junior associate that has no idea what he or she's talking about.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
I agree. I think several firms, even several that previously matched this cycle, are waiting for Milbank to signal this has settled. What would really be disruptive is if Milbank matches and announces spring bonuses, and then we start all over again as everyone awaits DPW and Cravath to match or raise the bonuses.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:15 amIf Milbank doesn't match by the end of this week, I suspect they could be planning to re-raise or match with a special bonus. S&C and a few other firms, knowing that could happen, are remaining silent I think.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:13 amI don’t think so. S&C has not matched yet, either.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:11 amHas Milbank still not yet re-matched the Cravath scale?
-
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:44 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
So what are the v50s (or so), from which we have great evidence-based reason to expect a full match, but which have not yet announced one?
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
DLA at least matched Milbank in late January. Firms like S&C, Jones Day, and MoFo haven't yet announced anything.objctnyrhnr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:17 amSo what are the v50s (or so), from which we have great evidence-based reason to expect a full match, but which have not yet announced one?
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Willkie match. Previously matched DPW.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
K&S has not yet matched.objctnyrhnr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:17 amSo what are the v50s (or so), from which we have great evidence-based reason to expect a full match, but which have not yet announced one?
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
K&S match cravath for all partner track associates, all offices. Year 7+ just listed as 400+ with no year 8.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Confirmed.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:19 pmK&S match cravath for all partner track associates, all offices. Year 7+ just listed as 400+ with no year 8.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
wtf is a "partner track" associate? LOLAnonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:19 pmK&S match cravath for all partner track associates, all offices. Year 7+ just listed as 400+ with no year 8.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Not sure. Think it's just the formal internal designation. We do have staff attorneys but they are called staff attorneys not associates.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 3:11 pmwtf is a "partner track" associate? LOLAnonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:19 pmK&S match cravath for all partner track associates, all offices. Year 7+ just listed as 400+ with no year 8.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Let's keep this rolling, Atlanta firms!Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:19 pmK&S match cravath for all partner track associates, all offices. Year 7+ just listed as 400+ with no year 8.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Milbank Match.
/Thread
/Thread
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Now, now, we still have to see if SullCrom will ever match
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Dla and s and c and mofo still outstanding? (And JD, but eff Jd)Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 4:42 pmNow, now, we still have to see if SullCrom will ever match
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
And WSGR. What do people think of spring bonuses now????Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:00 pmDla and s and c and mofo still outstanding? (And JD, but eff Jd)Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 4:42 pmNow, now, we still have to see if SullCrom will ever match
- BrowsingTLS
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2021 6:17 pm
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Either vault is rigged or many survey participants are incredibly uninformed. Or both. It is astounding that jones day didn't plummet in the rankings years ago given the blackbox comp and many other issues.objctnyrhnr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:17 amSo what are the v50s (or so), from which we have great evidence-based reason to expect a full match, but which have not yet announced one?
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
Also, good to know Milbank finally matched. S&C will drag its associates as usual, but that's not enough to keep this thread interesting.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Gibson matched Cravath.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
DLA matched Cravath. Retroactive to January 1. Paid on April 4. All U.S. offices.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
I'm legit curious to see if this impacts Milbank's vault ranking. Maybe if it goes to v15, milBANK will raise again to crack v10.BrowsingTLS wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:23 pmEither vault is rigged or many survey participants are incredibly uninformed. Or both. It is astounding that jones day didn't plummet in the rankings years ago given the blackbox comp and many other issues.objctnyrhnr wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:17 amSo what are the v50s (or so), from which we have great evidence-based reason to expect a full match, but which have not yet announced one?
S&C
DLA
I know there are more
And will you all PLEASE stop vault-ranking Jones day so high every. Single. Year. My god. Send them below the v50 with the non-matchers where they belong.
Also, good to know Milbank finally matched. S&C will drag its associates as usual, but that's not enough to keep this thread interesting.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
NRF acted like they wanted to be seen as in lockstep with the market leaders but now they're competing with Baker Botts to be the last major Texas firm to match.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
NRF matched via firm wide phone call…no email.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 3:11 pmNRF acted like they wanted to be seen as in lockstep with the market leaders but now they're competing with Baker Botts to be the last major Texas firm to match.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Just want to call out some of the early Milbank or CSM adopters who still haven't reupped to DPW and/or CSM: Steptoe, McKool, Wilmer, MLB, Choate, Wilson, Jenner, and A&P. Shame.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k
Ok thanks, no one mentioned that yet here. So, BB is really in a spot.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 3:28 pmNRF matched via firm wide phone call…no email.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 3:11 pmNRF acted like they wanted to be seen as in lockstep with the market leaders but now they're competing with Baker Botts to be the last major Texas firm to match.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login