Top Law Schools

Does anybody know what Wachtell bonuses have been in the past two years? Above the Law doesn't seem to know, and I'm curious.

ATL knows, it's just that they're sort of in bed with certain firms and Wachtell is one of them. As a result, and I think per the request from someone at Wachtell, ATL does not routinely publish information on Wachtell's bonuses.

Friend was a former summer - He was told by associates that they have been 100% of salary for the last several years apparently, don't know about this year but that's probably a decent assumption.

Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Same anon as above

The associate hours are tangibly worse at Wachtell. They are not good at Cravath obviously but the norm at Wachtell is to work until like 10. The people Wachtell hires probably tend to come from affluent backgrounds and at a certain point other things than compensation come into play. You could ask the same thing about why anyone wanting to do lit would take anything over Boies, but many do.

I admit that I don't fully understand it, I would have taken WLRK or BSF over anything.

zweitbester wrote:ATL knows, it's just that they're sort of in bed with certain firms and Wachtell is one of them. As a result, and I think per the request from someone at Wachtell, ATL does not routinely publish information on Wachtell's bonuses.

Makes sense, Lat's a Wachtell alum

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Most people who get Cravath offers don't get Wachtell offers. Thats how few and far between they are. I know 3 people who had Cravath offers. None of them got Wachtell offers.

911 crisis actor wrote:

zweitbester wrote:ATL knows, it's just that they're sort of in bed with certain firms and Wachtell is one of them. As a result, and I think per the request from someone at Wachtell, ATL does not routinely publish information on Wachtell's bonuses.

Makes sense, Lat's a Wachtell alum

This is interesting, given that ATL has reported on Wachtell bonuses in the past--e.g., in 2010 they reported that bonuses bottomed out at around 45%. Assuming that bonuses have risen back to ~100%, reporting only from disgruntled associates in bad years doesn't seem consistent with the story that ATL is in bed with Wachtell. It does seem somewhat consistent with a story that Wachtell associates are sufficiently overworked/satisfied in normal years that they don't bother leaking.

But it's heartening to hear (anecdotally) that at least one firm has reverted to the norms of the fat years--thanks, guys!

911 crisis actor wrote:

zweitbester wrote:ATL knows, it's just that they're sort of in bed with certain firms and Wachtell is one of them. As a result, and I think per the request from someone at Wachtell, ATL does not routinely publish information on Wachtell's bonuses.

Makes sense, Lat's a Wachtell alum

Yeah thanks we all kind of know that...

meliorquamheri wrote:

911 crisis actor wrote:

zweitbester wrote:ATL knows, it's just that they're sort of in bed with certain firms and Wachtell is one of them. As a result, and I think per the request from someone at Wachtell, ATL does not routinely publish information on Wachtell's bonuses.

Makes sense, Lat's a Wachtell alum

This is interesting, given that ATL has reported on Wachtell bonuses in the past--e.g., in 2010 they reported that bonuses bottomed out at around 45%. Assuming that bonuses have risen back to ~100%, reporting only from disgruntled associates in bad years doesn't seem consistent with the story that ATL is in bed with Wachtell. It does seem somewhat consistent with a story that Wachtell associates are sufficiently overworked/satisfied in normal years that they don't bother leaking.

But it's heartening to hear (anecdotally) that at least one firm has reverted to the norms of the fat years--thanks, guys!

There's I think one post where Lat specifically mentioned that it was requested that ATL do not post bonus information.

FYI the most recent ATL post on WLRK bonuses (notice how it was posted in April though they were doled out 4 months earlier:

Lawyers at the firm are very discreet — and paid well for their discretion (happy and well-compensated associates are less likely to complain). And this year there was an additional reason for employees to remain tight-lipped. We won’t go into it, so as not to give other firms ideas; but if you currently work at WLRK, you know what we’re talking about.

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/04/associat ... chtell-do/

kaiser wrote:

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Most people who get Cravath offers don't get Wachtell offers. Thats how few and far between they are. I know 3 people who had Cravath offers. None of them got Wachtell offers.

I have never known a person to turn down a Wachtell offer for Cravath. Generally, all the people I know who went to Cravath did not have great alternatives (e.g. I know quite a few people who turned down Cravath for Davis Polk and Simpson Thacher, but I haven't run across anybody for whom the opposite is true; and I also know a fair number of people for whom Cravath was their only V10 offer).

I'm an associate at a biglaw firm in Chicago, and I do know a few people practicing here who turned down Wachtell; but at that point, choice of city comes into the mix, making it more complicated than one firm versus another firm in a vacuum (which applies more to Wachtell v. Cravath).

Anonymous User wrote:

kaiser wrote:

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Most people who get Cravath offers don't get Wachtell offers. Thats how few and far between they are. I know 3 people who had Cravath offers. None of them got Wachtell offers.

