Is Wachtell really paying first year associates $400k? Forum

[Sackboy]

I’m not in M&A so perhaps the nuances will be lost on me, but can somebody explain how or why WLRK built this reputation? Is it the size of their deals, the complexity of the issues, the level of client service (I assume 24/7/365), or something else entirely?

It just seems that -- for any mega-deal Wachtell is working on -- there’s going to be at least one (but usually a handful) of other BL firms on the same deal. If that’s the case, what is Wachtell doing that those other firms are not able to do?

WLRK built their reputation long ago. It was an upstart law firm many decades ago by some NYU grads with a philosophy that it ONLY takes work that is sophisticated and interesting, that it'd only be a NY firm, and that it'd only hire top law school graduates. The built a very solid foundation of an excellent boutique firm. WLRK became famous for working on hostile takeovers in the 80s. For the decade or so before that, it was just generally seen as a good (but not WLRK-level status of today) firm that did general corporate work and some litigation. Once the 80s happened and Marty Lipton (the L in WLRK) invented the poison pill, the firm moved into the elite tier, as it worked on big ticket hostile takeover one after another, and leapt into the top PPP stop that it still maintains today. From there, the firm could have pursued the typical growth strategy of bringing in bigger and bigger summer classes, adding new departments to the firm to make it a full service firm, etc., but the firm chose not to. I know when the firm grew to 200-250 attorneys, Marty Lipton commented that the firm was getting too big for his liking, as he wanted everyone at the firm to know everyone else at the firm.

As for client service, it's essentially 24/7/365, which is true but also isn't to the same degree at the other V10s. Associates have a lot less invested with most V10s having two-tier partnerships and significantly higher associate to partner ratios than Wachtell. Every lawyer at Wachtell is invested because they are either a partner or have a realistic shot at it if they grind it out. All the V10s are also bringing on like 200 person summer classes (or similarly monstrous levels) that are starting to be filled in by non-T14 and less credentialed folks, while Wachtell can basically say that every attorney they hire could at minimum get a COA clerkship and a fair number could do SCOTUS-level clerkships.

You hire Wachtell when you want the smallest margin of legal error as possible.

[Anonymous User]

Because Wachtell, rightly or wrongly, is viewed as being head and shoulders above other firms when it comes to M&A and corporate governance.

I’m not in M&A so perhaps the nuances will be lost on me, but can somebody explain how or why WLRK built this reputation? Is it the size of their deals, the complexity of the issues, the level of client service (I assume 24/7/365), or something else entirely?

It just seems that -- for any mega-deal Wachtell is working on -- there’s going to be at least one (but usually a handful) of other BL firms on the same deal. If that’s the case, what is Wachtell doing that those other firms are not able to do?

How did WLRK build this reputation? First of all, by being a first mover. In the days when Wachtell first started up, the most profitable transactional groups were commercial paper/municipal bonds, maybe real estate and trusts and estates. They had to be scrappy because Mudge Rose, Lord Day & Lord, and Dewey Ballantine (all RIP) had those markets sewn up. So they did things that others thought were unseemly, like representing people in contested situations, representing target boards, that kind of thing.

Skadden was also in this spot back then. But they did what Latham and Kirkland have done (also successfully) in the 80s and 90s, by trying to carpet bomb everything and take over the world. That was never WLRK’s strategy. There’s stuff about how they decided to diversify clients but focus on areas, never let one client dominate, etc fairly early on in the piece. (https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business- ... artnership is just the highest hit, but there have been pieces like this - and predicting the firm’s downfall - since at least the 1990s.)

The Harvard Business School case studies talk, too, about the other bits of strategy that have kept the firm as is. (Might be worth trying to get hold of them - there are two, of which I’m aware.) These include no partnership agreement, going out to law schools and teaching “the gospel according to Marty and Herb” with lecturers who seem to love what they do, and taking industry positions. There are people who say being on the Wachtell mailing list is the best professional resource they have. (I can attest to this: their deal studies and guides on takeovers and spin-offs have been lifesavers for a while.) This helps to build a reputation.

