Cravath vs. Boies Schiller Forum

[anon168]

Probably a naive question, but does W&C carry with it any of the same risks that BSF does? I know it's not as new, but is it also less well known than a place like Cravath? Any other downsides to choosing W&C?

Not probably. It is totally a naive question.

[Anonymous User]

Then let me ask it another way: assuming a person is interested in lit and has no issue with DC (but would be fine with multiple markets), is there any legitimate reason to choose any other firm over W&C? It's deified to such an extent on these forums that I'm just trying to get a more specific sense of why that is, and whether there are any negative aspects to the firm that I'm not aware of.

PS - I've read through every post on these forums that includes the words "Williams" and "Connolly," so I'm not asking in place of using the search function. Just trying to do due diligence. Thanks.

[thesealocust]

Probably a naive question, but does W&C carry with it any of the same risks that BSF does? I know it's not as new, but is it also less well known than a place like Cravath? Any other downsides to choosing W&C?

...are you talking about White & Case?

Or are you really concerned about the reputation of the firm that Presidents use to defend them when they're threatened with impeachment?

It ain't even a liberal thing - Williams & Connolly is presently shipping lawyers out to defend Republican Secretaries of State who are implementing restrictive new early voting and/or voter identification laws.

If you're talking about the W&C I think you're talking about, they're kind of a big deal.

[thesealocust]

Then let me ask it another way: assuming a person is interested in lit and has no issue with DC (but would be fine with multiple markets), is there any legitimate reason to choose any other firm over W&C? It's deified to such an extent on these forums that I'm just trying to get a more specific sense of why that is, and whether there are any negative aspects to the firm that I'm not aware of.

PS - I've read through every post on these forums that includes the words "Williams" and "Connolly," so I'm not asking in place of using the search function. Just trying to do due diligence. Thanks.

Ah, I see what you're getting at.

The only downside is that the firm has a very large focus on white collar/criminal defense type stuff relative to other litigation firms, and basically no non-lit if you realize you were wrong about your lit interest. Both of those are negligible.

If there is another firm you prefer to W&C, nothing at all wrong with going there instead (I know people who turned it down). But if you like it and have an offer, I can't think of any "downsides" from an outside perspective. It's not for everyone, but if you dig on it, don't look back.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks, thesealocust. How about hours? I know TCR is that all major law firms require long hours, but I'm still curious since posters above mentioned that BSF is notably worse than Cravath on this measure...where does W&C fall on the spectrum?

[thesealocust]

Thanks, thesealocust. How about hours? I know TCR is that all major law firms require long hours, but I'm still curious since posters above mentioned that BSF is notably worse than Cravath on this measure...where does W&C fall on the spectrum?

All 3 firms are in the "say goodbye to your friends and loved ones" category. There are only a small handful of firms where you can say "yeah, biglaw means big hours, but [firm] is especially bad" and all 3 fall into that category.

You really can't say more beyond that because hours worked REALLY depends on the individual, the practice area, and the partners assigning you work. A firm with an "average" of 2400 hours billed by associates means more work than one with an "average" of 2000, but the 2400 firm will have people billing under 2000 and the 2000 firm will have people billing over 2400.

[Anonymous User]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

[taf]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

[Anonymous User]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

Same question for incoming first-year associate offers at Boies. People seem very spooked about job security there - but isn't the worst case scenario really just getting huge bonuses for a couple years, paying off loans faster, and then lateraling to Cravath/Paul Weiss/another decent NYC litigation group if things don't work out?

[Lincoln]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

Same question for incoming first-year associate offers at Boies. People seem very spooked about job security there - but isn't the worst case scenario really just getting huge bonuses for a couple years, paying off loans faster, and then lateraling to Cravath/Paul Weiss/another decent NYC litigation group if things don't work out?

Cravath doesn't take laterals. That aside, it seems that the lateral market is reasonably healthy, so what you're suggesting seems like a reasonable proposition.

