A Worth Weil firm? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Trying to figure this out … Weil is a v10, arguably the best in bankruptcy and is competitive with other elite firms in most of their corporate practices. However, having read many different threads here & there over months on here, I tend to see or infer posters suggesting they aren't as good as their ranking, lower ranked firms are better, or when talking about elite firms, leaving Weil out of the conversation entirely. I am wondering why, despite high ranking, high profits and good practices, there is, in my opinion, a negative market perception of the firm, at least as I have read on this site. Is this still an effect of 2013? Note - talking about NYC & I'm anon b/c I'm an incoming summer and just being cautious, idk

[cron1834]

Because people here are self-selecting prestige whores. Vault may overstate Weil's value a little, but it's still a better outcome than 95+% of people who enter law school. As long as the firm's finances are solid, you should feel good about being at Weil.

[Traynor Brah]

They shitcanned a fair amount of associates a few years ago. With respect to lit, they and Latham aren't like chambers peers with the rest of the V15. I think that's the gist of why TLS is not so high on them, relatively speaking. They seem to have a pretty great culture and are obviously very well respected, generally. No reason to worry about this kind of shit right now. If you don't feel comfortable with them after the summer, reassess at that point.

[Anonymous User]

They're not arguably the best in bankruptcy anymore. They've been indisputably passed by K&E, and many would argue other firms.

They have a middling M&A practice relative to the top NYC firms, and that's the most important (and profitable) corporate practice.

Its important to think of rankings not as ordinal, but in tiers. Weil is in the same tier as a Latham, a Wilkie. It's an excellent law firm. It's not Cravath. If that gets your underwear twisted I don't know what to tell you. If you survive to be a 6th year at Weil you'll have much better job options than someone who washes out in 3 years at Cravath.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

The stink of the 2013 layoffs are still on them little. They never really recovered from that. Nothing about their financials suggest they're a particularly strong firm, but nothing suggests they aren't generally fine.

I think of them as just another firm. I don't think anyone's really "bashing" Weil; they're just telling you to disregard Vault, as it's not a useful metric.

And also, if you're an incoming summer, then you shouldn't be worried about anything besides implosion (which isn't happening) for the next four-ish years, so no real point in thinking about it.

[jbagelboy]

They're not arguably the best in bankruptcy anymore. They've been indisputably passed by K&E, and many would argue other firms.

They have a middling M&A practice relative to the top NYC firms, and that's the most important (and profitable) corporate practice.

Its important to think of rankings not as ordinal, but in tiers. Weil is in the same tier as a Latham, a Wilkie. It's an excellent law firm. It's not Cravath. If that gets your underwear twisted I don't know what to tell you. If you survive to be a 6th year at Weil you'll have much better job options than someone who washes out in 3 years at Cravath.

^this is my impression.

If vault reflected objective market strength & selectivity factors and not self-perpetuating, painfully slow adjusting, M&A focused survey results, Weil would be a V25 (still very well regarded), but not V10, firm. In NY corporate, its out of place in the cravath/davis polk/s&c/simpson group, and closer to the Latham (probably also overrated by vault)/Jones Day/Shearman/white&case group. It's fallen progressively from 6 to 9 over the past few years, and I'd anticipate that continuing (with a firm like Paul Weiss reaping the rankings reward), but none of this means anything of consequence. Vault is, and will always be, of extremely limited utility and only representative of broad trends (operates in bands, not digits) in one city, in a handful of practice areas.

[TLSModBot]

Yeah if you have a job at Weil, you're not likely going to lose it outside of personal failings/burn-out.

Weil had some minor dips in revenue in 2013 and 2014 (not sure about their 2015 figures yet), but overall they've maintained profitability at expected levels and haven't overhired since the 2013 layoffs. Weil's leverage is on the higher side (over 5 to 1), but there've been no indications that anyone is looking to (or can afford to) poach significant partners from the firm which is what it would take to make this statistic worrisome in the near future.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Weil's profit margin is still around 35% though, which is weirdly low. As an example, they have much greater expenses per capita than Cahill does despite paying less across the board. They don't compare favorably to firms with similar profiles in that regard, and this is after they theoretically cut a bunch of longstanding dead weight in their firm.

[PMan99]

Yeah if you have a job at Weil, you're not likely going to lose it outside of personal failings/burn-out.

Weil had some minor dips in revenue in 2013 and 2014 (not sure about their 2015 figures yet), but overall they've maintained profitability at expected levels and haven't overhired since the 2013 layoffs. Weil's leverage is on the higher side (over 5 to 1), but there've been no indications that anyone is looking to (or can afford to) poach significant partners from the firm which is what it would take to make this statistic worrisome in the near future.

