The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Opinions on Shearman
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:44 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office Discuss (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089000) |
 |
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:45 PM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife Top international firm, negligible New York firm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089003) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:47 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king Negligible? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089014) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:47 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office What do you mean by negligible NY firm? In terms of the finance industry? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089015) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:48 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king I think he means not S&C/DPW/Cravath. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089017) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:49 PM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife I'm just being glib. They are no longer in the top rank of NY firms in terms of deals and clients (as far as I can tell), and they are far from the top rank of NY firms in terms of associate recruiting. But their international presence is still huge and relatively prestigious. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089024) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:51 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king In the grand scheme of things (i.e., outside our narrow, ultra-elitist mentality) they are definitely top of the top. That said, I didn't go there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089045) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:52 PM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife Yeah but it's silly to worry about "the grand scheme of things" without a realistic comparison of the person's options. Between S&S and, like, Fried Frank, you go to Fried Frank. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089053) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:53 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king I dunno. I think it depends on what you want to do at that point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089068) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:56 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office How would you compare it to Wllkie? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089086) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:57 PM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife I don't know. I was exaggerating about the ease of the choice vs. FF too. Depends on practice area you want. Willkie obviously is extremely strong in some areas, and S&S in others. For lit or cap markets I would think S&S. For M&A too, probably. For structured finance type stuff or whatever WFG is good at, WFG. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089104) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:59 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king I'd go to Willkie. Sweet view. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089119) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:59 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office You're going to have to tone down the sarcasm- I don't get it through the computer. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089125) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:35 AM Author: amber party of the first part Subject: Talk about silly It's ridiculous to dismiss something as silly while exaggerating as you do it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091708) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:38 AM Author: rough-skinned toaster menage rk982 tends to do stupid shit like that. it always seems as if he's trying too hard. and honestly, he is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091714) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:53 PM Author: razzle gay set I don't know about that. I don't think it would take much education for those outside our narrow mentality to agree they may be a "top" firm but not "top of the top". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089065) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:52 PM Author: razzle gay set According to AdamSmith, Esq. they are a full $1MM behind their former peers in PPP. This suggests you're right. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089055) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:00 PM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife Yeah, a lot of the negative vibe about S&S is not that they're bad/unprestigious/whatever, it's that they're so much worse/less-prestigious than they were ten years ago. And the badly-handled layoffs deservedly made them a pariah with law students. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089133) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:38 AM Author: amber party of the first part Now it sounds like you're just trying to create your own spin. Law students hungry for offers from top ranked firms aren't likely to be deterred by ancient history. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091713) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 8:30 AM Author: insanely creepy indigo persian knife Bullshit. Law students at top schools aren't "hungry for offers from top ranked firms," but they are extraordinarily risk-averse about what will happen to them when they get to those firms -- you're infinitely marketable as a top 2L, but much less so as a first-year associate. When a firm gets a reputation for firing people and screwing over their careers, it (rightly) takes more than a decade to live that down in recruiting. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091872) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:14 PM Author: amber party of the first part You might enjoy living in 2001 but you don't represent the majority. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6093189) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:29 PM Author: razzle gay set Maybe by now, but one or two years ago it was a big deal. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6093308) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 3:24 PM Author: amber party of the first part As the centerpiece of your campaign, it certainly was. Why you try so hard to keep it alive raises more questions than your so-called advice answers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6094762) |
|
Date: September 13th, 2006 8:43 PM Author: floppy learning disabled personal credit line "you're infinitely marketable as a top 2L, but much less so as a first-year associate"
Really? How many phone calls a day do you get from headhunters as a 1st year? Because I didn't get any when I was a 2L, and I'm not getting any now... |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 11:42 AM Author: medicated degenerate I second most of what rk982 has said so far. S&S is still held in fairly high esteem (Vault ranking is still #15), but it's definitely not as prestigious as it was 10, or even 5, years ago.
