Top Law Schools

?

How is babby formed?

K-JDs often act like the top law firms are these all-powerful, super wealthy companies. These profit making juggernauts. But even the biggest law firms bring in far less revenue and are worth less than any of the Big 4 accounting firms. And are worth far less valuable than the vast majority of tech companies you'd recognize the names of. Big law firms and their business models aren't these untouchable juggernauts or cash printing machines so many attorneys like to believe, especially moving forward.

Anonymous User wrote:K-JDs often act like the top law firms are these all-powerful, super wealthy companies. These profit making juggernauts. But even the biggest law firms bring in far less revenue and are worth less than any of the Big 4 accounting firms. And are worth far less valuable than the vast majority of tech companies you'd recognize the names of. Big law firms and their business models aren't these untouchable juggernauts or cash printing machines so many attorneys like to believe, especially moving forward.

Darn youngin's! If only they had worked for 9+ months in a crappy desk job, they'd have a great understanding of law firm economics. Its not opaque at all once you've received a paycheck after college.

Anonymous User wrote:K-JDs often act like the top law firms are these all-powerful, super wealthy companies. These profit making juggernauts. But even the biggest law firms bring in far less revenue and are worth less than any of the Big 4 accounting firms. And are worth far less valuable than the vast majority of tech companies you'd recognize the names of. Big law firms and their business models aren't these untouchable juggernauts or cash printing machines so many attorneys like to believe, especially moving forward.

is this sarcasm?

The better question is does Cravath think raising salaries to recruit first years or retain attorneys is necessary. The may be happy where they are, I don’t know. I doubt the partners or their clients care if they don’t match associate raises.

It will be interesting to see what they do.

Npret wrote:The better question is does Cravath think raising salaries to recruit first years or retain attorneys is necessary. The may be happy where they are, I don’t know. I doubt the partners or their clients care if they don’t match associate raises.

It will be interesting to see what they do.

I doubt the clients or Cravath partners care either. But both the clients and Cravath partners do care about the quality of associates that Cravath is able to recruit every year (especially since they don't accept laterals). And that quality will go down over time if Cravath ever pays below market rate.

4LTsPointingNorth wrote:

Npret wrote:The better question is does Cravath think raising salaries to recruit first years or retain attorneys is necessary. The may be happy where they are, I don’t know. I doubt the partners or their clients care if they don’t match associate raises.

It will be interesting to see what they do.

I doubt the clients or Cravath partners care either. But both the clients and Cravath partners do care about the quality of associates that Cravath is able to recruit every year (especially since they don't accept laterals). And that quality will go down over time if Cravath ever pays below market rate.

You really think so? There are more grads than jobs even from T14 and Cravath has its unique system that sets it apart. Everyone knows they don’t take laterals so you need to start there from the beginning if you want their training.

I’m also very skeptical of the difference in quality of first years where most of the people I’ve seen over time are within a close range no matter what school they attended.

Right now they are paying market and some others are paying above market.

I’m just curious as to how pressured they feel to join in.

Anonymous User wrote:?

Until they move to 200K, YES THEY ARE POOR AND SHOULD BE SHAMED MERCILESSLY FOR IT.

Cravath taking this long to move to 200K has lowered my opinion of the firm. They have the money to do it clearly, unless there is some major financial problem with the firm that we don't know about.

They're not poor. They just don't think their associates are worth 200k, let alone 190k (or 180k/160k/145k/120k, &c.).

Wild Card wrote:They're not poor. They just don't think their associates are worth 200k, let alone 190k (or 180k/160k/145k/120k, &c.).

Associates are "worth" way more than their salaries. If you bill a 1st year at 400/hr, you collect 1250 hours and 20% goes to overhead, that 1st year is "worth" 400K. The only reason that 1st year doesn't make 400K is because they cant start their own shop. They need all of the other bullshit at a law firm (specialists in other departments, ppl with client contacts, etc.) so have to pay a tax on their efficiency to management (because management already set up all that other bullshit). So the question is just how much of that 400K goes to the associate and how much of it goes to management, not whether the associate is "worth it" or whether the firm can "afford it". Of course they are worth it and of course the firms can afford it.

jkpolk wrote:

Wild Card wrote:They're not poor. They just don't think their associates are worth 200k, let alone 190k (or 180k/160k/145k/120k, &c.).

Associates are "worth" way more than their salaries. If you bill a 1st year at 400/hr, you collect 1250 hours and 20% goes to overhead, that 1st year is "worth" 400K. The only reason that 1st year doesn't make 400K is because they cant start their own shop. They need all of the other bullshit at a law firm (specialists in other departments, ppl with client contacts, etc.) so have to pay a tax on their efficiency to management (because management already set up all that other bullshit). So the question is just how much of that 400K goes to the associate and how much of it goes to management, not whether the associate is "worth it" or whether the firm can "afford it". Of course they are worth it and of course the firms can afford it.

This is why we should unionize

Wachtell didn’t raise to 180 when everyone else did (they stayed at 165 for a while, I believe). But everyone knows that wachtell gives huge bonuses, so no one cared.

Maybe Cravath is going to give gigantic bonuses in December. That’ll really separate cravath (and whoever matches or beats it) from the rest of the pack.

Anonymous User wrote:Wachtell didn’t raise to 180 when everyone else did (they stayed at 165 for a while, I believe). But everyone knows that wachtell gives huge bonuses, so no one cared.

Maybe Cravath is going to give gigantic bonuses in December. That’ll really separate cravath (and whoever matches or beats it) from the rest of the pack.

This doesn't make much sense. Firms including Cravath will either match 190k or go beyond before the OCI period. Waiting until December will be pointless.

And Wachtell is just in a different game altogether. That's why nobody cares whether they match or not. "Matching" is irrelevant for them with their gigantic bonuses.

Apparently not:
https://abovethelaw.com/2018/06/cravath ... ssociates/