This overstates things. Every firm, even strong ones in good times with good financials, has an up-or-out system. Maybe it means you get pushed out as a 3rd or 4th year instead of a 2nd year, but it still happens to many people regardless of burn-out.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah if you have a job at Weil, you're not likely going to lose it outside of personal failings/burn-out.

Weil had some minor dips in revenue in 2013 and 2014 (not sure about their 2015 figures yet), but overall they've maintained profitability at expected levels and haven't overhired since the 2013 layoffs. Weil's leverage is on the higher side (over 5 to 1), but there've been no indications that anyone is looking to (or can afford to) poach significant partners from the firm which is what it would take to make this statistic worrisome in the near future.

This overstates things. Every firm, even strong ones in good times with good financials, has an up-or-out system. Maybe it means you get pushed out as a 3rd or 4th year instead of a 2nd year, but it still happens to many people regardless of burn-out.

To be clear I don't believe the above poster is speaking about debt leverage--Weil is a firm that doesn't take on debt. I believe s/he is referring to associate-partner ratios, which are actually consistent with many firms in the V10...

[Anonymous User]

They're not arguably the best in bankruptcy anymore. They've been indisputably passed by K&E, and many would argue other firms.

They have a middling M&A practice relative to the top NYC firms, and that's the most important (and profitable) corporate practice.

Its important to think of rankings not as ordinal, but in tiers. Weil is in the same tier as a Latham, a Wilkie. It's an excellent law firm. It's not Cravath. If that gets your underwear twisted I don't know what to tell you. If you survive to be a 6th year at Weil you'll have much better job options than someone who washes out in 3 years at Cravath.

^this is my impression.

If vault reflected objective market strength & selectivity factors and not self-perpetuating, painfully slow adjusting, M&A focused survey results, Weil would be a V25 (still very well regarded), but not V10, firm. In NY corporate, its out of place in the cravath/davis polk/s&c/simpson group, and closer to the Latham (probably also overrated by vault)/Jones Day/Shearman/white&case group. It's fallen progressively from 6 to 9 over the past few years, and I'd anticipate that continuing (with a firm like Paul Weiss reaping the rankings reward), but none of this means anything of consequence. Vault is, and will always be, of extremely limited utility and only representative of broad trends (operates in bands, not digits) in one city, in a handful of practice areas.

I think this poster might be speaking from a litigator's perspective, and not actually as someone who is current on corporate V10s' relative standings... Kind of a joke to compare to white and case/shearman, jones day is closer but I'd be very surprised if folks picked any of these corp practices over Weil. The types of deals in their NY offices are just not on the same level?

Believe that if Vault were based on M&A league tables, Weil would still be up there. The last time I checked was in Q3, where I believe Weil was top 5. Before that, I recall Weil was top 3? I don't understand how these league tables don't reflect market strength, since they're based on revenue/deal count, but perhaps there's something I'm missing; I don't think so, though.

Wrt bankruptcy (first post) agree that Weil isn't the clear leader as of 2015. But no one in bankruptcy at any of the other debtor firms would tell you that weil is somehow inferior to K&E. And I'd be even more surprised if anyone would argue that there's another legitimate contender, apart from KE.

[jbagelboy]

They're not arguably the best in bankruptcy anymore. They've been indisputably passed by K&E, and many would argue other firms.

They have a middling M&A practice relative to the top NYC firms, and that's the most important (and profitable) corporate practice.

Its important to think of rankings not as ordinal, but in tiers. Weil is in the same tier as a Latham, a Wilkie. It's an excellent law firm. It's not Cravath. If that gets your underwear twisted I don't know what to tell you. If you survive to be a 6th year at Weil you'll have much better job options than someone who washes out in 3 years at Cravath.

^this is my impression.

If vault reflected objective market strength & selectivity factors and not self-perpetuating, painfully slow adjusting, M&A focused survey results, Weil would be a V25 (still very well regarded), but not V10, firm. In NY corporate, its out of place in the cravath/davis polk/s&c/simpson group, and closer to the Latham (probably also overrated by vault)/Jones Day/Shearman/white&case group. It's fallen progressively from 6 to 9 over the past few years, and I'd anticipate that continuing (with a firm like Paul Weiss reaping the rankings reward), but none of this means anything of consequence. Vault is, and will always be, of extremely limited utility and only representative of broad trends (operates in bands, not digits) in one city, in a handful of practice areas.

