Shearman and Sterling Looking at Partner Demotions Forum

[dabigchina]

pack it up guys, this dude's mom says everything's ok.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Funny, I joined this site tonight as I am applying to Law school for Fall 2017. Just browsing through the topics and saw Shearman and Sterling in the thread title and had to see what it was about.

My mother is a partner at S&S. I would be so bold as to call her a "rainmaker" but she's a decently sized name in New York.

I wouldn't believe everything you read.

Fuck guys, I was getting really concerned with internal leaks from the firm and a documented history of letting partners go but a 0L posting for the first time anonymously on an Internet forum for autistic superstudy lawyers said his mom told him that you can't believe everything you read.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Funny, I joined this site tonight as I am applying to Law school for Fall 2017. Just browsing through the topics and saw Shearman and Sterling in the thread title and had to see what it was about.

My mother is a partner at S&S. I would be so bold as to call her a "rainmaker" but she's a decently sized name in New York.

I wouldn't believe everything you read.

Shhh, just go exchange your Good Boy Points for tendies from mummy and everything will be okay.

[fleurdelis2]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

[rpupkin]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

I've heard the primary reason is the firm's practice of having its partners use their children to spread misinformation about the firm.

[itbdvorm]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

[Hikikomorist]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

Could you do this sort of breakdown for other firms that have risen/fallen a fair amount recently?

[rpupkin]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

Could you do this sort of breakdown for other firms that have risen/fallen a fair amount recently?

Please send me the breakdown by 9 a.m. tomorrow morning. Thx.

[Hikikomorist]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

Could you do this sort of breakdown for other firms that have risen/fallen a fair amount recently?

Please send me the breakdown by 9 a.m. tomorrow morning. Thx.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound pushy, and I would be happy to get the information from anyone willing and able to share.

[Blackfish]

from the other shearman thread...

that Shearman's still slumping and is moving in the wrong direction.

i still don't understand where this anecdotal stuff comes from

where is it all coming from?!!

jeez. lol.

[Anonymous User]

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

As someone about to summer there next year, should I be particularly worried?

[itbdvorm]

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

As someone about to summer there next year, should I be particularly worried?

Of course not. My post is an explanation why they've fallen a step behind the top NYC firms. Still an excellent firm with better prospects than many others. They're far from alone among the star firms of the '80s whose luster has dimmed.

[itbdvorm]

I know it might be speculation, but what's been the reason for Shearman's decline this past decade?

Real reason - roughly, they botched the dot-com era. I believe they were slow to react, and when they did, they over-reacted, leading to big job cuts in the early 2000s. See: http://observer.com/2005/04/shearminati ... -to-leave/ (may sound familiar)

This meant that they basically missed out on the 2005-6-7 boom. And they also had a much smaller class of "next up" partners.

So when the senior guys retired, left, etc., there wasn't as much of a rising star class to assume the mantle.

When you think of the current "core" of a firm, you've got the senior rainmakers and the guys who have been out of law school ~20-25 years ago. So if you graduated law school between 1991-1996 and went to Shearman, you had a higher-than-usual chance of either getting booted or (potentially worse) made partner and then pushed out. Now the rainmakers are retiring or inexplicably moving to Magic Circle firms (still waiting for someone to explain that one)...

Could you do this sort of breakdown for other firms that have risen/fallen a fair amount recently?

Please send me the breakdown by 9 a.m. tomorrow morning. Thx.

This made me chuckle. If there are other firms you're thinking of happy to provide a bit of feedback, but too general to answer this sort of q really.