Top Law Schools

Facing mounting partner frustration at the firm’s stalled growth, Shearman & Sterling could decide as soon as today on a possible plan to demote some equity partners in an effort to refocus business on priority practices and lift profits, according to a report

https://bol.bna.com/wake-up-call-shearm ... e-profits/

Doesn't seem to be more info right now, at least publicly.

I'm going there next summer. What does this actually mean firm-health wise?

hope these partners accept the demotion and the rainmakers don't leave. If they left, I would be really worried.

.

Doesn't seem like they have really finalized on what to do yet. I have heard that their international strategy was haphazard and a bunch of profitable partners left in the early 2000's because they were tired of bankrolling it.

mvp99 wrote:hope these partners accept the demotion and the rainmakers don't leave. If they left, I would be really worried.

Well the rainmakers aren't the ones being demoted. Why would they leave?

the reason they are doing this is because rainmakers thought their draws were getting dragged down by unprofitable partners. if the unprofitable partners don't leave, the rainmakers will go somewhere else to get their raise.

Do the unprofitable partners have a say though? I don't really know how demotion works - do they have to agree to it?

the article said something about 75% of partners needing to agree in order for demotions to take effect.

I do not think the demotion itself makes the firm weaker, but the demotion can be a symptom of other weaknesses.

a TTT in even further decline. glad i turned down my offer there. volk and some of the other rainmakers left in early 2000s and the firm never really recovered. recession hit them hard too and didn't have a countercylical practice like litigation to capitalize on the downturn.

2007: V15
2017: V50
2018: V100

anyone have access to ALM able to post the text of this article?

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120276 ... 2615717726

How exactly do you demote a partner?

Do they just go back to being an associate or something?

bearsfan23 wrote:How exactly do you demote a partner?

Do they just go back to being an associate or something?

I assume they would just "de-equitize" them and have them be salary partners.

fleurdelis2 wrote:anyone have access to ALM able to post the text of this article?

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120276 ... 2615717726

i dont think im allowed to post paywalled articles here, but the gist is:

shearman has underperforming partners and practice areas and the ones that are profitable are complaining that they're pulling money from the pot w/o contributing much, so they want to de-equitize them. partners in US and asia will most likely be affected. shearman recently lost their anti trust partners to quinn and then 3 top m&a partners to paul hastings. unknown how many partners will be affected if the demotion happens. firm currently has 162 equity and 26 non-equity partners. thats about it.

bearsfan23 wrote:How exactly do you demote a partner?

Do they just go back to being an associate or something?

I think partners get de-equitized and receive a salary instead of gettif a share of the profits

bearsfan23 wrote:How exactly do you demote a partner?

Do they just go back to being an associate or something?

I'm not quite sure of the exact ritual but I imagine there's some kind of holy water and a crucifix involved.

Anonymous User wrote:

fleurdelis2 wrote:anyone have access to ALM able to post the text of this article?

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120276 ... 2615717726

3 top m&a partners to paul hastings.

From the SF office right? They used to have a nice little office out there. Who do they even have in the Bay Area nowadays.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

fleurdelis2 wrote:anyone have access to ALM able to post the text of this article?

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120276 ... 2615717726

3 top m&a partners to paul hastings.

From the SF office right? They used to have a nice little office out there. Who do they even have in the Bay Area nowadays.

yes, from the SF office. i have no idea. i didnt even know they had an SF office.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

fleurdelis2 wrote:anyone have access to ALM able to post the text of this article?

http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=120276 ... 2615717726

3 top m&a partners to paul hastings.

From the SF office right? They used to have a nice little office out there. Who do they even have in the Bay Area nowadays.

yes, from the SF office. i have no idea. i didnt even know they had an SF office.

They used to have quite a few rainmakers in SF who have since moved on to different firms in the area.

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.

Anonymous User wrote: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.

What's there to not believe? The firm confirmed it all.

Anonymous User wrote: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.

i wouldnt believe everything mommy tells you either about business. but mainly, this is obviously flame because no law firm partner is recommending their kid go to law school.

Anonymous User wrote: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.

Previous partners getting poached is already in the history books, and the firm already confirmed this current story. Get a life.