Cravath's Spawn - the Wave of Copycats - RUNNING TALLY Forum

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

http://www.google.com

[rpupkin]

I think you guys are wrong about Susman. I think the 190K is what you would get for your stub year (end of clerkship - January) and then you get elevated to the second year salary (210) in January. So this would be above market - at any other firm matching Cravath coming off of a clerkship you'd get 180K for your stub year and then get elevated to 190K in January. Am I missing something?

It's very unlikely you're correct. No other law firm I'm aware of calls an associate a "first year" during the stub year but then a "second year" two months (or whenever) later. Why would Susman mislead people into thinking that the firm doesn't pay above-market base salaries? It doesn't make sense.

[Mack.Hambleton]

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

http://www.google.com

anon ABUSE

[emkay625]

I think you guys are wrong about Susman. I think the 190K is what you would get for your stub year (end of clerkship - January) and then you get elevated to the second year salary (210) in January. So this would be above market - at any other firm matching Cravath coming off of a clerkship you'd get 180K for your stub year and then get elevated to 190K in January. Am I missing something?

It's very unlikely you're correct. No other law firm I'm aware of calls an associate a "first year" during the stub year but then a "second year" two months (or whenever) later. Why would Susman mislead people into thinking that the firm doesn't pay above-market base salaries? It doesn't make sense.

Maybe I am entirely incorrect, but my understanding of how clerkships work is you get the 1st year salary for the stub year and then you are bumped to second year in January. This is, at the very least, my impression of how both of my offers worked. Maybe I just didn't/don't understand?

It also makes logical sense to me....if you clerk, you get treated the same as you would have if you had not clerked. If you're c/o 2015, why would the firm pay you your increase 4-5 months before everyone else in the c/o 2015?

Former clerks: did you get paid as a second year as soon as you started, or did the class bump happen in January when all of the other class bumps for everyone else happened?

[Greenandgold]

I think you guys are wrong about Susman. I think the 190K is what you would get for your stub year (end of clerkship - January) and then you get elevated to the second year salary (210) in January. So this would be above market - at any other firm matching Cravath coming off of a clerkship you'd get 180K for your stub year and then get elevated to 190K in January. Am I missing something?

It's very unlikely you're correct. No other law firm I'm aware of calls an associate a "first year" during the stub year but then a "second year" two months (or whenever) later. Why would Susman mislead people into thinking that the firm doesn't pay above-market base salaries? It doesn't make sense.

Maybe I am entirely incorrect, but my understanding of how clerkships work is you get the 1st year salary for the stub year and then you are bumped to second year in January. This is, at the very least, my impression of how both of my offers worked. Maybe I just didn't/don't understand?

It also makes logical sense to me....if you clerk, you get treated the same as you would have if you had not clerked. If you're c/o 2015, why would the firm pay you your increase 4-5 months before everyone else in the c/o 2015?

Former clerks: did you get paid as a second year as soon as you started, or did the class bump happen in January when all of the other class bumps for everyone else happened?

You're missing the fact that Susman only hires former clerks so they're not paying you an increase over anyone else in your class. It's like how at other firms stub years get paid the same salary for 14-16 months after starting (stub year + first full year). "First years" at Susman are going to get 190k for 14-16 months and then they'll be on the same track as every other law firm. It's pretty obvious that's what Susman is doing since their new pay scale matches up perfectly with the Cravath scale if you simply add a year to each class. (First years make 190, second years make 210, etc.)

[Anonymous User]

Fried Frank already this morning.

Is anyone left from the V25 that hasn't announced (besides Covington)?

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

These are the V50s that don't seem to have announced yet.

CovingTTTon
Jones Day
Wilmer
A&P
Cadwalader
Mayer Brown
Goodwin
Linklaters
Allen & Overy
DLA
Orrick
Morgan Lewis
K&L Gates
King & Spalding

Looks like these fall into a few different categories. Wilmer and Goodwin will presumably move now that Ropes moved, which in turn should get A&P moving. King & Spalding is in a tough place since it's an Atl firm and first-year market there is still 135-145. K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances. Thoughts on the others?

