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

[kcdc1]

Need more speculation re: Fish. Is it possible that high-end patent boutiques will simply pay less than biglaw?

It doesn't sound totally implausible to me since the recruiting market has limited overlap (biglaw cares a lot about law school prestige and grades, patent firms care more about undergrad major, grades, and WE). It's entirely possible that a highly qualified patent prosecution candidate would not have offers from any biglaw firms. Seems less likely for litigation tho.

Regarding Fish, they have more lit associates than prosecution associates...which is why no-raise is surprising.

Is Fish very grade/prestige conscious for lit? Or will they hire EE's from George Mason with median law school grades?

[TLSModBot]

It took months last time for matches to come in. It has been a little over one week this time. Relax.

You'll get your raises sooner or later. Except for a select few firms whose associates will die penniless in the gutter, outcast from society.

Eh, that was 10 years ago, the world is different.

I fully expect to die penniless in a gutter tyvm.

Good point - 10 years ago law firms were backwards institutions run by boomer partners on a financial model largely unchanged since the 1970's!

so glad that's all changed.

[Abbie Doobie]

Need more speculation re: Fish. Is it possible that high-end patent boutiques will simply pay less than biglaw?

It doesn't sound totally implausible to me since the recruiting market has limited overlap (biglaw cares a lot about law school prestige and grades, patent firms care more about undergrad major, grades, and WE). It's entirely possible that a highly qualified patent prosecution candidate would not have offers from any biglaw firms. Seems less likely for litigation tho.

gp firms rarely hire patent pros associates fresh out of law school. they usually poach experienced associates (from ip firms or other gp firms) or hire them as tech specs/patent agents while they are in law school (wilmerhale, arent fox, foley, etc.). event the big ip firms (fish/finnegan), for the most part, do not hire pros associates out of their summer programs. patent prosecution budgets are just too small now 'n' days to train associates at first year billing rates.

its entirely possible that large ip firms with prosecution-heavy practices won't be able to keep up with gp firms in terms of compensation due to the reduction in prosecution budgets. fish seems like an exception though.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know if DLA matched in Baltimore, or if so far only Hogan is paying new Cravath scale in Baltimore?

[Anonymous User]

A&O finally matched full scale for all offices in the Americas (NYC/DC/SAO PAOLO?!)

[Anonymous User]

Starting at Wilmer in a few months. Can't imagine they won't have matched by then, but this still lame as hell.

[Big Shrimpin]

Does anyone know if DLA matched in Baltimore, or if so far only Hogan is paying new Cravath scale in Baltimore?

lollllll

[Actus Reus]

If you're worried about your firm going to 180 instead of studying for the bar, you have some issues. You're not changing firms anyways so you're stuck with it no matter what.

Also, gtfo that JD intentionally waited to appease it's summers. Summers are a money hole for firms. The fact that these firms raised for summers is still insane to me.

[Anonymous User]

Starting at Wilmer in a few months. Can't imagine they won't have matched by then, but this still lame as hell.

Same, and same. If more places were taking their time this would be fine. In fact it's totally reasonable that they would need a couple weeks to figure shit out and get everything in order---and some firms jumped on it very quickly, to the point where it's shocking they didn't think through it more (did they have a plan all along? did they always have the money to spare but didn't want to pay associates?). Hopefully places don't get burned by that. Anyway, in that way WH is being reasonable. It just fucking sucks because to us outsiders it seems like every John G. Smith and Associates in Wichita, Kansas is easily, happily matching 180k which is clearly a lowball by biglaw standards.

I bet a big player bumps it to 190k soon honestly (not like this cycle but in the next couple years). And we're still sitting here WAITING

[kcdc1]

Need more speculation re: Fish. Is it possible that high-end patent boutiques will simply pay less than biglaw?

It doesn't sound totally implausible to me since the recruiting market has limited overlap (biglaw cares a lot about law school prestige and grades, patent firms care more about undergrad major, grades, and WE). It's entirely possible that a highly qualified patent prosecution candidate would not have offers from any biglaw firms. Seems less likely for litigation tho.

gp firms rarely hire patent pros associates fresh out of law school. they usually poach experienced associates (from ip firms or other gp firms) or hire them as tech specs/patent agents while they are in law school (wilmerhale, arent fox, foley, etc.). event the big ip firms (fish/finnegan), for the most part, do not hire pros associates out of their summer programs. patent prosecution budgets are just too small now 'n' days to train associates at first year billing rates.

its entirely possible that large ip firms with prosecution-heavy practices won't be able to keep up with gp firms in terms of compensation due to the reduction in prosecution budgets. fish seems like an exception though.

Agreed that patent pros is likely not profitable enough to justify a salary increase. What shops paid the full 160 lockstep for large scale patent pros? I'm sure a lot started at 160 but compressed advancement.