If you're measuring "marketability" by how many calls you get from a headhunter, then you are sadly misguided. As a 2L from a top law school, you have a clean slate and you can get interviews with any of the top 25 firms. If you try to lateral as a first year, you face the same problem you have when you try to interview as a 3L: they assume something went terribly wrong. Unless you have a valid excuse (e.g. I got married and my husband lives in a city where my current law firm does not have an office) or learn to spin a good story, you will often be moving to a lesser firm. |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 11:48 AM Author: floppy learning disabled personal credit line i mostly wrote that just because rk is a pompous ass and i wanted to disagree with him. anyway, vault is total bullshit. they're worse than usnews. it's been fashionable to bash s&s lately, so you have a bunch of young associates who say it's not that prestigious...meanwhile, they're probably working at lebeouf or something. vault rankings say nothing about how clients view the firm, and that's all that really matters. all i know is that s&s has had a bunch of high profile deals lately, and have been doing very well in the league tables. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6612524) |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 11:52 AM Author: medicated degenerate no, i've actually heard S&S's own associates admit to me about the way things have been going at their firm. yah, vault guide is total bullshit, except to measure "resume value." and noone would disagree that S&S is still a very good name to have on your resume. However, just as Milbank fell from the top-tier during the 90's, S&S seems to be experiencing a similar fall from the top. take it from those who are in the industry. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6612537) |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 11:55 AM Author: floppy learning disabled personal credit line what are the asociates saying? also, to what do you attribute the decline, and what do you think can be done to remedy it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6612543) |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 12:12 PM Author: medicated degenerate nothing too specific, since we're just having small-talk. but the overall impression seems to be that hiring is not as selective as it used to be and overall deal-flow has slowed down.
here's an article from 2005 (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1119603921844) that talks about PPP. you'll recognize most of the firms at the end of the paragraph...S&S is rather conspicuously missing. They were also not included in 2006.
"We don't think there is a single measure of firm economic well-being. We believe in the revealing power of revenue per lawyer, which is our best proxy for a firm's success in the marketplace, as well as profits per partner. For 2005 we found that 17 firms scored in the top quintile on all three charts. Together, they constitute the current economic elite. They are: Wachtell; Sullivan; Skadden; Kirkland; Weil; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft; Cahill Gordon & Reindel; Cravath, Swaine & Moore; Davis Polk & Wardwell; Debevoise & Plimpton; Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher; Latham; Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; Schulte Roth & Zabel; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; and Willkie Farr & Gallagher." |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 1:11 PM Author: floppy learning disabled personal credit line of course hiring is not as selective as it used to be. the layoffs came at the worst possible time, when the internet bulletin boards were blossoming, the economy was down, and a lot of people had a lot of free time to write bad shit and the flame was fierce. all of a sudden it became the in thing to bash the firm, and so you've had five years of bullshit all over the net about what a hellhole the place is. the shit snowballs. attorneys are insecure people, and they like to gang up on firms and bash them. it makes them feel better about where they work.
and then there's vault, which again is a total bunch of bullshit. they send out a bunch of surveys, with no regards to where the attorney-respondents practice or what their practice area is. so you get some litigator in chicago who thinks 'gee, i know nothing about securities lawyers, but when i went to school everyone thought cleary was the shit and that shearman sucked.' and with vault's brilliant methodology, his opinion counts as much as the guy's from stb who sits across the table from s&s on every deal.
but what is said on the net by law students and lawyers who may, and probably in most cases, do not, have much experience with nyc corporate law has little to no bearing on the perceptions of the firm in the eyes of bankers and corporate clients.
and so what if hiring is down a bit? how many people are made partner per year? 5-10? the fact is that the low level work is pretty menial, and most people could do it competently. out of a summer class of about 100, certainly there are at least 10-20 people who are really fucking smart, hard-working people who will make kick-ass corporate lawyers. it's not like they're scraping the bottom of the barrel.
