Top Law Schools

All others equal, V30 may be busier and not as good work-life balance (60 hours/week typically vs. 45-50) which I don't mind at all at this moment.
Nevertheless, I do foresee to want a better balance in the near future (settling down, etc.)
I was told by multiple people that V30 comes with awesome name recognition and exit opportunity, so it is very possible that I will be able to lateral to the V100 or the like in the future.
But, does it make more sense to start there?

I guess my gut feeling is I should go to V100, but I cannot get over the prestige thing. Advice please! Thanks!

I think the hours will be about the same, all other things equal. I personally would be reluctant to make a "riskier" choice solely on the basis of a screener and CB. It's very difficult to get an accurate impression of what working at a firm will be like. If you don't like your summer at the V30 or see some red flags, you will most likely be able to switch to a different firm if you are moving "down."

It's not about "up" or "down", and I'm sure the V100 has instant name recognition as well. Go with your gut.

If your sole rationale is better work-life balance, this is not a good decision. Hours billed differ far more within firms that between firms, even at pretty vastly different levels of "prestige." It depends to some degree on what firms you're actually talking about; there are a handful of lower V100 firms that genuinely are known for being more relaxed (note that this list is not the same as the list of firms that tell you when interviewing that they are more relaxed). However, for the most part, it is a myth that the lower you go on the prestige scale, the fewer hours you work, so you are most likely making a decision based on no difference at all between firms.

There are other reasons to choose a lower Vault firm over a higher one, though, including practice areas, personalities, market, etc.

Anonymous User wrote:If your sole rationale is better work-life balance, this is not a good decision. Hours billed differ far more within firms that between firms, even at pretty vastly different levels of "prestige." It depends to some degree on what firms you're actually talking about; there are a handful of lower V100 firms that genuinely are known for being more relaxed (note that this list is not the same as the list of firms that tell you when interviewing that they are more relaxed). However, for the most part, it is a myth that the lower you go on the prestige scale, the fewer hours you work, so you are most likely making a decision based on no difference at all between firms.

There are other reasons to choose a lower Vault firm over a higher one, though, including practice areas, personalities, market, etc.

This is spot on.

Tell us more. Ideally which firms, which practice areas you're interested in, and where they're located.

In some situations this would make perfect sense, and in others it would be nuts. It's impossible to tell from the Vault rankings.

landshoes wrote:Tell us more. Ideally which firms, which practice areas you're interested in, and where they're located.

In some situations this would make perfect sense, and in others it would be nuts. It's impossible to tell from the Vault rankings.

Yes. Remember that the Vault rankings are based on a silly questionnaire where a bunch of associates (including many 1-2nd years who know nothing about the legal market) are asked to rate the prestige of firms on a scale of 1-10. Things like being NYC-based and being physically large play an out sized role.

Chambers and Partners bands for your intended practice area will likely tell you more than Vault will.

landshoes wrote:Tell us more. Ideally which firms, which practice areas you're interested in, and where they're located.

In some situations this would make perfect sense, and in others it would be nuts. It's impossible to tell from the Vault rankings.

This. Location is key -- some V100 firms may be the easy choice if its the flagship office in your desired location where the v30 might be a smaller regional outpost.

Don't decide based on work life balance. Almost no way to know (much less control) what your hours are going to be.

ETA: nealric beat me to it. But I echo his thoughts.

It depends what has the better chambers band.

star fox wrote:It depends what has the better chambers band.

The issue is, I don't feel chambers band are consistent. For example, one firm is ranked as band 1 in Chicago, but not ranked in Illinois -- how confusing is it?! I know the same applies to the vault ranking I am citing, but at least that's everyone's going by.

Anonymous User wrote:

star fox wrote:It depends what has the better chambers band.

The issue is, I don't feel chambers band are consistent. For example, one firm is ranked as band 1 in Chicago, but not ranked in Illinois -- how confusing is it?! I know the same applies to the vault ranking I am citing, but at least that's everyone's going by.

