Which firm? Biglaw in a secondary market or top local firm. Forum

[Anonymous User]

Firm 1: International Vault firm with 1000+ lawyers and relatively high leverage. Offer is from its largest office, which is located in the Midwest (not Chi)/PA/Georgia. Its reputation is mediocre among V firms. It laid off lots of lawyers in 09. It may be leaner today and therefore needs more lawyers, or it may still be in a bad shape. I liked the people I met.

Firm 2: No. 1 firm in a different secondary market with 250+ lawyers and mid-leverage. Revenue was up 10+% last year. The firm was actually expanding and actively hiring during the recession. No international V firm is in the same market. I love the people I met.

Both firms pay $100K+. However, Firm 1 pays $10000 more per year at the beginning. It may pay $30000 more per year in 5 years. Firm 1's PPP and RPL are about 2x of Firm 2's. Both cities have equally low CoL. I like both cities.

I like Firm 1 because it may allow me to move to one of its expanding international offices, which is great for the ambitious part of me. It also seems more "powerful" and offers better exist options.

I absolutely love the people at Firm 2. The firm also seems to be financially healthy. But if I work there, I may get stuck in that market, which is fine for the laid-back part of me.

I don't mind to settle in Firm 2's city for the rest of my life, but I don't think that I should make that decision now. What do you think?

[YourCaptain]

So this is Jones Day vs....

[Anonymous User]

So this is Jones Day vs....

Or Squire Sanders, K&L Gates, and a few others.

[Welp2277]

The first firm definitely sounds like Squire. I don't anything he says applies to Jones Day as far as the first firm is concerned.

[Anonymous User]

I'd go with firm 2, especially if firm 1 is jones day but really regardless. Healthier financially, you liked the people better, and are your exit options really going to be that much better with a "mediocre" reputation? Sometimes people on TLS spend too much time thinking 3 jobs ahead instead of thinking what is the better job now, especially when there are only marginal or impossible to determine differences in "exit options" which will be largely dependent on how well you do at the firm, what type of work you do, the job market 5 years from now, etc.

[Anonymous User]

I'd go with firm 2, especially if firm 1 is jones day but really regardless. Healthier financially, you liked the people better, and are your exit options really going to be that much better with a "mediocre" reputation? Sometimes people on TLS spend too much time thinking 3 jobs ahead instead of thinking what is the better job now, especially when there are only marginal or impossible to determine differences in "exit options" which will be largely dependent on how well you do at the firm, what type of work you do, the job market 5 years from now, etc.

OP here. My problem is that, for example, I can imagine myself lateral from Firm 1 to Firm 2, but not vice versa.

Firm 1's reputation is mediocre among the elites, but it's still an internationally reputable firm. Firm 2 is not even nationally well-known.

If I were to stay in one firm forever, I would lean towards Firm 2, even though I do find Firm 1's much higher PPP potentially attractive.