The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
 46 posters qualify.
You have 0 points. Copying this list does not send funds. Paste it on Disperse, then connect your wallet there. |
WHY I WILL NEVER WORK AT CRAVATH
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:21 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Here's the thing: Cravath is refusing to expand. It has one office in NYC, and a skeleton satellite office in London.
As a result, it is virtually unknown outside the United States. To put it in perspective, check out the Vault UK rankings: http://europe.vault.com/nr/lawrankings.jsp?london2007=2&ch_id=242&top50=1
Debevoise, Simpson Thacher, Cleary, Latham, Skadden, S&C -- they all made the cut. Guess what? Cravath is nowhere on that list.
A similar result in Asia as well. S&C, Skadden, Simpson are all really well ranked in Asia. Cravath? Not even the top 100. Check the Vault Asia rankings (I couldn't paste the link here because it gives away my gold membership).
If you couple the above facts with the possibility that a large percentage of the corporate business in the world is shifting from NYC to London and Hong Kong (as the Wall Street Journal reported last week, especially M&A work and IPOs, as a percentage of global deals), Cravath will not be able to compete on the same level as the rest of the V5. In fact, there are already reports to support my claim: the top 5 deals in 2005 (in terms of value) involved many V5 firms. None from Cravath.
Cravath does great work, and always will, I have no doubt, especially in NYC. But the deals that Cravath and these other shops have been doing for all these years are getting increasingly complex and, if you don't mind me using the word: global. Cravath won't be able to compete with S&C and the Skadden types because they don't have the presence in places like Asia or Latin America nor the manpower to do these kinds of deals.
Coupled with the fact that Cravath is ranked #1 in terms of associate hours worked per week -- at a whopping 69.8 hours (to put that in perspective, Skadden associates work on average 58.8 hours per week --- or about 21 LESS DAYS OF WORK PER YEAR): http://avery.ws/ai/shortest_hour_law_firms5.html
On top of that, Cravath pays no more than other competing Vault 10 firms, even though associates are putting in almost 3 extra weeks' worth of time at the office per year than other firms.
Finally, Cravath's claim to have better "training opportunities" for associates is misguided. While we can speculate based on our own experiences, the recent Vault guide doesn't even put Cravath in the top 20 (Latham, Weil made the list, as did other V10 firms). See "Best Firms to Work For."
In summary, what I put forth is this: Cravath is a great firm with a great history. I hope no one misreads me on that. However, it has been, and always will be, a "boutique" of sorts -- and it's supposed "prestige" actually leaves many things to be desired. Name recognition? Limited to the U.S. (with a bias towards the East Coast). Global reach? Compared to other V5 firms -- zero. Associate life? Miserable hours. Exit opportuniites? Not as good as other V5 firms if you are thinking of going abroad. Contacts with Fortune 500? Not on the kind of regular basis that other V5 firms have with their *regular* F500 clients.
And to clarify: HLS, offer from Cravath in 2L, declined for another V5. |
 |
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:27 PM Author: buff cerebral locus Something tells me this might not be the only reason you're not working at Cravath. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886485) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:29 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask HLS Cravath offer 2L, hated the people I talked to, declined for another V5 firm. Hope that helps. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886505) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:31 PM Author: buff cerebral locus Nice work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886519) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:43 AM Author: nofapping pit "hated the people I talked to"
this sounds like a much better reason to decline the cravath offer |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:28 PM Author: azure crackhouse core competencies (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886495) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:32 PM Author: sinister chapel Avery gets it numbers from the AMLaw Mid-Associate Survey...and those are one year old....if I remember correctly, the gap is now much smaller between cravath and the rest of the V10.....
but these figures in any given year are subject to fluctuations , of course |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 10:09 AM Author: Maniacal Harsh Market Boltzmann I recall the 2004 survey puts them in about the same places. It is pretty accurate, year-to-year.
How do you know the gap is "now much smaller"? The survey doesn't come out until next year. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 4:50 PM Author: sinister chapel I don't think Avery has updated their figures with the 2006 AM Law survey
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 11:52 PM Author: Exciting bearded office roast beef (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6889954) |
|
Date: November 25th, 2006 11:28 AM Author: yellow plaza you have a dead link, here's current one:
http://www.averyindex.com/shortest_hour_law_firms5.php
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:24 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Cravath to faceless: Ding! Fag (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886473) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:27 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask You can attack me personally all you want, but leaving my points unrefuted will only (1) make you look like a tard, and (2) validate my points.
:) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:28 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Cravath to faceless: Ding! Fag (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886496) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:30 PM Author: Thriller pearly water buffalo gas station hey, just b/c NAMBLA won't let you in doesn't make it a good place to hang out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886512) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:31 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Cravath to Personal Jebus: Ding! Fag (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886524) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:31 PM Author: kink-friendly cruise ship national security agency that and they wouldn't hire you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886518) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:34 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask And the fact that my brother in London had no fucking clue what Cravath was. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886542) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:34 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Cravath to faceless's brother in London: Ding! Fag (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886550) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:36 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Look, sorry you already accepted. I'm not trying to hate on Cravath. I'm only making the point that this so called "prestige" that surrounds Cravath proportionally declines as one travels away from NYC. Hope that helps. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886563) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:33 PM Author: aqua multi-colored mad-dog skullcap yarmulke Pointing to the London Vault rankings doesn't really make sense. Cravath's London office only has 17-20 people, 3 of whom are partners - all Americans with JDs - and the rest are American associates doing their rotations in Corporate. The Vault "surveyed solicitors at major law firms and asked them to rank firms in terms of how prestigious it would be to work for them." This implies that the solicitors surveyed were considering places where they could actually work. Given that Cravath's London office is so small, and (almost?) entirely American, it makes sense that it's not on the list because solicitors can't/don't work there.
So even if you place value on "prestige" rankings, which is stupid in the first place, you can't really rely on Vault London because it in no way measure's their opinions of the firm's work. It's not an option for them, so it's unlikely for them to rank it. It would be like associates listing Goldman in the law firm survey. The absense of Cravath from Vault London also doesn't it imply that British solicitors haven't heard of Cravath, although I'm sure that fewer have.
[repost from other thread, only addresses "Europe" not Asia].
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:35 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Which only validates my point: Cravath has very little, if any, presence in London.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:37 PM Author: razzle abnormal immigrant stain are these surveys asking to rank american offices or london? im sure if they asked to rank u.s. firms, cravath would come in top 3, as would wachtell, which has no london office. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886569) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:40 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask You are missing the point. Cravath has a great office in NY, I have no doubt.
My point was that Cravath has no presence in London, and, arguably, the rest of the world excluding the U.S.
Contrast this to S&C, Simpson, Skadden and other comparable firms. They are well-ranked in prestige and presence in markets around the world, London and HK included. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:41 PM Author: razzle abnormal immigrant stain i thought your point was that the name doesnt carry outside, and throughout the u.s. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886593) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:44 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Yes, their name doesn't carry outside the U.S... and I cited to the Europe and Asia rankings to show that lawyers in those places don't consider Cravath to be a major player, while other V5 firms such as Simpson, Skadden, Davis --- are all well regarded in those places as well.
That, in conjunction with Cravath's crappy hours, relatively mediocre pay and associate training -- I asked: why would anyone want to work at Cravath when they can go to other V5 firms which have infinitely better resources and world-renounced prestige? |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:46 PM Author: razzle abnormal immigrant stain how about wachtell, how are they ranked by europe and asia vault? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886629) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:51 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Wachtell is equally applicable as Cravath, I only used Cravath because of the notoriety it gets on this board.
Just keep in mind, I am making a comparison between Cravath and the rest of the V5 firms.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:03 PM Author: razzle abnormal immigrant stain I dont think you could be more wrong about cravath. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886753) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:07 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Prove me wrong then :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886775) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:38 PM Author: aqua multi-colored mad-dog skullcap yarmulke If your point is that their London office is small, or that they don't have offices in Asia, your post could have been a lot shorter. The fact that you felt the need to point to Vault rankings undercuts your argument because it irrelevant and not a measure of "presence" in any way.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:41 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I cited their lack of offices in the rest of the world to show that they do very little business outside the U.S., which results in less name recognition in those parts. This is a result of (1) their lawyers concentrated solely in NYC, and (2) their staunch refusal to expand their firm to adapt to global business. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886598) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:57 PM Author: aqua multi-colored mad-dog skullcap yarmulke No, you pointed to prestige rankings for offices that don't exist.
Also, I'm not sure that I agree with your assumption that global expansion is the only way for a law firm to adapt to a globalized economy. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:06 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask The survey doesn't ask for the "prestige rankings for offices." Rather, it asks for prestigious firms that one would like to work for. Not sure if you see the distinction, but I think it is significant.