I have never known a person to turn down a Wachtell offer for Cravath. Generally, all the people I know who went to Cravath did not have great alternatives (e.g. I know quite a few people who turned down Cravath for Davis Polk and Simpson Thacher, but I haven't run across anybody for whom the opposite is true; and I also know a fair number of people for whom Cravath was their only V10 offer).

I'm an associate at a biglaw firm in Chicago, and I do know a few people practicing here who turned down Wachtell; but at that point, choice of city comes into the mix, making it more complicated than one firm versus another firm in a vacuum (which applies more to Wachtell v. Cravath).

I have not seen too many people turn down Wachtell for Cravath either, although I admit I don't know too many people with Wachtell offers to begin with. On that note, Cravath seems to have an interesting recruiting philosophy. My small anecdotal sample of associates shows a bunch of top grades/tons of offers/LR types as well as a couple students with a seemingly more limited set of options. My sense is that Cravath MAY be a better decision for general corporate practice (securities, banking, etc.) whereas Wachtell is better if someone knows they want public M&A and corporate governance/takeover defense? Wachtell definitely provides better compensation.

Also relevant, I know at least one person who turned down Wachtell for a v10 in NY (because of the hours) and quite a few people who only had one v5 or v10 option at every firm sans Wachtell.

Shooter wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

kaiser wrote:

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Most people who get Cravath offers don't get Wachtell offers. Thats how few and far between they are. I know 3 people who had Cravath offers. None of them got Wachtell offers.

I have never known a person to turn down a Wachtell offer for Cravath. Generally, all the people I know who went to Cravath did not have great alternatives (e.g. I know quite a few people who turned down Cravath for Davis Polk and Simpson Thacher, but I haven't run across anybody for whom the opposite is true; and I also know a fair number of people for whom Cravath was their only V10 offer).

I'm an associate at a biglaw firm in Chicago, and I do know a few people practicing here who turned down Wachtell; but at that point, choice of city comes into the mix, making it more complicated than one firm versus another firm in a vacuum (which applies more to Wachtell v. Cravath).

I have not seen too many people turn down Wachtell for Cravath either, although I admit I don't know too many people with Wachtell offers to begin with. On that note, Cravath seems to have an interesting recruiting philosophy. My small anecdotal sample of associates shows a bunch of top grades/tons of offers/LR types as well as a couple students with a seemingly more limited set of options. My sense is that Cravath MAY be a better decision for general corporate practice (securities, banking, etc.) whereas Wachtell is better if someone knows they want public M&A and corporate governance/takeover defense? Wachtell definitely provides better compensation.

I actually think that people overestimate the scope of Cravath's practice and underestimate the scope of Wachtell's practice. They're probably not as far off as people think.

Source: Practicing in corporate biglaw, and talking with multiple friends who work at Wachtell and Cravath.

Anonymous User wrote:

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Same anon as above

The associate hours are tangibly worse at Wachtell. They are not good at Cravath obviously but the norm at Wachtell is to work until like 10. The people Wachtell hires probably tend to come from affluent backgrounds and at a certain point other things than compensation come into play. You could ask the same thing about why anyone wanting to do lit would take anything over Boies, but many do.

I admit that I don't fully understand it, I would have taken WLRK or BSF over anything.

This is false from what I've seen. People I know going to Wachtell did not come from affluent backgrounds, and they are driven to do whatever it takes in order to make it. The only plus of Wachtell to them over Cravath, S&C, etc. is the money. The affluent 2L's and 3L's seem to be going to places such as S&C and DPW.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

wert3813 wrote:Why does anyone who is only planning to stay for 3 years or so take Cravath over Wachtell? Are fit, prestige, quality of work so substantively different as to justify it?

Not rhetorical, asking those who have done it.

Same anon as above

The associate hours are tangibly worse at Wachtell. They are not good at Cravath obviously but the norm at Wachtell is to work until like 10. The people Wachtell hires probably tend to come from affluent backgrounds and at a certain point other things than compensation come into play. You could ask the same thing about why anyone wanting to do lit would take anything over Boies, but many do.

I admit that I don't fully understand it, I would have taken WLRK or BSF over anything.

This is false from what I've seen. People I know going to Wachtell did not come from affluent backgrounds, and they are driven to do whatever it takes in order to make it. The only plus of Wachtell to them over Cravath, S&C, etc. is the money. The affluent 2L's and 3L's seem to be going to places such as S&C and DPW.

Sorry I wasn't entirely clear but I think we agree. My point was that the pool of Wachtell offerees who turn them down are probably largely affluent and select away from Wachtell because the money is not an issue/not compelling for them. The ones who accept at Wachtell almost surely care about compensation in addition to prestige.