Top Law Schools

I really liked both firms and felt that both were a good "fit." I'm interested in transactional, maybe investment management but not sure exactly what corporate area yet. I'm having trouble making a decision and would appreciate any insight. Thanks!

Anonymous User wrote:I really liked both firms and felt that both were a good "fit." I'm interested in transactional, maybe investment management but not sure exactly what corporate area yet. I'm having trouble making a decision and would appreciate any insight. Thanks!

I don't have personal knowledge about it, so maybe someone else can speak more, but a bunch of partners (18) have left Ropes & Gray this year. Looks like its mostly from overseas offices, so maybe NY isn't too affected, but I'd be careful.

http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/ ... 0816223114

At NYU, Ropes is more selective than Fried Frank.

Generally, FF hires 3.0-3.1s, while Ropes hires 3.2+.

For whatever it's worth, I was in the same position and went with Ropes for the prestige but I regret that decision in retrospect. YMMV though.

Wild Card wrote:At NYU, Ropes is more selective than Fried Frank.

Generally, FF hires 3.0-3.1s, while Ropes hires 3.2+.

Why would this be helpful?

runinthefront wrote:

Wild Card wrote:At NYU, Ropes is more selective than Fried Frank.

Generally, FF hires 3.0-3.1s, while Ropes hires 3.2+.

Why would this be helpful?

Selectivity and "prestige" go hand-in-hand. Generally, one has better exit options from more reputable firms.

You could argue that it's V5 or GTFO, and that the reputational difference between Ropes and FF is negligible, but maybe OP cares about this.

Wild Card wrote:

runinthefront wrote:

Wild Card wrote:At NYU, Ropes is more selective than Fried Frank.

Generally, FF hires 3.0-3.1s, while Ropes hires 3.2+.

Why would this be helpful?

Selectivity and "prestige" go hand-in-hand. Generally, one has better exit options from more reputable firms.

You could argue that it's V5 or GTFO, and that the reputational difference between Ropes and FF is negligible, but maybe OP cares about this.

That makes sense. At my old school, the difference between a 3.1 and 3.2 was pretty negligible in terms of ranking. But I guess those are big distinctions at other schools.

Anonymous User wrote:For whatever it's worth, I was in the same position and went with Ropes for the prestige but I regret that decision in retrospect. YMMV though.

OP here. Why did you regret your decision?

runinthefront wrote:

Wild Card wrote:At NYU, Ropes is more selective than Fried Frank.

Generally, FF hires 3.0-3.1s, while Ropes hires 3.2+.

Why would this be helpful?

This is really not helpful. There are various reasons why a firm would be more selective than another firm at a particular school ranging from innocent factors such as one firm does not realize or care about the curve of a particular school to size of the office that targets that school (the smaller the office, the more selective it can be), to other school preferences it might have etc, etc.

Overall, I do think that ropes is slightly more prestigious than ff, for whatever that is worth, however I am not certain that applies to their New York offices, and obviously there are plenty of practice areas where ff is better than ropes.

You are going to need to weigh how much you want to do funds work versus overall prestige in the NY market. Ropes is one of the best funds firms - I'd just check to make sure a lot of the funds work is done in NY - but FF has much greater general prestige in the New York if it turns out that's not where you want to be.

Go with with your gut with this one. On your resume to go in house or lateral no one is going to care either way.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:For whatever it's worth, I was in the same position and went with Ropes for the prestige but I regret that decision in retrospect. YMMV though.

OP here. Why did you regret your decision?

Ropes very much over-promised and under-delivered, especially regarding substantive work and access to partners. I felt the summer program was run very poorly; the entire system at Ropes of having 2 coordinating lawyers who give you the bulk of your work only works if those attorneys care about giving you work which many (especially corporate partners) do not. In contrast, my friends at Fried Frank seemed to all really enjoy it and it seemed (from what they told me) that HR was much more involved in their day to day and making sure they got good assignments.

Fried Frank seems to be underrated when it comes to NYC corporate. Ropes is one of the best several firms for investment management though. Both are good options.