On the "global expansion" argument, I think this article is relevant: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/19/business/ipo.php
While not conclusive, I think it points to a trend away from NYC to markets abroad. In other words, corporate work in Asia will make up an increasingly large proportion of total business in the world. Not to say NYC is in trouble, I'm just saying that expansion in China, for example, will make growth in NYC appear quite small.
Finally, while I do agree that Cravath's profit margins will remain robust, I don't agree that, in pure numbers, it will be able to compete with the V3-V6 powerhouses.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:44 PM Author: Heady Piazza Electric Furnace Subject: No presence in London? Check the League Tables http://www.thomson.com/pdf/financial/league_table/ma/99217/3Q06_MA_Legal_Adv
Scroll down to page to page 11. So despite having "no presence in London" Cravath managed #9 through the 3rd quarter despite having fewer European offices and European lawyers than every other law firm by a factor of 10.
No presence, indeed. Or to put it another way, what you call no presence, the rest of the world calls a powerhouse.
By the way, sorry you got dinged. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:48 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Funny how you cite to 3rd quarter 2006. In fact, if you look at year-over, you'll see that this was an exceptional case and that Cravath was ranked 56th. Meanwhile, Skadden and other V5 firms have consistently ranked at the top, without fail.
But that was not my point, precisely. My point was that RELATIVE (emphasis on RELATIVE) --- relative to the other V5 firms, Cravath does significantly less work and has a significantly less presence in places outside the U.S. -- when compared to other V5 firms.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:36 PM Author: irradiated purple step-uncle's house because they work you to death and pay you shit (comparatively)? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886564) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:48 PM Author: kink-friendly cruise ship national security agency yeah but i am sure you can cash in after you leave cravath. 3-5 yrs there and go to some other firm and $$$ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886650) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 2:53 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Which you could do equally as well at other V5 shops, such as DPW, Skadden, etc.
However, the same argument doesn't apply if you wanted to go to another firm, say, abroad. Then I would argue that the other V5 shops would give you better opportunities because of their name recognition in those respective markets (which Cravath lacks). |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:01 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish I don't want to defend Cravath too much and I think the extra hours for the same pay is a big detractor. But your point about international prestige is pretty unfounded.
Let's see how this is most likely to play out. Say your plan is to start in NY and go to Hong Kong in 5 years or so. So, you summer and start at a firm like Sullivan & Cromwell. You have no idea what kind of corp work you're going to end up doing, or what the legal market or the exit opps are like in HK, or really anything as a 2L, but you've heard S&C is good in HK, so there you go.
Now it's five years later. You've worked with some bigshot in S&C's HK office and found out that he's a screamer and don't want to deal with that. You've also decided what practice area you want to work in, maybe it's IPOs. Simpson and Latham probably do more China-issuer IPOs than any other firm now, and in five years it might be some other firms. You also find out that maybe S&C doesn't pay the highest expat package in HK and you can do better elsewhere. For all these reasons you figure you're better off interviewing around.
So now you're interviewing with lawyers from DPW, STB, Latham, Skadden, etc. These are US lawyers who were probably in NY as associates or even partners before coming out to HK. Do they think highly of Cravath? Certainly. Do they think you're somehow better because your firm has a HK office and Cravath doesn't? Chances are they don't even like your firm's HK office that much and figure you've arrived at the same conclusion, or else you wouldn't be interviewing. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:56 PM Author: Aquamarine faggot firefighter Good post, but you don't need three paragraphs to make your simple point: if you want to lateral to a HK office, the people interviewing you are US lawyers who were probably in NY as associates or even partners before coming to HK, so they know Cravath. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887025) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:59 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish I was bored at the time and in a storytelling mood. Seems like normal logical reasoning isn't working with this guy anyway. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887040) |
|
Date: November 25th, 2006 12:10 PM Author: Brilliant Narrow-minded Base Community Account You failed to address one of his main points, which is that Cravath is declining in relevance because it refuses to expand beyond New York. As NYC becomes a relatively less important market, Cravath will become a less significant firm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#7063995) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:05 PM Author: Zombie-like stage (1) For litigation, there's no real value in international prestige. It's not like American litigators are really going to go do much litigation abroad anyway (other than in specialized practices like arbitration ... and I think Cravath actually is quite good in int'l arbitration).
