Choosing between "better" Firm vs. "better" City if you can't have both. Forum

[Anonymous User]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

[Anonymous User]

Depends how miserable the city is, but a mediocre firm in the saturated NYC market is not a great place to launch your career from. If the better firm is name brand, you can probably lateral either internally or via a lateral process to a better firm in NYC or wherever else more easily. Plus COL is probably lower there so if you’re getting paid market, you can probably sock away a ton of cash.

[Anonymous User]

If you don’t mind the other city, take the better firm. If you don’t like that city, take the midlaw offer.

I went to an awful city for a biglaw job and hated every second there. On top of that, interviewing to lateral was hard because I wasn’t in the city I wanted to be in (had to fly out for callbacks).

[The Lsat Airbender]

What other city are we talking about? If it's, like, Chicago or Houston, seems like a no-brainer to get on the Cravath scale ASAP and lateral to a NYC V50 when you get the chance. If it's Buttfuck, Nowhere then that's a lot tougher for a number of reasons unless you're from Buttfuck and want to put down roots there.

[louislittmbajdesq]

I'm not really answering your question, but I would just caution against using Vault to gauge strength of a firm in a non-NY market. Vault is basically a proxy for NY transactions, very little more.

[Lukky]

I think it’s always easier to go from biglaw to biglaw. I think the whole “not having connections” to a market thing is more relevant when you’re a law student, but is in no way an impediment when lateraling. In fact, when you’re lateraling, wanting to go to a different city is a pretty compelling interview reason for your move.

[eastcoast_iub]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Probably something like Kirkland Palo Alto lmao

[Anonymous User]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Probably something like Kirkland Palo Alto lmao

"Wait, do people actually live in Houston?"

[Anonymous User]

According to OP's definition, I practice in the "middle of nowhere." I've seen a bunch of Cravath-types march into our city expecting to be handed a partnership by our top offices. The ones I have seen ended up as associates at good, but pretty middling offices. Funniest is when these types go up to places like Susman Godfrey Houston expecting some kind of red carpet. Obviously if you clerked for a feeder and worked at Wachtell, it's a little different. I don't know where New Yorkers get this perception that their market is king of the industry, especially for litigation. I guess transactions is different.

[target_corp]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

[Anonymous User]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look up all the offices of every V10. The following are the most “middle of nowhere” cities that have a V10, so OP must be referring to one of them:

Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, San Diego, Denver, Wilmington

Obviously, calling any of these places “middle of nowhere” is f*ing ludicrous lol. I mean I guess Wilmington is pretty small, but it’s on the East Coast and obviously quite important for corporate law. Like, OP is Houston too small for you because it’s only the 4th biggest city in the country?

To OP’s admittedly strange question, my vote would be firm over city, considering that none of the above cities should limit your career if you’re at the local V10 (but being at some mediocre firm in NYC very well might).

[Anonymous User]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look up all the offices of every V10. The following are the most “middle of nowhere” cities that have a V10, so OP must be referring to one of them:

Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, San Diego, Denver, Wilmington

Obviously, calling any of these places “middle of nowhere” is f*ing ludicrous lol. I mean I guess Wilmington is pretty small, but it’s on the East Coast and obviously quite important for corporate law. Like, OP is Houston too small for you because it’s only the 4th biggest city in the country?

To OP’s admittedly strange question, my vote would be firm over city, considering that none of the above cities should limit your career if you’re at the local V10 (but being at some mediocre firm in NYC very well might).

If you look even further into OP's question, the reciprocity issue does not exist with regards to Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, or Denver. So OP is clearly speaking about San Diego, Palo Alto, or Wilmington. I don't think anyone would consider a California firm a bad outcome. Seeing as OP thinks these are the "middle of nowhere" I'm not quite sure what they mean by "NYC midsize an average-mediocre one". OP, if these are your options, only you can answer which one aligns with your goals. If you're so scared about being trapped in "the middle of nowhere", maybe that choice isn't for you. To each their own. Sorry, that you may only have "an average-mediocre" firm as the alternative.

[Spartan_Alum_12]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look up all the offices of every V10. The following are the most “middle of nowhere” cities that have a V10, so OP must be referring to one of them:

Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, San Diego, Denver, Wilmington

Obviously, calling any of these places “middle of nowhere” is f*ing ludicrous lol. I mean I guess Wilmington is pretty small, but it’s on the East Coast and obviously quite important for corporate law. Like, OP is Houston too small for you because it’s only the 4th biggest city in the country?

