NY GOES TO 180k! IT HAPPENED!!!! (CovingTTTon does a 180! Holder wept.) Forum

[Nachoo2019]

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/salary-w ... ed-raises/


ATL just posted a nicely laid out grid off all firms and offices that made the jump to 180.

[Br3v]

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/salary-w ... ed-raises/


ATL just posted a nicely laid out grid off all firms and offices that made the jump to 180.

Really helpful, but confirms they read TLS

[PennBull]

Tech-savvy and chill KIRKLAND DC associates working from their HOME OFFICE with their firm-supplied MACBOOK PROS with RETINA DISPLAY while CovingTTTon associates TRUDGE to the office to share a single COMPAQ PRESARIO DESKTOP with a summer associate

[Anonymous User]

Will King & Spalding match? They're profitable af.

[Anonymous User]

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/salary-w ... ed-raises/


ATL just posted a nicely laid out grid off all firms and offices that made the jump to 180.

Really helpful, but confirms they read TLS

I knew they read TLS far before this lol.

[123fakest]

less xo dookieposting and more baseless speculation about which V50s that haven't matched yet will, and when, please

[imalreadyamember?]

less xo dookieposting and more baseless speculation about which V50s that haven't matched yet will, and when, please

Does the CovingTTTon truth hit too close to home?

[Single-Malt-Liquor]

less xo dookieposting and more baseless speculation about which V50s that haven't matched yet will, and when, please

Does the CovingTTTon truth hit too close to home?

Yah duder. Just retake and ED NU.

[imalreadyamember?]

To Above the Law, since they clearly are monitoring this thread:

I literally could not care less about a tiny boutique law firm raising its base salary (I mean cmon, a full post and email blast when the firm only has 6 associates? Seriously: http://www.yettercoleman.com/lawyers/). I know it's a slow news day as usual, but maybe start doing a Boutique Roundup where you address them at once or something. I'm sure the six of them (especially Deborah) are all pleased as punch and I apologize to them for ruining their moment in the ATL sun.

[DELG]

To Above the Law, since they clearly are monitoring this thread:

I literally could not care less about a tiny boutique law firm raising its base salary (I mean cmon, a full post and email blast when the firm only has 6 associates? Seriously: http://www.yettercoleman.com/lawyers/). I know it's a slow news day as usual, but maybe start doing a Boutique Roundup where you address them at once or something. I'm sure the six of them (especially Deborah) are all pleased as punch and I apologize to them for ruining their moment in the ATL sun.

i care.

[Anonymous User]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

[JusticeJackson]

.

[Anonymous User]

The rumor that GDC would follow Covington's lead, posted a few pages ago, seems really silly. Other than deriving a comparatively large proportion of revenue from things other than big NYC corporate deals and having a cadre of name-brand DC partners, GDC doesn't really share that much in common with Covington.

Covington is a weird DC firm with a history of throwing tantrums about salary increases, with profitability lagging behind peer firms. GDC has big NY and DC offices, but it is a CA centric firm, and if you surveyed the firm's partners/associates about who they considered their chief competition, Latham would be by far the most common response.

There is no way they don't raise salaries. They are in a better position to absorb the increased costs than all but a handful of firms in the country, and they are in direct competition with firms that have raised in basically every relevant market. GDC might be the first mover in Denver (I don't know who else is there), but in basically every other market, their hand is already forced. It's just a matter of time. They'll move before the raises are effective elsewhere (so by month's end for sure).

[UnicornHunter]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

The article's almost certainly right but it's also almost certainly right that even paying 160 didn't make sense for a lot of firms that did it just to keep up with the Cravaths of the world. Firms that have less than stable books of business would probably be better served (and serve their associates better) by paying relatively low salaries and then giving out larger bonuses in the good years, and not firing people in the bad years.

But signalling is everything in the law game, so here we are with a grossly distorted market.

[philepistemer]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

David Lat's understanding of business, economics and statistical reasoning is poor.