(2) Cravath's training is better. The 2007 Vault guide ranked them pretty high (3rd, I think). And the rotation system really does seem to make a difference. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:15 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I never made an argument that there was "real value in international prestige." That statement is quite broad. However, I do claim that international prestige is helpful in terms of exit options abroad.
For example, if one goes to the behemoth I&C Bank of China for an in-house counsel position, I can guarantee you that their Chinese-educated lawyers will have never heard of Cravath. They will have heard of Simpson (because they helped them on a finance deal) and Skadden (because they are assisting on the IPO), and will appreciate the kind of work that those firms do.
There is no "appreciation" however, for a firm like Cravath who has done so little work in China (relative to these other V3-V6 firms).
Finally, note in my original post: Cravath didn't even make it in the top 20 for associate training. We're either looking at different Vault guides (mine is 2007), or you are mistaken. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:22 PM Author: Zombie-like stage See page 62. They're ranked 3rd. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886832) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:47 PM Author: Walnut Range Newt How many Simpson and Skadden lawyers do you think go in-house in China at the behemoth I&C Bank of China? My guess is zero. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886979) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:48 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish Their HK lawyers probably could if they wanted to -- key phrase being "if they wanted to." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886986) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:17 PM Author: wonderful chocolate shrine I turned down v20 to work at non-vault. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886812) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:22 PM Author: tripping talking laser beams "If you couple the above facts with the possibility that a large percentage of the corporate business in the world is shifting from NYC to London and Hong Kong (as the Wall Street Journal reported last week, especially M&A work and IPOs, as a percentage of global deals), Cravath will not be able to compete on the same level as the rest of the V5."
The fact that market A is (presently) growing faster than market B does not mean that those firms who work in both markets will have more work, revenues, "prestige", or whatever than firms who concentrate in market B. Also, not having intl offices is not the same as not being able to handle the intl aspects of mainly domestic deals.
If you want to work outside america, then more power to you; but the idea that Cravath's "weak" intl presence is a hindrance (Edit: to the firm's growth or reputation) is ridiculous. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:32 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask "not having intl offices is not the same as not being able to handle the intl aspects of mainly domestic deals."
That's my point. They do mostly local deals. They have very little business outside of NYC, relative to other V5 firms. This is mainly the reason why they shut down their Hong Kong office a few years ago -- they couldn't sustain it. There just wasn't enough clients.
Like I said, I think Cravath is a great firm. But they are virtually unknown outside the U.S. The news reports and the rankings cited above support this -- which is a lot better than what you've cited to (which is nothing).
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:35 PM Author: tripping talking laser beams I'm dealing with your shitty argument, not your links. Way to avoid the subject.
This law firm trolling/anti-trolling is really weird. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:43 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Ad hominem. Seriously, your counter-arguments are really weak. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886956) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 7:45 PM Author: tripping talking laser beams You're a fucking idiot. That's an ad hominem.
Saying "your counter-arguments are really weak" is a really weak argument. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:54 PM Author: Walnut Range Newt You think Cravath does mostly "local" deals? Like, one hotdog vendor taking over another? That's ridiculous. Cravath has essentially as strong a national presence as any V5 firm, and a strong international presence too. (Deal presence, not office presence.) The fact that they focus on New York, which is still essentially the financial capital of the world, doesn't mean that they don't have many non-New York clients. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887016) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:15 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Do you know how to read? Local = domestic. I think it was pretty clear in light of the fact that farouk was discussing "domestic" deals and I chose to call them "local" relative to the internaional stage.
Look, I feel like I have to reiterate this in every post because a lot of people seem to misunderstand what I'm saying --- Cravath is a great firm, I don't dispute that. But in terms of global presence and global prestige, Cravath is a speck compared to the V3-V6. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:18 PM Author: Aquamarine faggot firefighter Cleary doesn't have any global presence or global prestige? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887119) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:23 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I'm making comparisons between firms, not absolute statements on firms themselves. I thought that was pretty clear. Thus, I chose to compare Cravath to V3-V6 because I think there's a vast difference between the two groups. Never said anything explicitely or impliedly about Cleary, sorry.
I will however make the claim that Cravath has little global presence or prestige compared to the V3-V6. No more, no less. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:23 PM Author: House-broken lodge toilet seat This is why I'll never work there.
http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/dea453_653/students/hda2_wfs4/ny1.jpg
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:25 PM Author: aromatic honey-headed really tough guy puppy Best anti-Cravath thread ever. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886855) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:31 PM Author: Aquamarine faggot firefighter Your main premise that everyone is questioning is that "It is necessary to have an office in a city or market in order to be considered prestigious in that city or market."