And, of course, something like the poison pill is a lightning strike. There’s one firm in the world that’s got something through the Delaware courts that boards can (sometimes) use when under siege. Every other firm has drafted pills and had them implemented, but when you’re a CEO or Special Committee under real fire from an activist or a whale that’s trying to swallow you whole, money becomes less of an object. So the firm can sort of write its own check in those situations.

Plus selectivity means their lawyers are both bright and have to work: if there’s work on and everyone else is already doing 400 hour months, it’s harder just to decide that a second year isn’t “good” because of one aberration or you don’t like her face or accent (neither of which is likely anyway), so you get worked if you’re there. (Other shops with small entering classes have a similar setup, e.g., Cravath. It’s a major reason that senior associates who age out of those firms have a number of doors open to them for partnership.) With the volume of work on, this means that a Wachtell fifth year may have more experience (and so knowledge) than an eighth year at K&E. This both means higher quality work and makes it easier to justify percentages than hourly rates.

I think the market can only handle one or two firms like this at a time. And Wachtell needs the other firms, too, because one of the ways they stay profitable is by keeping investments in “non-core” practices low. I’ve seen deals where Wachtell’s doing the M&A and STB has the capital markets piece or Cahill the debt because those firms are their normal company counsel. I think Wachtell has some capability in those areas, but not at the same level as M&A, lit, tax, etc.

It might annoy other firms that Wachtell takes the bet the company deal sometimes when they’ve done 20 previous acquisitions for the target (at hourly rates plus a slight kicker), but they have to bear it because they need the 20 previous acquisitions and the support work to feed bigger teams. And WLRK usually doesn’t want the other, less significant, deals (or so they claim). They’re too busy saving other companies or working to acquire bigger targets. So the rest of the street tolerates them, while being filled with envy (and at least in one case, encouraging their genius son to join Wachtell and make partner there).

There’s a ton of literature on this generally. Lincoln Caplan’s “Skadden” talks about what Skadden did, and some of the divergences. Marty Lipton’s memos are in a giant PDF somewhere, plus there’s lots of stuff on the Harvard Corporate Law and Governance Forum. James B. Stewart’s stuff (especially “Den of Thieves”) talks about the world in the 80s - Lipton’s a central figure in two of the main characters’ lives. “M&A Titans” isn’t a great book, but talks about some of this too.

[Anonymous User]

There’s a ton of literature on this generally. Lincoln Caplan’s “Skadden” talks about what Skadden did, and some of the divergences. Marty Lipton’s memos are in a giant PDF somewhere, plus there’s lots of stuff on the Harvard Corporate Law and Governance Forum. James B. Stewart’s stuff (especially “Den of Thieves”) talks about the world in the 80s - Lipton’s a central figure in two of the main characters’ lives. “M&A Titans” isn’t a great book, but talks about some of this too.

I’ll also add Tombstones by Lawrence Lederman, a memoir by a lawyer who started at Cravath and then joined and later made partner at Wachtell during the takeover boom.

[Anonymous User]

Marty Lipton’s memos are in a giant PDF somewhere

Better yet, this now exists (I think it's run by Penn Law):

https://theliptonarchive.org/

[Anonymous User]

There’s a ton of literature on this generally. Lincoln Caplan’s “Skadden” talks about what Skadden did, and some of the divergences. Marty Lipton’s memos are in a giant PDF somewhere, plus there’s lots of stuff on the Harvard Corporate Law and Governance Forum. James B. Stewart’s stuff (especially “Den of Thieves”) talks about the world in the 80s - Lipton’s a central figure in two of the main characters’ lives. “M&A Titans” isn’t a great book, but talks about some of this too.

I’ll also add Tombstones by Lawrence Lederman, a memoir by a lawyer who started at Cravath and then joined and later made partner at Wachtell during the takeover boom.