[rpupkin]

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

http://www.google.com

anon ABUSE

And Google abuse.

[emkay625]

I think you guys are wrong about Susman. I think the 190K is what you would get for your stub year (end of clerkship - January) and then you get elevated to the second year salary (210) in January. So this would be above market - at any other firm matching Cravath coming off of a clerkship you'd get 180K for your stub year and then get elevated to 190K in January. Am I missing something?

It's very unlikely you're correct. No other law firm I'm aware of calls an associate a "first year" during the stub year but then a "second year" two months (or whenever) later. Why would Susman mislead people into thinking that the firm doesn't pay above-market base salaries? It doesn't make sense.

Maybe I am entirely incorrect, but my understanding of how clerkships work is you get the 1st year salary for the stub year and then you are bumped to second year in January. This is, at the very least, my impression of how both of my offers worked. Maybe I just didn't/don't understand?

It also makes logical sense to me....if you clerk, you get treated the same as you would have if you had not clerked. If you're c/o 2015, why would the firm pay you your increase 4-5 months before everyone else in the c/o 2015?

Former clerks: did you get paid as a second year as soon as you started, or did the class bump happen in January when all of the other class bumps for everyone else happened?

You're missing the fact that Susman only hires former clerks so they're not paying you an increase over anyone else in your class. It's like how at other firms stub years get paid the same salary for 14-16 months after starting (stub year + first full year). "First years" at Susman are going to get 190k for 14-16 months and then they'll be on the same track as every other law firm. It's pretty obvious that's what Susman is doing since their new pay scale matches up perfectly with the Cravath scale if you simply add a year to each class. (First years make 190, second years make 210, etc.)

No, I understand that about Susman. My comments about getting a bump over others in your class year were more directed to rpupkin comments about how no firm works that way (1st year salary Oct - Dec, 2nd year salary in Jan for clerkships). Susman just throws out that they pay above market at every stage in the recruiting process, so I always assumed that had to mean they pay what they've labeled "first year" comp in fall - dec and then you get the bump to second year in jan. Why do they routinely say they pay above market? Maybe they mean when you account for bonus?

[Anonymous User]

Fried Frank already this morning.

Is anyone left from the V25 that hasn't announced (besides Covington)?

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

These are the V50s that don't seem to have announced yet.

CovingTTTon
Jones Day
Wilmer
A&P
Cadwalader
Mayer Brown
Goodwin
Linklaters
Allen & Overy
DLA
Orrick
Morgan Lewis
K&L Gates
King & Spalding

Looks like these fall into a few different categories. Wilmer and Goodwin will presumably move now that Ropes moved, which in turn should get A&P moving. King & Spalding is in a tough place since it's an Atl firm and first-year market there is still 135-145. K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances. Thoughts on the others?

I'm guessing that A&P is waiting on CovingTTTon and praying that they provide them with cover to not raise DC.

[Anonymous User]

Jenner matched.

[rpupkin]

No, I understand that about Susman. My comments about getting a bump over others in your class year were more directed to rpupkin comments about how no firm works that way (1st year salary Oct - Dec, 2nd year salary in Jan for clerkships).

What? How did you glean that from my comments?

If someone has clerked for a year and starts in, say, October, just about any firm would treat them as a first-year for a couple of months. As you point out, this basically corresponds to the "stub year" that just-out-of-law-school associates experience. My point--and I think everyone else's point--is that it would make no sense for Susman to announce a "first year" salary for this necessarily small window of time.

Yes, Susman brags about paying above market. That's true. But Susman's above-market compensation takes the form of large bonuses for associates. I don't think Susman is known for paying above-market base salaries. If they've started to do so now, that memo was an unnecessarily (and uncharacteristically) modest way of announcing the change.

[Anonymous User]

CovingTTTon
Jones Day
Wilmer
A&P
Cadwalader
Mayer Brown
Goodwin
Linklaters
Allen & Overy
DLA
Orrick
Morgan Lewis
K&L Gates
King & Spalding

Thoughts on the others?