Chambers is better than Vault but can still be plenty misleading. I see some head-scratching stuff in Chambers sometimes, like firms that are ranked as Band 1 or 2 in certain practice areas even though most of the firm's key partners in that area have all retired/died/left in the recent past. I feel like Chambers often lags behind reality by a few years.

What will your friends think of you now?

Given that the $$ is normally in V lockstep, the determining factors would likely include the practice area and if one firm is in a particular part of the country you prefer. I suppose state/city taxes could come into play as might COL. As far as ranking, not so much. In any case you can lateral with ease if need be.

Anonymous User wrote:

star fox wrote:It depends what has the better chambers band.

The issue is, I don't feel chambers band are consistent. For example, one firm is ranked as band 1 in Chicago, but not ranked in Illinois -- how confusing is it?! I know the same applies to the vault ranking I am citing, but at least that's everyone's going by.

You're anonymous. Tell us the firms so we can help you out. Vault is not useful for this scenario.

Mayer Brown chicago vs Haynes and Boone dallas. IP.
Both are my target cities so let's exclude the market consideration for now.

Anonymous User wrote:Mayer Brown chicago vs Haynes and Boone dallas.
Both are my target cities so let's exclude the market consideration for now.

Does money matter to you at all?

Does money matter to you at all?

Yes, but I believe both pays market?

Shit, at that point...do you like snow?

No state income tax in Texas...

RaceJudicata wrote:No state income tax in Texas...

Honestly might do Dallas for this and the generally lower COL.

I would go for Mayer Brown because I don't think there's any serious tradeoff in terms of work/life balance for IP people, and that's what you said your concern was. But I don't think it's nuts to choose the Dallas firm in general, just nuts to choose it over something like "work/life balance."

KMart wrote:

RaceJudicata wrote:No state income tax in Texas...

Honestly might do Dallas for this and the generally lower COL.

Definitely this

I'd choose Dallas. We don't have 350 people shot a month down here, the cost of living is lower, no state income tax, generally friendly people, less traffic, better Mexican food (actually Tex-Mex)and a lot nicer weather IMHO. About the only factor I'd tip in Chicago's favor is that they have better pizza generally. (Although you can get Chicago pizza shipped down, packed in dry ice, quite easily)

Admittedly I'm biased as I have lived in this area my whole life except for 4 years at Notre Dame (about 90 miles East of Chicago).

Good luck with your decision.

Leprechaun wrote:I'd choose Dallas. We don't have 350 people shot a month down here, the cost of living is lower, no state income tax, generally friendly people, less traffic, better Mexican food (actually Tex-Mex)and a lot nicer weather IMHO. About the only factor I'd tip in Chicago's favor is that they have better pizza generally. (Although you can get Chicago pizza shipped down, packed in dry ice, quite easily)

Admittedly I'm biased as I have lived in this area my whole life except for 4 years at Notre Dame (about 90 miles East of Chicago).

Good luck with your decision.

Choosing a Dallas firm is reasonable, but LOL at Dallas being a better city than Chicago or that the ONLY way Chicago is better than Dallas is the pizza. jfc.

sublime wrote:

Leprechaun wrote:I'd choose Dallas. We don't have 350 people shot a month down here, the cost of living is lower, no state income tax, generally friendly people, less traffic, better Mexican food (actually Tex-Mex)and a lot nicer weather IMHO. About the only factor I'd tip in Chicago's favor is that they have better pizza generally. (Although you can get Chicago pizza shipped down, packed in dry ice, quite easily)

Admittedly I'm biased as I have lived in this area my whole life except for 4 years at Notre Dame (about 90 miles East of Chicago).

Good luck with your decision.

Choosing a Dallas firm is reasonable, but LOL at Dallas being a better city than Chicago or that the ONLY way Chicago is better than Dallas is the pizza. jfc.

Saying that Chicago is better than Dallas is objectively true, but LOL at trying to explain this to a Dallassian or thinking that a Texan would ever be objective when assessing whatever city they have decided to hitch their wagon to. jfc.