Larry Lederman shows up, less salubriously, in a book called "Eat What You Kill" (the Milton Regan version). There's a bit of a precis of the events giving rise to it at https://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/10/busi ... icted.html. (Lederman retired from Milbank, at the end, as senior partner I think.)

[Anonymous User]

While we're discussing quirks & oddities, it is interesting (and a bit insane) that WLRK has not adopted the limited liability (LLP) structure that every biglaw firm, including the stuffy white shoes, migrated to in the 1990s-2000s. That choice follows from the "last true partnership" concept, but I can't imagine it would pass muster under a strict cost-benefit analysis. If you are engaging a firm, it's nice to know that the firm has skin in the game but I sorta doubt the firm's structure would really move the needle for most clients?

[Anonymous User]

Wachtell's per-hour pay may be the lowest in the V100. Virtually everyone bills over 4000 hours per year. FOUR. THOUSAND. No thank you. Cravath & Wachtell subject their associates to a unique type of misery, with extremely poor work-life balance and a joyless, fear-driven culture. To be avoided at all costs...

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

[ExpOriental]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

Two problems with your math:

(1) In tallying comp at non-Watchtell firms, you aren't counting year-end bonuses. Wachtell's year-end bonuses are indeed 100% of base. But of course other V100s all pay year-end bonuses too. They are smaller than Wachtell's, but once you include those year-end bonuses in your math, you see that those firms pay more than 205K and, ultimately, more per hour than Wachtell. That is not even accounting for other "special" bonuses, retention bonuses, etc. Once you factor that additional compensation in, virtually all V100s pay more per-hour than Wachtell, and many actually pay significantly more (those with signing, retention, and special bonuses).

(2) Not everyone bills 2200. Many firms expect 2100 or less.

But even if you treat 2200 as the expectation, once you factor in year-end bonuses Wachtell pays less than the rest of the V100.

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

[Anonymous User]

No way billing 4,000 hours is expected, even at WLRK. Maybe it's an outlier in certain years for certain associates, but if you're saying every single associate is expected to bill 4,000 every single year, I call BS on that.

[ExpOriental]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

[Anonymous User]

No way billing 4,000 hours is expected, even at WLRK. Maybe it's an outlier in certain years for certain associates, but if you're saying every single associate is expected to bill 4,000 every single year, I call BS on that.

Def not 4,000. More like 3,000-3,500.

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

I’ve clearly hit a nerve with my true statement that Watchell pays less per hour than the rest of the V100.

The 4000+ hour anecdotes are real. The only specific criticism you’ve lodged against my math is my use of the 4000 hour figure. Assume for a moment that the figure is correct (it is). Would you then concede that Watchell pays less per hour than a typical V100 where associates bill 2100?

I’m not trolling- just warning law students and laterals. I was shocked to learn this myself.

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

We could quibble further over the details but the basic point that Watchell doesn’t pay significantly more *per hour* than the rest of the V100, and may in fact pay less, stands. The worst deal of all however is that offered by CSM: Watchell hours, Milbank pay.

[ExpOriental]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

I’ve clearly hit a nerve with my true statement that Watchell pays less per hour than the rest of the V100.

The 4000+ hour anecdotes are real. The only specific criticism you’ve lodged against my math is my use of the 4000 hour figure. Assume for a moment that the figure is correct (it is). Would you then concede that Watchell pays less per hour than a typical V100 where associates bill 2100?

I’m not trolling- just warning law students and laterals. I was shocked to learn this myself.

Hearty laffs at "Watchell." Troll confirmed.

Who knew that winning internet arguments is as easy as simply demanding that the other side accept your (blatantly false) linchpin facts as true? Consider me schooled.

Similarly, I have had great success landing dates with supermodels by insisting that despite what their lying eyes might tell them, I am in fact 6'4" with a chiseled jawline and a six pack. Such are my lawerly powers of persuasion.