[Tiago Splitter]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

The article's almost certainly right but it's also almost certainly right that even paying 160 didn't make sense for a lot of firms that did it just to keep up with the Cravaths of the world. Firms that have less than stable books of business would probably be better served (and serve their associates better) by paying relatively low salaries and then giving out larger bonuses in the good years, and not firing people in the bad years.

But signalling is everything in the law game, so here we are with a grossly distorted market.

It's also not about keeping up with Cravath, it's about keeping up with whoever your own peer firms are. And with so much overlap as you move down the chain eventually everyone has a peer firm that is paying 180.

Except for peerless CovingTTTon.

[jbagelboy]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

The article's almost certainly right but it's also almost certainly right that even paying 160 didn't make sense for a lot of firms that did it just to keep up with the Cravaths of the world. Firms that have less than stable books of business would probably be better served (and serve their associates better) by paying relatively low salaries and then giving out larger bonuses in the good years, and not firing people in the bad years.

But signalling is everything in the law game, so here we are with a grossly distorted market.

It's also not about keeping up with Cravath, it's about keeping up with whoever your own peer firms are. And with so much overlap as you move down the chain eventually everyone has a peer firm that is paying 180.

Except for peerless CovingTTTon.

This. Lat is buying too forcefully into the dated narrative of "prestige" firms and non-prestige firms, because he's prestige-obsessed himself. I'm not saying there's no difference between CSM/DPW/S&C/STB/Cleary/ect. and some of the AmLaw200, but he exaggerates the difference. For example, the first major firm to match was Milbank. Who does Milbank compete for talent with? Many of the firms on Lat's mocking list of "generous" firms (who can't afford the raises). These V100 firm leaderships haven't deceived themselves into thinking they are competing with Cravath--they know they are competing with others who are profitable enough or aggressive enough to match.

[Anonymous User]

No matches so far today...

[imalreadyamember?]

No matches so far today...

Didn't you see the Yetter Coleman email blast?

[Anonymous User]

Hogan Lovells will be announcing their match later today - no word yet on whether it's just NY or will include DC too.

[rpupkin]

Hogan Lovells will be announcing their match later today - no word yet on whether it's just NY or will include DC too.

I expect Hogan won't match in DC because DC is its own special market.

[androstan]

Hogan Lovells will be announcing their match later today - no word yet on whether it's just NY or will include DC too.

I expect Hogan won't match in DC because DC is its own special market.

- CovingTTTon Compensation Committee

[Anonymous User]

Hogan Lovells will be announcing their match later today - no word yet on whether it's just NY or will include DC too.

I expect Hogan won't match in DC because DC is its own special market.

dat prestige tho

[rpupkin]

Hogan Lovells will be announcing their match later today - no word yet on whether it's just NY or will include DC too.

I expect Hogan won't match in DC because DC is its own special market.

- CovingTTTon Compensation Committee

Covington DC is like Yale Law School. Does Yale give out merit-based aid? Lol no. When some Covington associate mentions to a partner that Skadden DC has moved to 180 and that therefore Covington should match, it's like when an applicant takes his Hamilton to Yale admissions and asks for a match.

Prestige is worth more than money, my friends.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

ATL trolling us: http://abovethelaw.com/2016/06/dear-big ... -salaries/

The article's almost certainly right but it's also almost certainly right that even paying 160 didn't make sense for a lot of firms that did it just to keep up with the Cravaths of the world. Firms that have less than stable books of business would probably be better served (and serve their associates better) by paying relatively low salaries and then giving out larger bonuses in the good years, and not firing people in the bad years.

But signalling is everything in the law game, so here we are with a grossly distorted market.

TITCR. Having law students think you're TTT is not good and will harm your associate quality for years to come, maybe costing you in billing rates more than the 5% or whatever of PPP it costs to match. But it might be even more damaging to do something that makes people think you're not financially healthy. That has the tendecy to snowball and become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Having a peacock tail is dumb, but sometimes it's not as dumb as not having one.