To OP’s admittedly strange question, my vote would be firm over city, considering that none of the above cities should limit your career if you’re at the local V10 (but being at some mediocre firm in NYC very well might).

I used to live in SV (San Jose, not Palo Alto, but they feel similar to me) and while it's not the middle of nowhere, I can definitely understand not wanting to live there, especially in your 20s/30s (I moved after two years, although I wasn't at a V10 or big law firm). It's bland suburbia, a tech monoculture, the social scene/urban vibe are lacking big time, and getting to/from SF can be a pain (and you're also paying top $$$ to live there). I wouldn't say it's bad enough to limit your career early on (you can always lateral out after a few years if you really hate it), but I would understand the reservations. I've been to all of the other cities on the above list besides Wilmington and Boston and would put them far above Palo Alto.

[Anonymous User]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look up all the offices of every V10. The following are the most “middle of nowhere” cities that have a V10, so OP must be referring to one of them:

Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, San Diego, Denver, Wilmington

Obviously, calling any of these places “middle of nowhere” is f*ing ludicrous lol. I mean I guess Wilmington is pretty small, but it’s on the East Coast and obviously quite important for corporate law. Like, OP is Houston too small for you because it’s only the 4th biggest city in the country?

To OP’s admittedly strange question, my vote would be firm over city, considering that none of the above cities should limit your career if you’re at the local V10 (but being at some mediocre firm in NYC very well might).

I used to live in SV (San Jose, not Palo Alto, but they feel similar to me) and while it's not the middle of nowhere, I can definitely understand not wanting to live there, especially in your 20s/30s (I moved after two years, although I wasn't at a V10 or big law firm). It's bland suburbia, a tech monoculture, the social scene/urban vibe are lacking big time, and getting to/from SF can be a pain (and you're also paying top $$$ to live there). I wouldn't say it's bad enough to limit your career early on (you can always lateral out after a few years if you really hate it), but I would understand the reservations. I've been to all of the other cities on the above list besides Wilmington and Boston and would put them far above Palo Alto.

That's totally fair and there are plenty of legitimate reasons to prefer some of these cities over others (including preferring some of them over NYC). I think OP's question was more about a pure career calculation rather than living preferences though, which is what makes it a sillier thing to ask. If they meant actual lifestyle in each city then it's more reasonable.

[Spartan_Alum_12]

Curious to learn whether it's easier to move offices within the same firm, or move firms within the same jurisdiction.

Suppose you want to get into NY biglaw. Would you rather take a V10's satellite office in the middle of nowhere in a non-reciprocating jurisdiction or a NYC midsize (an average-mediocre one, not one of those superstar midsizes)?

What V10 has a satellite in the middle of nowhere? I think you have a skewed definition of that term.

Skadden has the Wilmington office, TBF. But also yes, there's a lot wrong with OP's question, so I'm not really disagreeing with your overall assessment.

Just out of curiosity, I decided to look up all the offices of every V10. The following are the most “middle of nowhere” cities that have a V10, so OP must be referring to one of them:

Houston, Dallas, Boston, Chicago, Palo Alto, San Diego, Denver, Wilmington

Obviously, calling any of these places “middle of nowhere” is f*ing ludicrous lol. I mean I guess Wilmington is pretty small, but it’s on the East Coast and obviously quite important for corporate law. Like, OP is Houston too small for you because it’s only the 4th biggest city in the country?

To OP’s admittedly strange question, my vote would be firm over city, considering that none of the above cities should limit your career if you’re at the local V10 (but being at some mediocre firm in NYC very well might).

I used to live in SV (San Jose, not Palo Alto, but they feel similar to me) and while it's not the middle of nowhere, I can definitely understand not wanting to live there, especially in your 20s/30s (I moved after two years, although I wasn't at a V10 or big law firm). It's bland suburbia, a tech monoculture, the social scene/urban vibe are lacking big time, and getting to/from SF can be a pain (and you're also paying top $$$ to live there). I wouldn't say it's bad enough to limit your career early on (you can always lateral out after a few years if you really hate it), but I would understand the reservations. I've been to all of the other cities on the above list besides Wilmington and Boston and would put them far above Palo Alto.

That's totally fair and there are plenty of legitimate reasons to prefer some of these cities over others (including preferring some of them over NYC). I think OP's question was more about a pure career calculation rather than living preferences though, which is what makes it a sillier thing to ask. If they meant actual lifestyle in each city then it's more reasonable.

Ahh yeah, I see. I got caught up in different aspects of the thread and just read the OP's post again. Pure career calculation (for the OP's goals) no doubt is V10 in any of the above markets.