But patent lit remains profitable. Key questions in my mind are: (1) whether boutiques that do a lot of lit feel a need to compete on salary with GP firms to attract and retain talent, and (2) whether and how they'll handle price pressure on the pros side. One option would be to pay patent pros associates less, but I don't know if that's tenable.

[1styearlateral]

Also, gtfo that JD intentionally waited to appease it's summers. Summers are a money hole for firms. The fact that these firms raised for summers is still insane to me.

Especially after the summer already started. Like, who's gonna quit their summer job two weeks in because they didn't get a raise?

[Anonymous User]

If you're worried about your firm going to 180 instead of studying for the bar, you have some issues. You're not changing firms anyways so you're stuck with it no matter what.

Also, gtfo that JD intentionally waited to appease it's summers. Summers are a money hole for firms. The fact that these firms raised for summers is still insane to me.

I'm clerking; am I allowed to spend my time griping about it sir?

[2014]

The amount of firms that matched and that matched quickly have to make it marginally more likely that someone re-raises in the medium term (lets call it 1-2 years) to try and force a bimodal salary curve right?

If Cravath's goal was to slow attrition to other firms, either NY or in secondary/tertiary markets, this raise "failed" in a big way.

[Abbie Doobie]

Need more speculation re: Fish. Is it possible that high-end patent boutiques will simply pay less than biglaw?

It doesn't sound totally implausible to me since the recruiting market has limited overlap (biglaw cares a lot about law school prestige and grades, patent firms care more about undergrad major, grades, and WE). It's entirely possible that a highly qualified patent prosecution candidate would not have offers from any biglaw firms. Seems less likely for litigation tho.

gp firms rarely hire patent pros associates fresh out of law school. they usually poach experienced associates (from ip firms or other gp firms) or hire them as tech specs/patent agents while they are in law school (wilmerhale, arent fox, foley, etc.). event the big ip firms (fish/finnegan), for the most part, do not hire pros associates out of their summer programs. patent prosecution budgets are just too small now 'n' days to train associates at first year billing rates.

its entirely possible that large ip firms with prosecution-heavy practices won't be able to keep up with gp firms in terms of compensation due to the reduction in prosecution budgets. fish seems like an exception though.

Agreed that patent pros is likely not profitable enough to justify a salary increase. What shops paid the full 160 lockstep for large scale patent pros? I'm sure a lot started at 160 but compressed advancement.

But patent lit remains profitable. Key questions in my mind are: (1) whether boutiques that do a lot of lit feel a need to compete on salary with GP firms to attract and retain talent, and (2) whether and how they'll handle price pressure on the pros side. One option would be to pay patent pros associates less, but I don't know if that's tenable.

i do not know of any prosecution-heavy ip firms that pay lockstep. many 160k (or above) to first years, but as you said they probably have compressed advancement. plus their bonuses (aside from fish maybe) are significantly lower than market.

and i'm not so sure that patent lit is that profitable for ip firms anymore. fish seems to make it work but finnegan's numbers are down, fitzpatrick's numbers are down, kenyon is hurting significantly.

[Tiago Splitter]

The amount of firms that matched and that matched quickly have to make it marginally more likely that someone re-raises in the medium term (lets call it 1-2 years) to try and force a bimodal salary curve right?

If Cravath's goal was to slow attrition to other firms, either NY or in secondary/tertiary markets, this raise "failed" in a big way.

Cravath back to 160

[Actus Reus]

If you're worried about your firm going to 180 instead of studying for the bar, you have some issues. You're not changing firms anyways so you're stuck with it no matter what.

Also, gtfo that JD intentionally waited to appease it's summers. Summers are a money hole for firms. The fact that these firms raised for summers is still insane to me.

I'm clerking; am I allowed to spend my time griping about it sir?

Yes. I meant studying for the bar in terms of new grads.

[Anonymous User]

Where's the anon who promised WilmerHale today?

Yeah, what is going on with this? With the exception of WachTTTel and Williams and ConnollTTTY (both of which are non-traditional comp models), they're easily the most prominent firm not to have matched. Moreover, all of their main rivals in DC and Boston have matched. Guess those clouds in the DC lobby really are as expensive as they say....

Idk man someone on here says vaguely that they're announcing yesterday, then says oops never mind they meet TUESDAY (GOOD GOD ARE YOU SERIOUS JUST HAVE AN AD HOC MEETING), then someone else says nope today's the day. Jerkin me around like a Covington DC associate.

I'm the vague anon from before. Management committee held an ad hoc meeting on Tuesday of this week, which is why everyone expected an announcement on Tuesday. Partners have their regularly scheduled meeting next Tuesday, which may be the cause of the delay. Bob and Susan are both in the DC office today to talk to SA. Otherwise I know nothing.

Oh thank goodness. Some SA will surely risk his/her offer by being a little too openly upset by the delay and we'll finally know more. That makes sense I guess but seems weird. Maybe they tabled it because some people want to discuss whether to match everywhere (i.e. whether to include Denver and the West Coast offices).