[thesealocust]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

Same question for incoming first-year associate offers at Boies. People seem very spooked about job security there - but isn't the worst case scenario really just getting huge bonuses for a couple years, paying off loans faster, and then lateraling to Cravath/Paul Weiss/another decent NYC litigation group if things don't work out?

What? It's much more common for laterals to take a big fall "down" the vault/prestige rankings. Don't assume you'll be able to jump from Boies to one of the other best-regarded litigation firms in the city. As pointed out, it's literally impossible at Cravath which doesn't take laterals, but probably close to impossible at most other top-flight litigation firms.

[anon168]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

Same question for incoming first-year associate offers at Boies. People seem very spooked about job security there - but isn't the worst case scenario really just getting huge bonuses for a couple years, paying off loans faster, and then lateraling to Cravath/Paul Weiss/another decent NYC litigation group if things don't work out?

Look this is stupid.

I'm the OP who posted about BSF and associate's job security. If you want further detail feel free to PM me.

But here's the bottom line, and please do not take this the wrong way. All of you folks who are concerned about job security, layoffs, firm health, etc., are worrying about the wrong things. Unless a firm goes supernova like Dewey (and none of the firms we are talking about here will go supernova), you, yes YOU, are in the best position to determine whether you get an offer or get laid off.

No firm will layoff a rockstar associate -- I don't care whether it's BSF, QE, Cravath, or some V5 biglaw firm. The question then is, are you a rockstar associate? Do you have enough confidence in yourself to believe that wherever you go, you will rock their world?

If you can kick-ass, no firm is going to get rid of you, unless the entire firm goes kaboom.

And if you can't kick ass as an associate, it won't matter where you go or what the firm's rep or financial health is like, they will get rid of you faster than a john gets rid of a hooker with crabs.

So, if you've got confidence in yourself, then you just have to figure out where or what firm will provide the best environment for you to succeed at.

Pure and simple.

[bk1]

Pure and simple.

You seem to be making a false dichotomy between rock stars and duds as if there isn't anything in between.

[taf]

I'm leaning towards Cravath.
More job security (apparently...no data there), more "stable" firm (what happens when Boies retires?), more flexibility (maybe you'll want to switch to corporate)
Also, for some reason, even though Boies is probably more selective than Cravath, Cravath offers "better exit options" (?)
I think at either you get a good amount of work and work really rough hours

If anyone has any data/stories outside of what I've written here, PM me please. Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

NOT OP:

Can anybody else speak to Boies NY job security and SA/offer chances? I'm close to taking an offer there, but all this talk of super frequent no offers has me concerned. Aside from that ATL post from a couple years ago, I haven't found anything else that confirms that claim except for random anonymous posters (or poster?) who refuse to give any details because they'll "out" themselves.

Yeah. I'm in the same boat.

Same question for incoming first-year associate offers at Boies. People seem very spooked about job security there - but isn't the worst case scenario really just getting huge bonuses for a couple years, paying off loans faster, and then lateraling to Cravath/Paul Weiss/another decent NYC litigation group if things don't work out?

Look this is stupid.

I'm the OP who posted about BSF and associate's job security. If you want further detail feel free to PM me.

But here's the bottom line, and please do not take this the wrong way. All of you folks who are concerned about job security, layoffs, firm health, etc., are worrying about the wrong things. Unless a firm goes supernova like Dewey (and none of the firms we are talking about here will go supernova), you, yes YOU, are in the best position to determine whether you get an offer or get laid off.

No firm will layoff a rockstar associate -- I don't care whether it's BSF, QE, Cravath, or some V5 biglaw firm. The question then is, are you a rockstar associate? Do you have enough confidence in yourself to believe that wherever you go, you will rock their world?

If you can kick-ass, no firm is going to get rid of you, unless the entire firm goes kaboom.

And if you can't kick ass as an associate, it won't matter where you go or what the firm's rep or financial health is like, they will get rid of you faster than a john gets rid of a hooker with crabs.

