Top Law Schools

image says it all:

zweitbester wrote:image says it all:

To Wall Street: Don't be pussies, Fed is basically giving away money for you do it.

I don't think it economically follows to claim that less firms will lead to higher wages...

I am curious as to what people think the chances are for NYC to go to 190.

..

sublime wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I don't think it economically follows to claim that less firms will lead to higher wages...

I am curious as to what people think the chances are for NYC to go to 190.

What?

And not high enough to worry about.

You're arguing that with less firms in the market, wages will rise? Wouldn't it be the opposite? More firms means more competition, means the need for higher wages.

..

Interesting coincidence. Doesn't change the fact that revenues and profits are higher than in 2006/07, even after adjusting for inflation.

Do a lot of law firms make money off of first years? First years at some firms aren't profitable for those firms, first years at most firms probably are profitable, right?

I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants. When it gets to a point that firms become legitimately concerned about the still deteriorating talent pool coming out of law school to the extent that they think it will negatively affect their own long term stability, they will feel pressure to increase wages to attract more people away from going into other careers.

In a system where everyone is lockstep there are a lot of internal pressures to not start a new salary war among the usual suspects, so I don't see internal competition among firms for existing/near-term future prospects as playing much of a factor.

And of course a big LOL at profitability alone ever being sufficient to throw more money to the worker bees.

Okay, get on it, you transactional shitheads.

*puts feet up and reviews documents for 12 hours*

Cobretti wrote:I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants.

There are two reasons I don't think this will have as big of an effect as you think. First, the decline in law school applicants is in response to the overall health of the legal market. So while there are fewer overall graduates, there are also fewer jobs available than there used to be. Second, and perhaps more importantly as far as biglaw salaries are concerned, the big firms are drawing the top students from the top schools. This means that even if the bottom third of students attending T1s were to drop out right now, there would still be enough people to hire for biglaw.

Avian wrote:

Cobretti wrote:I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants.

There are two reasons I don't think this will have as big of an effect as you think. First, the decline in law school applicants is in response to the overall health of the legal market. So while there are fewer overall graduates, there are also fewer jobs available than there used to be. Second, and perhaps more importantly as far as biglaw salaries are concerned, the big firms are drawing the top students from the top schools. This means that even if the bottom third of students attending T1s were to drop out right now, there would still be enough people to hire for biglaw.

I meant the perceived drop in quality of applicants moreso than the warm body count.

Quality of summers is certainly dropping quite drastically. You're talking when firms used to be getting a bunch of 3.85/172 kids now they're getting a bunch of 3.78/166 kids

GOATlawman wrote:Quality of summers is certainly dropping quite drastically. You're talking when firms used to be getting a bunch of 3.85/172 kids now they're getting a bunch of 3.78/166 kids

Yes because 6 points on the LSAT means you have the ability to move more commas...

I'll assume you were being sarcastic.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Okay, get on it, you transactional shitheads.

*puts feet up and reviews documents for 12 hours*

k lemme go out and get some deals. My MacBook came with a number to call if I have problems. I'll ask the rep if apple would be interested in doing some deals

Wish me luck tyty

Also chart above is all M&A, not law firm mergers.



To the dumbass who thought otherwise.

11,000 law firm mergers in 2014 sounds plausible

dixiecupdrinking wrote:11,000 law firm mergers in 2014 sounds plausible

yeah i looked at the chart and was wondering if was possibly misleading, but no whoever posted that post is just mind blowingly stupid.

If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190

911 crisis actor wrote:If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190

Wait.



WAIT JUST A SECOND.



Did you say, NYC TO 190??????

Anonymous User wrote:Do a lot of law firms make money off of first years? First years at some firms aren't profitable for those firms, first years at most firms probably are profitable, right?

I'm taking a class with a partner where we often don't actually do the work assigned to the class but he tells us all about his tips for surviving at a firm. Wonderful class. He gave us a whole lecture about how first years are the most profitable. His reasoning was that there is an asymmetry between the increase in price/hour to the client, the time it takes to do a task, and the pay employees receive as they gain experience. That is, first years might take 10x as long to do the same task, but they probably only bill about 1/5 the rate of a partner, for example. So they bring in twice as much while getting paid about 1/20th as much.

But it also did seem like a bit of a recruiting spiel for his firm, because of course they're the one among the many who don't take advantage of you, so that could be it.

questionable whether firms make that much money from first years, from writing off time to additional training and clients who don't want first years on their matters.

but thats not the point of this thread. the point of this thread is that you should be doing more deals so NYC to 190k.

so stop posting here AND DO SOME MOTHERFUCKIN DEALS.

zweitbester wrote:NYC to 190k.

!!!!!!

911 crisis actor wrote:If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190

Nah we need actual corp bros to do less deals. Bill 1700 hours and stop.

You need to look at inflation adjusted salaries. There was a good article in AmLaw a couple of weeks ago. Revenue may be flat, but PPP is up, generally. Associates' salaries have been stagnant for a while. Not saying 190K is justified, but the push for an increased starting salary makes sense.