and yes, ppp is not as high as it could be, but again, so what? does this mean that cahill and cwt are better firms than s&s because they're making more money now? certainly not. the firm has been putting a lot of $$ into asian expansion efforts, and no doubt this has something to do with the mediocre ppp numbers. but whenever you make an investment, you sacrifice cash flows now for larger cash flows in the future. you wouldn't say that siemens is a bad company, or that they make bad products, because they invested heavily in new factories or a new product line and that has hurt revenues for a short time. |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 1:28 PM Author: medicated degenerate great job taking the straw-man apart. noone ever said S&S is a "hellhole," "sucked," "scraping the bottom of the barrel," or that "cahill and cwwt are better firms than s&s." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6612863) |
|
Date: September 14th, 2006 1:38 PM Author: floppy learning disabled personal credit line have you read this thread? or any of the others on this site (or on ga's) about the firm? my post wasn't meant to respond merely to you in particular, but as a general response to what is usually posted about the firm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6612897) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:24 PM Author: Godawful fluffy hairy legs Stop talking out of your ass. Yes, they are less selective than they used to be, but they are still the top 5 or 6 in M&A. Just check out the thomson tables or the gsi news. They do very well in many categories.
|
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:40 AM Author: rough-skinned toaster menage "Stop talking out of your ass."
that's kind of his shtick. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:44 AM Author: amber party of the first part Obviously. It sounds like all he has are multiple screen names and an ax to grind. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091721) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:47 AM Author: rough-skinned toaster menage this is definitely credited. this is the image i always conjure when i read his crap. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091723) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:10 PM Author: amber party of the first part His burning need to trash the place and make it look like his opinion is shared by many is further evidenced by starting a new thread. He is trying to pass off his feelings as conventional wisdom, it's very transparent and not convincing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6093149) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:46 PM Author: soul-stirring sex offender pretty good for simple cuts, but i prefer going to an actual salon for more involved hairstyles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089007) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:50 PM Author: razzle gay set In the olden days, I would've tend to avoid them because of their fire-happy ways. I'm starting to think things have changed for the better for them. (Although they are way behind their former peers.)
What other options do you have?
|
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:53 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office I'm not considering it. Just wondering because I thought it was a top firm, yet I've heard it dismissed as if it were Stroock. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089060) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:54 PM Author: razzle gay set Have you heard of their layoffs? Did you hear about the summer they canned for challenging AA? What about the story of a callback interviewer throwing a casebook at me? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089072) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:56 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office Yeah I know about that. But I've heard that a lot of firms did lay offs at that time, just not so publicly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089084) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:57 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king It wasn't just that it was public. They really fucked them over for the future. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089097) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 10:59 PM Author: razzle gay set I pulled a quote from lexis the other day. It was essentially "we're getting rid of some deadwood to ensure the level of competence our clients expect." Gee, thanks, that's not going to hurt my job hunting chances. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089122) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:00 PM Author: Cyan flirting box office I can see how that would piss some associates off. On the other hand, maybe they deserved it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089138) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:01 PM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king Yeah, especially since the motive there was to hide the firm's financial weakness. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089141) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:10 PM Author: azure mediation I think there was (and maybe still is) a sense among associates/law students that it doesn't matter how good they are, they should be disregarded because of their behavior in the firing situation. They should be "punished," to let all of the firms know that people will have along memory about those things. On the other hand, the management of the firm from that era (5 or 6 years ago) is completely gone and they seem to be on the upswing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089221) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 9:39 AM Author: razzle gay set I found the quote again. They characterize the layoffs as part of their normal process; A culling of people without the right fit. It is the clients, after all, who demand they meet high standards.
---
Reuters News
October 26, 2001 Friday 8:57 PM GMT
Bob Treuhold, managing partner of Shearman & Sterling, said that attorneys who do not have the "right long-term fit" with the firm will be given three months notice.
Treuhold characterized the cuts as part of the firm's normal review process.
"Twice a year we go through a review process to make sure that we continue to maintain the selective and high standards that our clients expect," said Treuhold.
From an old thread: http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=369803&forum_id=2
|
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:00 PM Author: wonderful stead Yeah, they're totally screwed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089132) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:15 PM Author: razzle gay set "But I've heard that a lot of firms did lay offs at that time, just not so publicly."
Let's compare: * Davis Polk & Wardwell circulated a memorandum within the firm announcing there would be no layoffs, but also no year-end bonuses.
* Simpson Thacher & Bartlett's chairman gave associates assurances believed to mean there would be no layoffs.
* Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton circulated a memorandum telling associates the weak economy would not lead to layoffs.
* Sullivan & Cromwell not only announced there would be no layoffs, it promised year-end bonuses.
...
On Oct. 26, New York's Shearman & Sterling circulated an internal memorandum about "a boom-economy workforce in a weak economy" and announced that about 80 associates would be let go.
