How much weight is "firm's health" when choosing? Forum

[alabamabound]

Can anyone talk more specifically about Mayer Brown and/or Nixon Peabody?

As the anon above who can't speak to NP but can speak to Mayer, what I've heard is lots of "they're in trouble" type comments from a variety of Chicago attorneys. Trouble is relative. In Mayer's case, it seems to mean: 1) partners are squabbling over dividing up diminished profits and 2) making partner is increasingly unlikely (cue the horde of TLS commenters who liken making partner to spotting a unicorn). From a Mayer partner, I heard they are facing real fee pressure from competitors, but they're not unique in this respect.

[Old Gregg]

Deferring the incoming class is bad for the incoming class, but likely very good for firms profit margins

So is laying off associates... are we to say that a firm is healthy even then? That's why this criterion that you posit...

One great way to keep a firm "healthy" (again, using that term to mean revenues are adequate to meet expenses and retain partners) is to keep your expenses down,and one great way to do that is by not brining in employees you can't keep busy.

...is stupid.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone talk more specifically about Mayer Brown and/or Nixon Peabody?

As the anon above who can't speak to NP but can speak to Mayer, what I've heard is lots of "they're in trouble" type comments from a variety of Chicago attorneys. Trouble is relative. In Mayer's case, it seems to mean: 1) partners are squabbling over dividing up diminished profits and 2) making partner is increasingly unlikely (cue the horde of TLS commenters who liken making partner to spotting a unicorn). From a Mayer partner, I heard they are facing real fee pressure from competitors, but they're not unique in this respect.

Isn't this the case for every Chicago firm (excluding Kirkland)?

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone talk more specifically about Mayer Brown and/or Nixon Peabody?

As the anon above who can't speak to NP but can speak to Mayer, what I've heard is lots of "they're in trouble" type comments from a variety of Chicago attorneys. Trouble is relative. In Mayer's case, it seems to mean: 1) partners are squabbling over dividing up diminished profits and 2) making partner is increasingly unlikely (cue the horde of TLS commenters who liken making partner to spotting a unicorn). From a Mayer partner, I heard they are facing real fee pressure from competitors, but they're not unique in this respect.

In my Mayer CB one of the partners told me frankly (and unsolicited) that the firm had a rough past couple of years, but was doing very well this year and he seemed to imply they were upping their SA class.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone talk more specifically about Mayer Brown and/or Nixon Peabody?

As the anon above who can't speak to NP but can speak to Mayer, what I've heard is lots of "they're in trouble" type comments from a variety of Chicago attorneys. Trouble is relative. In Mayer's case, it seems to mean: 1) partners are squabbling over dividing up diminished profits and 2) making partner is increasingly unlikely (cue the horde of TLS commenters who liken making partner to spotting a unicorn). From a Mayer partner, I heard they are facing real fee pressure from competitors, but they're not unique in this respect.

In my Mayer CB one of the partners told me frankly (and unsolicited) that the firm had a rough past couple of years, but was doing very well this year and he seemed to imply they were upping their SA class.

I too was told during CB that they were upping the class size and that profits, not revenue, but profits were up the last Q by 21%.

[alabamabound]

Can anyone talk more specifically about Mayer Brown and/or Nixon Peabody?

As the anon above who can't speak to NP but can speak to Mayer, what I've heard is lots of "they're in trouble" type comments from a variety of Chicago attorneys. Trouble is relative. In Mayer's case, it seems to mean: 1) partners are squabbling over dividing up diminished profits and 2) making partner is increasingly unlikely (cue the horde of TLS commenters who liken making partner to spotting a unicorn). From a Mayer partner, I heard they are facing real fee pressure from competitors, but they're not unique in this respect.

Isn't this the case for every Chicago firm (excluding Kirkland)?

I don't know if it is or isn't, but I heard a lot about Mayer having these problems and not anybody else. To be fair, I was only keeping my ear to the ground on 4 or 5 Chicago firms.