So, if you've got confidence in yourself, then you just have to figure out where or what firm will provide the best environment for you to succeed at.

Pure and simple.

You don't know what you're talking about. "Kick ass" status is subjective. Even if you do excellent work, if the partner doesn't like you or likes someone else more, you will be reviewed accordingly. You can do good work that goes unrecognized or others can steal your credit and leave you with blame. What will you do then? Sue them? There are no objective measures or outcomes in law firm life. Even if you are recognized as good, firms lay off/push out "rock star" associates all the time for petty reasons and nothing comes of it. The next "rock star" takes the place of the last one. Don't delude yourself into thinking you have control when you don't.

[Anonymous User]

So what's the bottom line then? Really hoping for something a little more concrete. Now that it's been established that regardless of whether or not you are a "rock star", a flubber, or something in between, you have very little control over getting fired, where does Boies stand? Are they just terribly indiscriminate and fire people all of the time? Or are people just latching on to an old ATL article? Recent Nalp data suggests that, at least coming in after a SA, the odds are very good that you will have an offer.

[Anonymous User]

Any new thoughts on this?

[Anonymous User]

Probably a naive question, but does W&C carry with it any of the same risks that BSF does? I know it's not as new, but is it also less well known than a place like Cravath? Any other downsides to choosing W&C?

The only major downside I can think of (aside from being located in the cesspool that is DC) is that a W&C summer needs to be 100% sure about lining up that fancy-pants clerkship. Also, W&C has a more limited range of practice areas, so there's that.

[brainking]

If you want to work in DC and get an offer at W&C, you should take it. There is no place like it for the DC market (other than Kellogg, maybe).

Cravath v. Boies is a different call, because both firms have distinct plusses and minuses:

Cravath pros: established firm with great name recognition, rotation system that ties you to a partner for ~18 months encourages the partner to invest in your development, better corporate department, office decor more prestigious (mahogany galore)
Cravath negatives: rotation systems runs risk of tying you to a raging lunatic for 18 months, stiff and formal culture, junior attorneys have to share terrible railroad-style offices

Boies pros: great one-off cases come in due to Boies name, significantly higher (read: six figure) bonuses, culture less formal and more relaxed, can generally work only for the partners you like (at least as you get more senior), no office sharing
Boies negatives: no formal training, NYC office space is kind of crappy, the amount of great work will likely drop off once Boies retires

On balance, I would choose Boies because I prefer an informal culture and, even if Boies retires and the firm changes so much that I would decide to move on, you've still made a ton more money in the meantime. Boies bonuses are no joke.

[KaNa1986]

In DC, it's essentially W&C > Wilmer > Covington/A&P, at least based on choices of law review students at HYS; different firms have different strengths. There are more top tier litigation firms in New York, and they fall under two categories. There are newer litigation powerhouses such as Boies and Quinn, and there are well-established elite Wall Street firms such as Cravath and S&C. Extra bonus should not be an important consideration, so your decision should largely depend on location, interests of practice areas, firm culture, and future goals.

[Old Gregg]

Extra bonus should not be an important consideration,

Maybe you're independently wealthy so this wouldn't quite matter to you? If you have $200k+ in debt, and you're deciding between a firm with a $7,500 bonus, I think the fact that the other firm offers a six figure bonus should be an important consideration.

[arklaw13]

Probably a naive question, but does W&C carry with it any of the same risks that BSF does? I know it's not as new, but is it also less well known than a place like Cravath? Any other downsides to choosing W&C?

(Assuming you mean Williams & Connolly and not White & Case like some dood in another thread)

W&C is definitely recognized as having the same level of prestige as Cravath. They're as grade-selective as it gets and work on very high-stakes, high-profile cases. Downside relative to BSF I guess would be no bonuses, but the base pay is higher so that does mitigate things to a certain extent. Basically if you want to do lit in DC, you'd be an idiot to turn down W&C for reasons other than fit/personality differences.