88 A.B.A.J. 26
|
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 5:39 AM Author: amber party of the first part How are you so familiar with what happened in the "olden" days? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091717) |
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:19 PM Author: Henna Comical Temple Crotch out of all my callbacks last year, they were by far the worst. i think any office that has (for example) an attorney-only cafeteria feeds an elitist culture that breeds unhappiness and discontent. the coldness of the environment there was palpable compared to other firms. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089291) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:03 AM Author: mildly autistic office An elitist culture? Attorneys eat with each other as a general rule, wherever you go. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089688) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:06 AM Author: Lime resort yeah, this guy should count how many office staff get to tag along on summer associate lunches. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089714) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:07 AM Author: Henna Comical Temple Crotch at some firms, people actually talk to their support staff and treat them as human beings. at shearman, they clearly think non-attorneys are inferior people.
that was hardly the only thing fucked up about that place, but it seems to sum it up nicely. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:09 AM Author: Lime resort you clearly have very little experience in law firms and among lawyers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089740) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:17 AM Author: Henna Comical Temple Crotch i'm a summer associate at a v40. i chose my firm in large part based on the people, and the level of respect shown by everyone in the office.
i've worked enough office jobs to be able to recognize a poisoned atmosphere, and it was clear to me that shearman is just that. i got the sense that the associates there were burned out, hated their jobs, and hated the people they work with (attys and otherwise). my feelings were echoed by several other people i know who did callbacks there.
this may come as a surprise to you, but not every atty is a flaming asshole who thinks (s)he's better than the rest of the world. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:23 AM Author: coral buck-toothed philosopher-king This post was dead on until the last sentence. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089895) |
|
Date: September 13th, 2006 8:51 PM Author: deranged beady-eyed mexican market you seem crazy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6609249) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 4:07 AM Author: apoplectic boyish jap step-uncle's house my classmate met her boyfriend there...she was a paralegal and he is an attorney...very cute pair! so, i gather from that they at least talk to some of the staff sometimes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091572) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:52 PM Author: Motley Orange Pozpig Queen Of The Night the cafeteria is a perk, cheap lunch buffet. how could you know how support staff are treated from just a call back interview? sounds like someone is bitter they didn't get an offer. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6093496) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 2:17 PM Author: Henna Comical Temple Crotch if you search shearman threads, you can find at least one with the story of how i threw my callback (already had offer in hand from current firm, and knew instantly i would NEVER work there).
one of the associates who took me to lunch described the cafeteria as being great - not for the food, but as a way to get away from the non-attys in the office. it was clear from his tone what he thought about himself in relation to other employees there... was that you? |
|
Date: September 13th, 2006 9:02 PM Author: Motley Orange Pozpig Queen Of The Night interestingly, the shearman cafeteria has now been shut down (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6609334) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2006 11:29 PM Author: Heady autistic affirmative action sucky sucky sucky sucky sucky! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6089385) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 1:49 AM Author: Startling Laser Beams Abode You might as well interview with them. Show some interest, you'll get a callback, and then you'll get a chance to see what the atmosphere and the attorneys are like.
I do remember it being one of the most depressing environments of that interview season. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 9:34 AM Author: razzle gay set It was the only callback where I was insulted. I know of others with similiar stories. Fine people over there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6092055) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 9:47 AM Author: odious doctorate Insulted? Please elaborate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6092126) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 9:50 AM Author: razzle gay set Didn't like one of my answers to his questions. Told me to stop BSing him, and that he thought I was interviewing there as a safety firm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6092137) |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 12:34 PM Author: Startling Laser Beams Abode It's interesting, I think every callback I get asked where else I was interviewing, but it seemed like Shearman cared even more than most.
The reality was that a few days before my Shearman callback, I had actually gotten an offer that I was very happy about and had cancelled almost all of my other callbacks. I didn't cancel Shearman because it was only a day or two away. But I felt that I at least went into the callback with an open mind and positive attitude, and thought it was only fair that they should do the same. |
|
Date: June 28th, 2006 8:49 AM Author: Grizzly Titillating Corner Should've kept burning the South. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=443529&forum_id=2#6091891) |