[Anonymous User]

The amount of firms that matched and that matched quickly have to make it marginally more likely that someone re-raises in the medium term (lets call it 1-2 years) to try and force a bimodal salary curve right?

If Cravath's goal was to slow attrition to other firms, either NY or in secondary/tertiary markets, this raise "failed" in a big way.

As someone in a true "tertiary" market, I disagree. Fair point that I would not have stayed in NYC any longer than I did, but I likely would have picked a 180 market and not a sub 160 market.

[lost129]

So are all these firms who are giving raises to the rest of the associates going to bump the IP first years even higher? Typically, at least in certain markets, IP first years were making about 25k more than other first years.

[Anonymous User]

Need more speculation re: Fish. Is it possible that high-end patent boutiques will simply pay less than biglaw?

It doesn't sound totally implausible to me since the recruiting market has limited overlap (biglaw cares a lot about law school prestige and grades, patent firms care more about undergrad major, grades, and WE). It's entirely possible that a highly qualified patent prosecution candidate would not have offers from any biglaw firms. Seems less likely for litigation tho.

gp firms rarely hire patent pros associates fresh out of law school. they usually poach experienced associates (from ip firms or other gp firms) or hire them as tech specs/patent agents while they are in law school (wilmerhale, arent fox, foley, etc.). event the big ip firms (fish/finnegan), for the most part, do not hire pros associates out of their summer programs. patent prosecution budgets are just too small now 'n' days to train associates at first year billing rates.

its entirely possible that large ip firms with prosecution-heavy practices won't be able to keep up with gp firms in terms of compensation due to the reduction in prosecution budgets. fish seems like an exception though.

Agreed that patent pros is likely not profitable enough to justify a salary increase. What shops paid the full 160 lockstep for large scale patent pros? I'm sure a lot started at 160 but compressed advancement.

But patent lit remains profitable. Key questions in my mind are: (1) whether boutiques that do a lot of lit feel a need to compete on salary with GP firms to attract and retain talent, and (2) whether and how they'll handle price pressure on the pros side. One option would be to pay patent pros associates less, but I don't know if that's tenable.

i do not know of any prosecution-heavy ip firms that pay lockstep. many 160k (or above) to first years, but as you said they probably have compressed advancement. plus their bonuses (aside from fish maybe) are significantly lower than market.

and i'm not so sure that patent lit is that profitable for ip firms anymore. fish seems to make it work but finnegan's numbers are down, fitzpatrick's numbers are down, kenyon is hurting significantly.

OP here. Without giving away too many details that would out me, no-raise is due to a combination of everything already said here:
1) IP is not that profitable right now, pros nor lit. Firm had a good year but the future outlook is grim.
2) Prosecution would likely have to stay at $160k , creating tension in the associate ranks.
3) New recruits are mostly STEM people from mid ranked schools that most other Biglaw firms have no interest in. HYS EE/CS superstars weren't going to Fish anyway, so this won't change much.
4) Laterals recruits aren't hard to find either, especially with all the layoffs in IP across the industry in recent years.

[Anonymous User]

So are all these firms who are giving raises to the rest of the associates going to bump the IP first years even higher? Typically, at least in certain markets, IP first years were making about 25k more than other first years.

Incoming IP Lit first year here, at my firm (V40 in a big East Coast market) we earn the same as any other first year. Not sure where you got this information, as my situation seems to hold true for my IP Lit friends at V5, V10, V20 firms, too. Their positions are all in NYC, DC, SF and SV, if that helps.

Were you talking about Pros first years? If so, I can't speak much to that side of things.

[trebekismyhero]

So are all these firms who are giving raises to the rest of the associates going to bump the IP first years even higher? Typically, at least in certain markets, IP first years were making about 25k more than other first years.

Isn't that only in markets that are paying like 125k and 135k like Minneapolis and then give bumps to IP to pay them 160? I haven't heard of any of the major markets giving that kind of bump to IP first years

[mushybrain]

So are all these firms who are giving raises to the rest of the associates going to bump the IP first years even higher? Typically, at least in certain markets, IP first years were making about 25k more than other first years.

Isn't that only in markets that are paying like 125k and 135k like Minneapolis and then give bumps to IP to pay them 160? I haven't heard of any of the major markets giving that kind of bump to IP first years

This would make sense. It def doesn't match my experience in SF/SV.

[goodxkarma]

So are all these firms who are giving raises to the rest of the associates going to bump the IP first years even higher? Typically, at least in certain markets, IP first years were making about 25k more than other first years.

Isn't that only in markets that are paying like 125k and 135k like Minneapolis and then give bumps to IP to pay them 160? I haven't heard of any of the major markets giving that kind of bump to IP first years

I could definitely see this being true.

[Anonymous User]

3) New recruits are mostly STEM people from mid ranked schools that most other Biglaw firms have no interest in. HYS EE/CS superstars weren't going to Fish anyway, so this won't change much.

Wait, so where are you supposed to go if you top-level credentials but want to do patent?