[Anonymous User]

This case study on WLRK was published in 1993, but most of it still rings true today: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~wstarbuc/wa ... erfly.html

[Anonymous User]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

I’ve clearly hit a nerve with my true statement that Watchell pays less per hour than the rest of the V100.

The 4000+ hour anecdotes are real. The only specific criticism you’ve lodged against my math is my use of the 4000 hour figure. Assume for a moment that the figure is correct (it is). Would you then concede that Watchell pays less per hour than a typical V100 where associates bill 2100?

I’m not trolling- just warning law students and laterals. I was shocked to learn this myself.

Hearty laffs at "Watchell." Troll confirmed.

Who knew that winning internet arguments is as easy as simply demanding that the other side accept your (blatantly false) linchpin facts as true? Consider me schooled.

Similarly, I have had great success landing dates with supermodels by insisting that despite what their lying eyes might tell them, I am in fact 6'4" with a chiseled jawline and a six pack. Such are my lawerly powers of persuasion.

Thx for confirming that I have indeed "w[o]n[] [this] internet argument[]" if my "linchpin fact" that Watchell associates often bill 4000 hours per year is true (it is).

[ExpOriental]

Don't see how your math works. If a "normal" associate is getting paid 205 and is expected to bill 2,200 hours a year, that's $93/hour. If you're being paid 400 and billing 4,000 hours, that's $100 - a $7/hour delta in WLRK's favor.

But your initial premise even seems suspect. Multiple threads over the years here on TLS have pointed to about a 3,000 hour expectation, in which case the comp handily beats "normal" biglaw. Perhaps things have changed? Or every WLRK associate is padding massively?

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

I’ve clearly hit a nerve with my true statement that Watchell pays less per hour than the rest of the V100.

The 4000+ hour anecdotes are real. The only specific criticism you’ve lodged against my math is my use of the 4000 hour figure. Assume for a moment that the figure is correct (it is). Would you then concede that Watchell pays less per hour than a typical V100 where associates bill 2100?

I’m not trolling- just warning law students and laterals. I was shocked to learn this myself.

Hearty laffs at "Watchell." Troll confirmed.

Who knew that winning internet arguments is as easy as simply demanding that the other side accept your (blatantly false) linchpin facts as true? Consider me schooled.

Similarly, I have had great success landing dates with supermodels by insisting that despite what their lying eyes might tell them, I am in fact 6'4" with a chiseled jawline and a six pack. Such are my lawerly powers of persuasion.

Thx for confirming that I have indeed "w[o]n[] [this] internet argument[]" if my "linchpin fact" that Watchell associates often bill 4000 hours per year is true (it is).

Watchell talkin' 'bout Willis?

[Buglaw]

Yeah I'm very curious why firms in times like this don't just keep raising rates until the demand for their services aligns with their capacity.

You don't have to dig very deep to see that Wachtell's business model is completely different from the Cravath model that generates profits from leverage. Wachtell has the highest PPP of any biglaw firm but also has a far lower leverage than any of the other firms near the top of PPP. Associate comp raises for them are simply cheaper for them than other firms.

I am in house and can offer one perspective: we wouldn’t keep retaining a firm that jumped its rates by 20%+ (or even probably 10%) a year. In any corp I can think of, including mine, legal budgets ultimately have to be justified to the business side in some form or another. 4% jump? Maybe we can say it is part of overall market rate increases and that the benefit of retaining attorneys who are already familiar with our business is worth it. But justifying significantly out of step rate increases would be a whole different story. And from the firm’s side, keeping clients you know is a heck of a lot easier than going out and finding new ones, because once a firm falls off a client’s radar, it generally isn’t going to get back on again anytime soon (so gutting your client roster during a transitory demand boom makes little long-term sense). I’d also add that rates clients pay are very often different and lower, for a number of reasons, than what a firm’s advertised rate is, and firms generally have approved rates that last for some period of time, so even if increases did occur they wouldn’t really affect things already in the pipeline.

