Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k Forum

[Anonymous User]

Arnold Porter just matched Cravath.

[Anonymous User]

Any news on whether the Houston lit boutiques have/will match?

[Anonymous User]

Wilmer match.

[Wubbles]

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.

To be fair, MLB preemptively said they were going to match whatever market was

[Anonymous User]

Arnold Porter just matched Cravath.

Public shaming works

[objctnyrhnr]

Still don’t get how Jd gets away with its vault ranking and no match.

Is it some sort of secret fedsoc agreement or something?

(No I have no personal gripe against jd but I just think we don’t talk enough about how there’s this one major outlier in upper vault—something that we all, as associates, theoretically have complete control over)

[Anonymous User]

Still don’t get how Jd gets away with its vault ranking and no match.

Is it some sort of secret fedsoc agreement or something?

(No I have no personal gripe against jd but I just think we don’t talk enough about how there’s this one major outlier in upper vault—something that we all, as associates, theoretically have complete control over)

Really just a combination of them being in many far-flung low-margin markets and providing a comfortable landing spot for conservative lawyers.

[Anonymous User]

Still don’t get how Jd gets away with its vault ranking and no match.

Is it some sort of secret fedsoc agreement or something?

(No I have no personal gripe against jd but I just think we don’t talk enough about how there’s this one major outlier in upper vault—something that we all, as associates, theoretically have complete control over)

I really think JD’s perception is carried by its SCOTUS clerk hiring strength. Enough biglaw associates are aware of that one piece of info to boost its ranking.

[Anonymous User]

Still don’t get how Jd gets away with its vault ranking and no match.

Is it some sort of secret fedsoc agreement or something?

(No I have no personal gripe against jd but I just think we don’t talk enough about how there’s this one major outlier in upper vault—something that we all, as associates, theoretically have complete control over)

I really think JD’s perception is carried by its SCOTUS clerk hiring strength. Enough biglaw associates are aware of that one piece of info to boost its ranking.

JD also recruits high-ranking government lawyers directly to its partnership (former U.S. Attorneys, DOJ Chiefs, and so on), many of whom started their careers elsewhere. On the other hand, JD's talent pipeline isn't focused on getting the best junior associates available. It's a weird model, very different from the other Vault firms. But as far as name recognition and national influence (for better or worse), it's hard to say JD isn't one of the top 30 or so big law firms.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings reward firms that are more known nationally. Tons of prominent NY firms have limited visibility in the rest of the country so lawyers there just don't rank them. JD has a lot of visibility and in many markets is the biggest player in town. Baker MacKenzie is another below market firm (compression) that is ranked higher than it should be simply by being huge and known.

This is also why WLRK is #2 not #1, why boutiques that pay market or above languish in the lower half of the V100, why Kirkland and Latham are v5/6.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings reward firms that are more known nationally. Tons of prominent NY firms have limited visibility in the rest of the country so lawyers there just don't rank them. JD has a lot of visibility and in many markets is the biggest player in town. Baker MacKenzie is another below market firm (compression) that is ranked higher than it should be simply by being huge and known.

This is also why WLRK is #2 not #1, why boutiques that pay market or above languish in the lower half of the V100, why Kirkland and Latham are v5/6.

Oh no you didn't. Brace yourselves, KE bootlickers are coming.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings reward firms that are more known nationally. Tons of prominent NY firms have limited visibility in the rest of the country so lawyers there just don't rank them. JD has a lot of visibility and in many markets is the biggest player in town. Baker MacKenzie is another below market firm (compression) that is ranked higher than it should be simply by being huge and known.

This is also why WLRK is #2 not #1, why boutiques that pay market or above languish in the lower half of the V100, why Kirkland and Latham are v5/6.

Oh no you didn't. Brace yourselves, KE bootlickers are coming.

Hahaha. Look, it's a good firm (culture aside). But it's not inherently better than say DPW or any other V10, maybe even V15-20.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings reward firms that are more known nationally. Tons of prominent NY firms have limited visibility in the rest of the country so lawyers there just don't rank them. JD has a lot of visibility and in many markets is the biggest player in town. Baker MacKenzie is another below market firm (compression) that is ranked higher than it should be simply by being huge and known.