Jenner (apparently) just moved (who I think of as a peer of MB's in Chicago). Would be surprised if MB didn't move this cycle. Movement of both would make JD further stand out in that cohort.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Yea All Right]

K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances.

Is Morgan Lewis not doing well or something? What does their recent acquisition of the Bingham lawyers say about their finances?

[barkschool]

K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances.

Is Morgan Lewis not doing well or something? What does their recent acquisition of the Bingham lawyers say about their finances?

Aren't law firm mergers basically huge leverage events?

[TLSModBot]

K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances.

Is Morgan Lewis not doing well or something? What does their recent acquisition of the Bingham lawyers say about their finances?

Mergers don't necessarily signal positive or negative things for the post-acquisition firm. On the one hand, the acquirer usually makes bank both by acquiring the accounts receivable (money earned by the firm but not yet paid) and by having the acquired partners accept a lower draw than previously to sweeten the deal for the acquiring partners. On the other hand, firms commonly overvalue books of business and future revenue - and defections post-merger can cause some issues.

Even good mergers take some time to fully exploit the efficiencies (getting associate headcount to the right number, cross-selling and expanding work for clients on both side of the merger/acquisition, etc.). I think Morgan Lewis is still working on it but is otherwise fine, but I only have their financials to back that up and the numbers never tell the full story.

[emkay625]

I think you guys are wrong about Susman. I think the 190K is what you would get for your stub year (end of clerkship - January) and then you get elevated to the second year salary (210) in January. So this would be above market - at any other firm matching Cravath coming off of a clerkship you'd get 180K for your stub year and then get elevated to 190K in January. Am I missing something?

It's very unlikely you're correct. No other law firm I'm aware of calls an associate a "first year" during the stub year but then a "second year" two months (or whenever) later. Why would Susman mislead people into thinking that the firm doesn't pay above-market base salaries? It doesn't make sense.

I got that from that sentence. Isn't that precisely what happens when you clerk? You get 160 (now 180) from when you start until January, then in January get bumped up to 2nd year pay with the rest of your class?

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User"][ K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances. quote]

Doesn't the new ATL article make it seem like Morgan Lewis is actually doing just fine?

[trbrny]

U/d with Covington NATIONWIDE raises.

Need a new name for The CovingTTTon List -- any suggestions?

[nahumya]

Need a new name for The CovingTTTon List -- any suggestions?

I think the name still works. We should not forgive and forget that easily.

[Anonymous User]

Fried Frank already this morning.

Is anyone left from the V25 that hasn't announced (besides Covington)?

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

These are the V50s that don't seem to have announced yet.

CovingTTTon
Jones Day
Wilmer
A&P
Cadwalader
Mayer Brown
Goodwin
Linklaters
Allen & Overy
DLA
Orrick
Morgan Lewis
K&L Gates
King & Spalding

Looks like these fall into a few different categories. Wilmer and Goodwin will presumably move now that Ropes moved, which in turn should get A&P moving. King & Spalding is in a tough place since it's an Atl firm and first-year market there is still 135-145. K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances. Thoughts on the others?

Has Baker & McKenzie matched?

[Anonymous User]

Fried Frank already this morning.

Is anyone left from the V25 that hasn't announced (besides Covington)?

Can anyone list the V50s that haven't announced?

These are the V50s that don't seem to have announced yet.

CovingTTTon
Jones Day
Wilmer
A&P
Cadwalader
Mayer Brown
Goodwin
Linklaters
Allen & Overy
DLA
Orrick
Morgan Lewis
K&L Gates
King & Spalding

Looks like these fall into a few different categories. Wilmer and Goodwin will presumably move now that Ropes moved, which in turn should get A&P moving. King & Spalding is in a tough place since it's an Atl firm and first-year market there is still 135-145. K&L and Morgan Lewis might have to think twice about their finances. Thoughts on the others?

Has Baker & McKenzie matched?

I can answer my own question...yes.

[soj]

.

[soj]

.

[Anonymous User]

Gibson matched for all offices yesterday, but they're not on OP's list.