I agree that it's certainly beneficial to be with a firm that has a foreign presence (e.g. building contacts or having a foreign office to easily transfer to), but when a Cravath resume lands on a foreign recruiter's desk, (1) recruiters will know that Cravath is one of the best firms in the world or (2) in the highly unlikely case that they don't they can easily figure out that in America Cravath is more prestigious and selective than other V5's. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:37 PM Author: Federal corn cake In order to help foreign recruiters in this effort, I urge you to distribute copies of the HLS callback stats to any and all interested parties. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886923) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:41 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I find it hard to believe that general counsel of a Chinese company would give deference to a U.S. Vault Ranking, rather than their own personal experience working with the firms themselves (which in Cravath's case would probably be zero). I also find it hard to believe that a ranking difference of a few places in the U.S. will really make a difference.
Finally, you say that I was arguing "it is necessary to have an office in a city or market in order to be considered prestigious." Umm, I'm not sure if you know this or not, but Cravath tried to open a Hong Kong office a few years back. I think the reason why they tried to establish a presence there is pretty obvious. The fact that they couldn't pull in enough business and had to close might say something. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:43 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center the chinamen can't afford their rates (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886952) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:58 PM Author: scarlet sandwich stage I am confused by this thread.
I agree that the financial industry is going to be very important in London and Hong Kong and Chicago, like the Journal says. But it also seems that it will continue to grow in New York. So is this thread aimed at people who like finance but don't like New York? It seems, whether or not your theory is correct, that you are making a very broad anti-Cravath argument out of a very niche exit-op concern. Should prospective summer associates really be that concerned about calculating the chances of, to use your example, going in house at a Chinese bank with a Cravath resume vs. a Skadden resume?
Also - what firm are you going to?
And - Can you link to those hour numbers you have faceless? Thanks. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:04 PM Author: aromatic honey-headed really tough guy puppy i believe his point isn't about the niche exit opportunities concern. he's just saying that while cravath is prestigious in the u.s. and particularly nyc, the same argument can't be made in the rest of the world.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:46 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish I don't know why you're debating everybody's posts except for mine. If you think you're going from the NY office of any firm, even S&C or Skadden, to an inhouse position at ICBC, you are seriously mistaken. If they want S&C lawyers, they'll go to S&C HK. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6886977) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:50 PM Author: Aquamarine faggot firefighter I find it remarkable how unsophiscated you consider general counsel of a Chinese comapnies to be.
You really think that these general counsel would not know what kind of firm Cravath is or not even go about finding out? That they will use their anecdotal experience as the only basis for juding foreign law firms?
Think about a law school admissions committee at a top school. They get applicants with backgrounds from all over the world, and have an interest in getting the best people by figuring out the best foreign academic programs. They know that the London School of Economics or Beijing University are top schools, even if it doesn't have the same recognition as Michigan State. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:18 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Unsurprisingly, you misread what I wrote, again.
Look, I'm not saying anyone would choose Michigan State over LSE. We're not comparing Cravath to the 1-800 MARGARITA firm. But if I make the claim that Cravath has little presence in markets outside of NYC, then it becomes clear that two firms being relatively equal, I'll probably choose the one that has greater presence and prestige in my geographical area and market. That's all. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:52 PM Author: Walnut Range Newt This is absurd. If your only career goal is to be an in-house counsel at a Chinese bank, working at Cravath would be a tragic mistake, but working at Simpson or Skadden would be an equally tragic mistake.
If your only career goal is to work in a firm's Hong Kong office then, yes, by all means work at a firm with a Hong Kong office. Why you felt the need for an ALL-CAPS THREAD ANNOUNCING THAT is well beyond me.
If you really think that Cravath's lack of a Hong Kong office will make it less profitable or competitive than Skadden in the near run (i.e. the three years you'll be at a firm), then that's totally unfounded. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:55 PM Author: House-broken lodge toilet seat ALL CAPS = EARNESTNESSSSSSSSSS (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887019) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 3:58 PM Author: aromatic honey-headed really tough guy puppy RK982
Wrong on Cravath. Wrong on Common Sense. Wrong for AutoAdmit.