[Anonymous User]

Mayer is taking more summer associates than originally planned for summer 2012 (I think they are going to have like 22-25) and many of the incoming first year associates have been called back earlier than anticipated due to demand. All of them were scheduled to start on time in the fall regardless unlike multiple other Chicago firms. The people I know there are very, very busy right now. They also offered everyone last summer.

MB really takes it on the chin on the PR front especially compared to Sidley and Kirkland and I have no idea why. They had the problem of merging at the same time the downturn occurred which was horrific timing but they are finally moving forward now.

In Chicago there is a clear #1 and then a clump of others and then everybody else. I don't see why there is any reason to think that Mayer Brown is on such lesser financial footing than their peers. Sidley's revenue was down was 1.2% in 2010 and Mayer's was down 1%. Kirkland's revenues were up 13.8% (lulz). If anything, Sidley is a heck of a lot closer to being Mayer Brown than being Kirkland, let's be serious. Both Sidley and Mayer had issues during the downturn, both laid folks off, Mayer just took a much smaller summer class in 2011 than Sidley which some might call good management. Keep in mind that Sidley has always been larger by about 100 lawyers so it would make sense for them to have larger classes.

[Anonymous User]

If anything, Sidley is a heck of a lot closer to being Mayer Brown than being Kirkland, let's be serious.

lol

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know how Seward & Kissel is doing?

[Renzo]

Deferring the incoming class is bad for the incoming class, but likely very good for firms profit margins

So is laying off associates... are we to say that a firm is healthy even then? That's why this criterion that you posit...

One great way to keep a firm "healthy" (again, using that term to mean revenues are adequate to meet expenses and retain partners) is to keep your expenses down,and one great way to do that is by not brining in employees you can't keep busy.

...is stupid.

Fine. Articulate a better definition of "healthy."

But keep in mind, there are plenty of healthy businesses that are terrible places to work. Walmart comes to mind--great, "healthy" company to own, terrible place to work.

[Old Gregg]

But keep in mind, there are plenty of healthy businesses that are terrible places to work. Walmart comes to mind--great, "healthy" company to own, terrible place to work.

ITE, I'll trade in the work-life balance shtick for job security, but you might prioritize things differently.

[Anonymous User]

Throwing this out there -- I picked Sidley NY over Weil NY in part because of firm health and specifically, the health of the practice area I wanted to join. Not like I chose a V50 over a V10, but still, firm health + people > 8 places of rankings for me.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone go into more specifically why Orrick might be in trouble? I know they pulled out of some OCIs, but I know offers have gone out and they're having a summer class.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone else concerned about accepting at one of the firms that relies very heavily on European bank clients?

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone go into more specifically why Orrick might be in trouble? I know they pulled out of some OCIs, but I know offers have gone out and they're having a summer class.

Same. I have an offer from them and have not heard back from my other CBs so it might be my only option...

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone go into more specifically why Orrick might be in trouble? I know they pulled out of some OCIs, but I know offers have gone out and they're having a summer class.

Same. I have an offer from them and have not heard back from my other CBs so it might be my only option...

I honestly don't know much about them or how they're doing, but at least it's not so bad they can't temp some new partners:

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/10/musical- ... d-lawyers/

In before someone who actually knows the industry explains how this isn't actually that good a haul.

[Renzo]

Can anyone go into more specifically why Orrick might be in trouble? I know they pulled out of some OCIs, but I know offers have gone out and they're having a summer class.

Same. I have an offer from them and have not heard back from my other CBs so it might be my only option...

I honestly don't know much about them or how they're doing, but at least it's not so bad they can't temp some new partners:

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/10/musical- ... d-lawyers/

In before someone who actually knows the industry explains how this isn't actually that good a haul.

This is good for the firm. Every indication to this point was that they weren't doing so hot, so hopefully this group will be profitable for them. Wicks, Flanagan, and Chung are all big acquisitions.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone speak more specifically about Shearman and Sterling?