This is also why WLRK is #2 not #1, why boutiques that pay market or above languish in the lower half of the V100, why Kirkland and Latham are v5/6.

Just curious, wasn't Latham a V30-40 ten years ago?? How did it manage to boost its ranking so quickly?

[Sackboy]

Just curious, wasn't Latham a V30-40 ten years ago?? How did it manage to boost its ranking so quickly?

Latham was #7 in 2008, so your premise isn't doing too well. I find the general Latham/K&E shade to be hilarious, because they are as profitable as the "real" preffftigious firms and are on the exact same deals. Some people really can't handle the new kids on the block.

[Anonymous User]

Just curious, wasn't Latham a V30-40 ten years ago?? How did it manage to boost its ranking so quickly?

Latham was #7 in 2008, so your premise isn't doing too well. I find the general Latham/K&E shade to be hilarious, because they are as profitable as the "real" preffftigious firms and are on the exact same deals. Some people really can't handle the new kids on the block.

If they were #7 a decade and a half ago, how are they the new kids on the block.

[Anonymous User]

What was the above-market multiplier at k&S for its 100 hour increments over 1950?

Considering lateraling (mid-level), and wanted to get a sense of how much extra for higher hours. Thanks!

[Sackboy]

Just curious, wasn't Latham a V30-40 ten years ago?? How did it manage to boost its ranking so quickly?

Latham was #7 in 2008, so your premise isn't doing too well. I find the general Latham/K&E shade to be hilarious, because they are as profitable as the "real" preffftigious firms and are on the exact same deals. Some people really can't handle the new kids on the block.

If they were #7 a decade and a half ago, how are they the new kids on the block.

Kirkland had a similarly good ranking (#11) and is considered a "new kid on the block". It's a euphemism for non-NY HQ/non-white shoe firm. Both firms, despite being well ranked, were also definitely worse positioned in corporate work 15 years ago. Now, both have massive PE and considerable pubco strategic M&A practices.

[Anonymous User]

It's been years since people stopped calling K&E and Latham "the new kids on the block." To find out where they stood a long time ago, you would have to go back further than 2008. Back to the time when Shearman was a peer firm to firms like Cravath and S&C.

Vault is a joke though. Why would we even put big national firms like Skadden in the same rankings with lit boutiques? The only rankings out there that somewhat accurately show how firms stack up in terms of prestige among New York firms are Vault NY rankings. I don't know much about other regions, but I suppose other regional rankings are also somewhat accurate. For actual strength of practice groups, Chambers is accurate.

[Anonymous User]

Vault rankings reward firms that are more known nationally. Tons of prominent NY firms have limited visibility in the rest of the country so lawyers there just don't rank them. JD has a lot of visibility and in many markets is the biggest player in town. Baker MacKenzie is another below market firm (compression) that is ranked higher than it should be simply by being huge and known.

This is also why WLRK is #2 not #1, why boutiques that pay market or above languish in the lower half of the V100, why Kirkland and Latham are v5/6.

This isn’t true. Baker pays market lockstep. https://abovethelaw.com/2022/03/baker-c ... atch-2022/

[Anonymous User]

What was the above-market multiplier at k&S for its 100 hour increments over 1950?

Considering lateraling (mid-level), and wanted to get a sense of how much extra for higher hours. Thanks!

Wrong thread bro.

[Anonymous User]

What was the above-market multiplier at k&S for its 100 hour increments over 1950?

Considering lateraling (mid-level), and wanted to get a sense of how much extra for higher hours. Thanks!

Wrong thread bro.

About $3k-$6k (increases by year) per each 100 hours worked over 1,950.

[Anonymous User]

What was the above-market multiplier at k&S for its 100 hour increments over 1950?

Considering lateraling (mid-level), and wanted to get a sense of how much extra for higher hours. Thanks!

Wrong thread bro.

About $3k-$6k (increases by year) per each 100 hours worked over 1,950.

The real above market is the black box firm citizenship raise that is entirely discretionary. Heard secondhand that some seniors got nearly 2x. But it's kind of fake because it's instead of making partner like other firms do.

[Anonymous User]

S&C match

[Anonymous User]

S&C match

Finally

[Anonymous User]

From the V50, besides JD the highest other firm that hasn't match if I am not mistaken is Perkins. They usually do different scales for different markets, but it is taken them way too long.