This message was brought to you by: the peanut gallery. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:03 PM Author: Heady Piazza Electric Furnace Subject: Margins in HK are terrible. Asia will never be as profitable as NY-based or London-based work. The margins simply aren't there. New York and Europe is where the money is, always will be. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887055) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:06 PM Author: aromatic honey-headed really tough guy puppy i've actually heard otherwise... which is why my firm is opening an office in beijing next year. do you have a source? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887078) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:09 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish "It’s not clear exactly how lucrative Latham’s IPO work was, though. Zhang says that fee pressure in China is intense, and other foreign firms say privately that Latham got the work due to discounting. “The goal is to realize our rates, and over time in Asia we’ve been very successful in making sure that we realize a full rate,” he says.
In a nation obsessed with the bottom line, discounting pressures are a fact of life. Chinese clients often ask for fee caps, contingency arrangements, or flat rates. “We’ve repeatedly gone in and bid on work for Chinese companies and offered them very fair rates and found that competitors were offering fixed fees of less than half what we were quoting,” says Norton. Multi-nationals doing business in China have learned from the natives, pushing harder for discounts. For some firms, taking the lower rate can cost money in the short run but pays dividends in branding, especially in high-profile deals." http://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/issues/ljn_international/1_7/news/147514-1.html |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:39 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Like I said, if Asia is as unprofitable as you say, then why did Cravath try to open an office in Hong Kong? Surely it saw something there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887233) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 7:40 PM Author: comical orchid halford Well, it *did* open an office there. The question you should ask is why they closed it.
The reason is that, while there might be big deals to be done in Asia, there aren't any cutting edge, creative deals, for which clients are willing to pay a premium.
Asian clients see legal services as fungible, and give their business to the lowest bidder. Cravath doesn't play in that kiddie pool. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 4:47 PM Author: opaque bateful menage prole #1 US GDP ~12 trillion #2 Japan GDP ~2 trillion
The other markets have a lot of catching up to do. NYC will continue to be the financial capital of the world for much longer than your biglaw career. Maybe if you were planning to go to law school in 2030 this would be a legitimate concern. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:00 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask LOL. Comparing GDP's of countries to show strength of the legal markets in each is completely misguided. The only reason why lawyers in America make so much money is because our laws are structured favorably to lawyers' pockets. If you look at the liability laws in, say, Japan, you'll see that their laws are not as favorable (which is why the lawyer-general population ratio is significantly less in Japan, by a magnitude of 10).
But that's beside the point. I'm not saying that the U.S. legal market is weak. It is growing, no doubt. All I said was that the markets overseas are growing at a much faster rate, and while Cravath can stick to their tried-and-true system and do business from NYC, the rest of the V10 (excluding Wachtell) are putting their money overseas. If successful, I claim that it may be likely that these global firms will do better financially and will become increasingly desirable to the corporate clients that matter the most: large, global companies. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:14 PM Author: opaque bateful menage prole "the only reason?" you fail to account for the fact that for many firms M&A is the largest driver of profits, not litigation. plus us firms don't do litigation in their foreign offices. CSM does a lot of international deals. typically, they partner with foreign firms. the problem with having a lot of international offices is that it is difficult to control the quality of lawyers and the foreign offices are less profitable. CSM and others have decided that it is better to work with the top firms in foreign markets instead of having to expand into them with sub-par talent, decreasing their profit margins. biglaw is not a growth biz, it is all about the profit margin. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887412) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:17 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Sorry, but even assuming what you say is true, M&A transactions contribute very little to overall GDP. You can't correlate M&A and GDP on a basis that would be meaningful. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887450) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:24 PM Author: opaque bateful menage prole not true, the largest deals will come out of the countries with the largest economies; bigger deals = more fees (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887500) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:10 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Think about what you are saying. Let's say there's a merger. Two companies come together. Is the biggest deal going to be in a country with the highest GDP? Makes it more likely, perhaps, but that relationship is tenuous at best. Perhaps the corporate laws of a country make a deal more likely in that country, but to say that >GDP means bigger transactions... not sure how you correlate the two. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887808) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:14 PM Author: opaque bateful menage prole are you just f'in around, or do you really not get it? my basic point is that the US is by far the largest economy and the largest M&A market. it will be a long time before other markets catch up, and by then, I will no longer be a biglaw lawyer (most likely). Perhaps, CSM's strategy will ultimately lead to its downfall, but this is a long time away.