I think this poster might be speaking from a litigator's perspective, and not actually as someone who is current on corporate V10s' relative standings... Kind of a joke to compare to white and case/shearman, jones day is closer but I'd be very surprised if folks picked any of these corp practices over Weil. The types of deals in their NY offices are just not on the same level?

Believe that if Vault were based on M&A league tables, Weil would still be up there. The last time I checked was in Q3, where I believe Weil was top 5. Before that, I recall Weil was top 3? I don't understand how these league tables don't reflect market strength, since they're based on revenue/deal count, but perhaps there's something I'm missing; I don't think so, though.

Wrt bankruptcy (first post) agree that Weil isn't the clear leader as of 2015. But no one in bankruptcy at any of the other debtor firms would tell you that weil is somehow inferior to K&E. And I'd be even more surprised if anyone would argue that there's another legitimate contender, apart from KE.

Yea I'm speaking generically (including litigation), not wrt m&a or bankruptcy specifically.

[TLSModBot]

Yeah if you have a job at Weil, you're not likely going to lose it outside of personal failings/burn-out.

Weil had some minor dips in revenue in 2013 and 2014 (not sure about their 2015 figures yet), but overall they've maintained profitability at expected levels and haven't overhired since the 2013 layoffs. Weil's leverage is on the higher side (over 5 to 1), but there've been no indications that anyone is looking to (or can afford to) poach significant partners from the firm which is what it would take to make this statistic worrisome in the near future.

This overstates things. Every firm, even strong ones in good times with good financials, has an up-or-out system. Maybe it means you get pushed out as a 3rd or 4th year instead of a 2nd year, but it still happens to many people regardless of burn-out.

To be clear I don't believe the above poster is speaking about debt leverage--Weil is a firm that doesn't take on debt. I believe s/he is referring to associate-partner ratios, which are actually consistent with many firms in the V10...

Yes - associate leverage (I'm not even sure where you'd find specific details on firm debt leverage - is that public?).

Weil and Cleary have the highest leverage in the V10 (5.27 and 5.37, respectively). The only other V10 that comes close after that is Davis Polk (at 4.69). All the rest are in the mid to upper 3's. Which means that for every partner at Weil, there are 2 more associates than there would be at most of the other V10's. Again this isn't worrisome for a firm health perspective, but in terms of long-term career stuff like being able to stay at the firm, getting training and attention from senior lawyers, etc. it can have an impact.

But that is a generality based on a firm-wide statistic, which doesn't take into account the practices (or leverage) of specific groups/offices.

[TTTooKewl]

Yeah if you have a job at Weil, you're not likely going to lose it outside of personal failings/burn-out.

Weil had some minor dips in revenue in 2013 and 2014 (not sure about their 2015 figures yet), but overall they've maintained profitability at expected levels and haven't overhired since the 2013 layoffs. Weil's leverage is on the higher side (over 5 to 1), but there've been no indications that anyone is looking to (or can afford to) poach significant partners from the firm which is what it would take to make this statistic worrisome in the near future.

This overstates things. Every firm, even strong ones in good times with good financials, has an up-or-out system. Maybe it means you get pushed out as a 3rd or 4th year instead of a 2nd year, but it still happens to many people regardless of burn-out.

To be clear I don't believe the above poster is speaking about debt leverage--Weil is a firm that doesn't take on debt. I believe s/he is referring to associate-partner ratios, which are actually consistent with many firms in the V10...

Yes - associate leverage (I'm not even sure where you'd find specific details on firm debt leverage - is that public?).

Weil and Cleary have the highest leverage in the V10 (5.27 and 5.37, respectively). The only other V10 that comes close after that is Davis Polk (at 4.69). All the rest are in the mid to upper 3's. Which means that for every partner at Weil, there are 2 more associates than there would be at most of the other V10's. Again this isn't worrisome for a firm health perspective, but in terms of long-term career stuff like being able to stay at the firm, getting training and attention from senior lawyers, etc. it can have an impact.

But that is a generality based on a firm-wide statistic, which doesn't take into account the practices (or leverage) of specific groups/offices.

I don't have a basis to come to the opposite conclusion, but your conclusions don't necessarily follow from the data. Opposite conclusions are just as plausible. Higher leverage could be a result of associates being permitted to stay at the firm longer, not necessarily a sign that associates will be pushed out earlier. This could mean a higher senior associate:junior associate ratio, and better training and mentoring from senior associates.