v5 vs v50 Forum

[Anonymous User]

I started my career in-house and have two offers on the table in a certain corporate practice. 1 is at a v10 in and the other is in a v50 that's growing firmwide, part of which includes growing this currently small practice. I didn't love the people I met with at the v10, and loved the people i met at the v50. i know conventional wisdom is going to the more prestigious firm... would it be crazy to choose the v50?

[s1m4]

I think conventional wisdom is actually not going with the higher ranked firm but with the firm that has the better fit for you and practice group that you want to work in. V50 is still nation-wide and will be well known.

[Neff]

No.

The "conventional wisdom" of higher Vault = better is more like the "conventional folly" of law students who haven't started their careers yet. There is certainly some loose correlation between Vault ranking and tangibles such as exit options, bonus pay, ease of lateraling, quality of experience, etc. But also some nasty (and stronger) inverse correlations as well such as happiness, sanity, hours, savings potential (a V5 in NYC vs e.g. a V50 in Texas). And too many confounding variables such as the specific practice group, office, one's personal goals etc to firmly conclude that it is wrong to choose V50 over V5.

In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

[dabigchina]

No.



In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

I think this is underrated when people choose firms. We bill our time for money. Firms with astronomical ppp's are that way because they work their associates harder.

[Anonymous User]

I started my career in-house and have two offers on the table in a certain corporate practice. 1 is at a v10 in and the other is in a v50 that's growing firmwide, part of which includes growing this currently small practice. I didn't love the people I met with at the v10, and loved the people i met at the v50. i know conventional wisdom is going to the more prestigious firm... would it be crazy to choose the v50?

Culture fit and quality of work are often cited as important.

My experience (4 different firms, including SA/internships, 2xV10, V25, V50, 3 in DC and 1 in NYC) is that the quality of work and work culture aren't that different. To the extent I've heard of positive outliers, it's in super niche areas (Cooley's startup teams in DC for example). Most outliers are negative and I'd definitely keep my ears up for such rumors. A caveat is, as a married man, I've never been that engaged in the culture/social aspects. I'd show up for happy hour, say hi, drink some tonic water like it had gin in it, and just go home for dinner.

In my tiny sample (all antitrust lit/transaction support negotiating with FTC if that matters), I did have a better experience with the tech support at the V10 and I am inclined to think they sink more money into IT (tiny little things like actually hiding wires in closets) and treasure our time with more support from the secretaries.

But I think that may just be luck of the draw and isn't related to their vault rankings.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

No.



In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

I think this is underrated when people choose firms. We bill our time for money. Firms with astronomical ppp's are that way because they work their associates harder.

Not necessarily. Billing rate has a lot to do with it. I work more now at a firm with a lower PPP because I need to work more to make the firm money as my billing rate is a good amount lower. Weil is gonna be able to charge more than DLA.

[Anonymous User]

No.

The "conventional wisdom" of higher Vault = better is more like the "conventional folly" of law students who haven't started their careers yet. There is certainly some loose correlation between Vault ranking and tangibles such as exit options, bonus pay, ease of lateraling, quality of experience, etc. But also some nasty (and stronger) inverse correlations as well such as happiness, sanity, hours, savings potential (a V5 in NYC vs e.g. a V50 in Texas). And too many confounding variables such as the specific practice group, office, one's personal goals etc to firmly conclude that it is wrong to choose V50 over V5.

In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

OP here, thanks so much for this. I know this is an impossible and subjective question but in your opinion, what would be a ballpark good enough PPP to constitute decent financials - especially if I happen to be paranoid of a coming recession?

[2013]

No.

The "conventional wisdom" of higher Vault = better is more like the "conventional folly" of law students who haven't started their careers yet. There is certainly some loose correlation between Vault ranking and tangibles such as exit options, bonus pay, ease of lateraling, quality of experience, etc. But also some nasty (and stronger) inverse correlations as well such as happiness, sanity, hours, savings potential (a V5 in NYC vs e.g. a V50 in Texas). And too many confounding variables such as the specific practice group, office, one's personal goals etc to firmly conclude that it is wrong to choose V50 over V5.

In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

OP here, thanks so much for this. I know this is an impossible and subjective question but in your opinion, what would be a ballpark good enough PPP to constitute decent financials - especially if I happen to be paranoid of a coming recession?

Wanted to chime in and say that you should also focus on the number of non-equity partners at the firm. A firm with a PPP of $2m with 50 equity partners and 300 non-equity partners making $450,000 is probably more concerning than a firm with only equity partners with a PPP of $800k.

[dabigchina]

No.



In my other posts, I advocate that not only is the conventional wisdom dubious, but that if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials. Because the one sure thing is that a high PPP = high level of misery -- that's all but guaranteed.

I think this is underrated when people choose firms. We bill our time for money. Firms with astronomical ppp's are that way because they work their associates harder.

Not necessarily. Billing rate has a lot to do with it. I work more now at a firm with a lower PPP because I need to work more to make the firm money as my billing rate is a good amount lower. Weil is gonna be able to charge more than DLA.

Right, but (I think) outside of cheap megafirms like DLA/Dentons, we most firms in the v50 more or less charge the same rates at associate levels. WSGR isn't 30% cheaper than Latham, for instance.

[dyemond]

This is meaningless without knowing the firms. Your post says "v10" but the title is "v5" - putting aside the inconsistency here, practice group and firm health are important here. I'd much rather be at Skadden/STB/PW than at some of the firms in the v50 and v40 based off of financial strength alone. Do your homework on your choices, who they represent, what deals they've been involved in this year, etc.

Prestige is a mostly pointless metric. PPP won't really give you insight given that law firm financials are extremely opaque and essentially bespoke to the firm.

[Wild Card]

No.

There is certainly some loose correlation between Vault ranking and tangibles such as exit options, bonus pay, ease of lateraling, quality of experience, etc. ... if your goal is longevity (i.e. stick around and collect a paycheck for as long as possible with as little pain as possible), it is best to choose firms lower in the rankings that have decent but not overwhelmingly good financials.

A V5 firm has signaling power of intelligence and work ethic. There's quite a gulf of difference in the qualifications of of V5 and V50 attorneys; this shouldn't apply to midlevels and partners, but the taint still follows.

Also, many V50 firms are firing first-year associates. It's hard to take away anything from financial figures, because these firms can just fudge their numbers by deequitizing partners.

[The Lsat Airbender]

There's quite a gulf of difference in the qualifications of of V5 and V50 attorneys[...]

Indeed -- a wide chasm yawns between people who were top-third at CLS and people who were merely median (I like to call them "mebians").

[thatlawlkid]

There's quite a gulf of difference in the qualifications of of V5 and V50 attorneys[...]

Indeed -- a wide chasm yawns between people who were top-third at CLS and people who were merely median (I like to call them "mebians").

[64Fl]

On the topic of billing rates, firms with higher PPP definitely charge more than lower PPP firms. It's not just a pure hour grind to get themselves to high PPP. I've seen project proposals from Skadden, Baker McKenzie, Kirkland, and a few other firms, and the rates weren't all in the same ballpark. The firms that you suspect had higher rates were indeed higher and sometimes by quite a bit.

As for OP, I don't think it'd be crazy to go tot he V50. At the end of the day, the paycheck at either place is going to be more than enough. At this point, it's worth prioritizing a good work environment.