On the Wachtell discussion generally in this thread, I’d add that they’re NYC-only, and if you took just the highest performing offices of each firm (usually but not always NYC), the PPP gap would probably be significantly smaller. In particular, international offices and non-NY(/ sometimes non-CA) offices usually weigh down a firm’s PPP (looking at you, DC offices).

Wachtell doesn't really bill by the hour. Second, this isn't really a problem for wachtell as there fees don't really come from within legal's budget. They are doing huge transformative transactions (no one asks if their $50 billion merger fees were accounted for at the beginning of the year).

[Buglaw]

I thought that was pretty obviously a bad troll.

Not trolling.

Non-Watchell V100 First-Year Pay: 220K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 2100 = 105/hour

Wachtell First-Year Pay: 400K comp (base plus year-end bonus) divided by 4000 = 100/hour

That doesn't even include "special" and retention bonuses, profit-sharing, etc. which once factored in put the rest of the V100 handily ahead of Wachtell in per-hour comp.

Where's the lie?

Regarding you as troll was the generous option; the alternative is that you're a histrionic dumbass bandying around laughably fake numbers for reasons that are beyond me. I'm still going with troll btw; I think the persistent inability to spell "Wachtell" properly is like a little troll flourish you're going with.

It's amusing that you edited out the "multiple associates have confirmed that everyone bills 4000 hours" bit, as if that's going to makes your bullshit any more believable.

This whole exchange is bizarre. Get different hobbies.

I’ve clearly hit a nerve with my true statement that Watchell pays less per hour than the rest of the V100.

The 4000+ hour anecdotes are real. The only specific criticism you’ve lodged against my math is my use of the 4000 hour figure. Assume for a moment that the figure is correct (it is). Would you then concede that Watchell pays less per hour than a typical V100 where associates bill 2100?

I’m not trolling- just warning law students and laterals. I was shocked to learn this myself.

Hearty laffs at "Watchell." Troll confirmed.

Who knew that winning internet arguments is as easy as simply demanding that the other side accept your (blatantly false) linchpin facts as true? Consider me schooled.

Similarly, I have had great success landing dates with supermodels by insisting that despite what their lying eyes might tell them, I am in fact 6'4" with a chiseled jawline and a six pack. Such are my lawerly powers of persuasion.

Thx for confirming that I have indeed "w[o]n[] [this] internet argument[]" if my "linchpin fact" that Watchell associates often bill 4000 hours per year is true (it is).

Watchell talkin' 'bout Willis?

This is dumb and every time it comes up someone makes this dumb claim. The average associate at Wachtell does not bill 4K hours. I worked with someone at a v10 who billed north of 3k every year. I don't claim that the average v10 associate bills 3k hours a year.

I'm willing to believe that someone (or even more than 1 someone) has billed 4k hours in a year at Wachtell. I don't believe that is anywhere close to what the median associate bills. I have also been told this by people who work at Wachtell...

[ExpOriental]

This is dumb and every time it comes up someone makes this dumb claim. The average associate at Wachtell does not bill 4K hours. I worked with someone at a v10 who billed north of 3k every year. I don't claim that the average v10 associate bills 3k hours a year.

I'm willing to believe that someone (or even more than 1 someone) has billed 4k hours in a year at Wachtell. I don't believe that is anywhere close to what the median associate bills. I have also been told this by people who work at Wachtell...

I don't believe that anyone, anywhere, has ever billed anything near 4000+ hours if they're being even semi-honest with their billing practices. And obviously, the notion that an entire firm is doing it regularly is entirely fanciful.

[Joachim2017]

Wachtell lawyers also walk uphill in the snow both on the way to work and back home. They feed on the fumes of exhausted opposing counsel, and they shit gold bricks in the rare event that they stop billing for a minute or two every leap year.

[Access]

They live a shoebox and work 29 hours a day.