plus CSM does do a lot of international work by partnering with foreign counsel. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:30 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask You are trying to pigeon-hole my argument into M&A business only. That's not what I'm arguing. Every company needs legal services, regardless of what country they are in. Cravath has chosen not to expand overseas, as a result, its primary market is going to be the U.S. Meanwhile, equally big players in the U.S. such as Skadden, are getting a lot of lucrative business overseas. Thus, Skadden's prestige and profitability will grow significantly (like other global V10 players) on a global scale, while Cravath's business will be inherently limited by their single presence in the U.S. (and maybe London, but only slightly). Simply put, their size and number will get them prestige, but locally at best. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887880) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:13 AM Author: opaque bateful menage prole "The only reason why lawyers in America make so much money is because our laws are structured favorably to lawyers' pockets."
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Are you even in law school? US firms with foreign offices do not do litigation. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 10:55 AM Author: lime contagious brunch jap i think it is absurd how you try to correlate gdp with m&a deals. absurd. i didn't even read what you wrote afterwards because it was just too funny. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891784) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:05 PM Author: scarlet sandwich stage Subject: MSG for Faceless - Regarding your Hours #s Do you have a link for the hours figures you used comparing Skadden to Cravath? Also, curious - what firm are you picking? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887373) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:12 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Sure, it was in my original message above as well: http://avery.ws/ai/shortest_hour_law_firms5.html
Cravath: 69.8 Hours Per Week S&C: 62.5 Hours Per Week Simpson: 60 Hours Per Week Skadden: 58.8 Hours Per Week
It may not seem like a big difference on a week-over basis (well, actually 10 hours is a big difference)... but over a year, that's like 21 FULL DAYS of work.
- And I went to another comparable firm, won't say which one. But, one that is significantly larger and has infinitely better resources, contacts, hours, and global presence and prestige. :) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:17 PM Author: scarlet sandwich stage Thank you for getting back to me -
Those numbers are kind of hard to interpret - Skadden is going to have its hours lowered by the offices outside of New York for instance. I'm only looking at New York corporate. Also, the rate-of-response clearly is going to skew things... anybody have anything more concrete?
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 5:25 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Of course, all surveys are going to be skewed in one way or another, but I think a 25-50% response rate makes it pretty accurate.
And while not conclusive, at least there's some factual basis for the kind of hours at Cravath. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:05 PM Author: opaque bateful menage prole Subject: hours doubledown, I worked 1L summer in a V50 firm that didn't have a sweat shop rep. During my M&A rotation, a few of the M&A associates showed me their time sheets for the week, and they were working about 15 hours/day. it seems that certain practice areas are going to bad regardless of the firm. if you want to do transactional work, then don't expect Skadden to have better hours than any other firm. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:21 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I would rather rely on surveys which indicate that on the whole, Skadden has better hours than Cravath.
Sorry, you can make excuses all you want (M&A is an exception, blah blah) but that really doesn't make much sense if you think about the survey itself: it asks associates across the various practice areas... and it averages in the M&A people as well. The numbers don't skew M&A numbers for Skadden, or Cravath for that matter. If you say Cravath has a disproportionate number of M&A associates, then that would be a different story... but I don't think that's the case. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 7:35 PM Author: Medicated Vibrant Set Love Of Her Life "Skadden is going to have its hours lowered by the offices outside of New York for instance."
Did you address this anywhere? |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:14 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I didn't design the survey, so sorry, I can't tell you the numbers for NYC specifically. But, it is better than what you have (which is nothing).
Also, Skadden's NYC office is nearly half of the entire firm. Thus, a random sampling of the firm would give you a pretty general idea of the NYC office in particular. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:21 PM Author: Medicated Vibrant Set Love Of Her Life "But, it is better than what you have (which is nothing)."
I haven't made any claims either way . . . just genuinely curious.
"Also, Skadden's NYC office is nearly half of the entire firm. Thus, a random sampling of the firm would give you a pretty general idea of the NYC office in particular."
If non-NYC associates worked significantly fewer hours then their NYC counterparts, I'm not sure how this would be true (unless, of course, the non-NYC surveys represent a statistically insignificant proportion of the overall survey). |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:18 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur "unless, of course, the non-NYC surveys represent a statistically insignificant proportion of the overall survey"
You know, that just might be it... |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:41 AM Author: Medicated Vibrant Set Love Of Her Life Is there anything that indicates that this may be the case?
Edit: Nevermind . . . I just saw your pathetic work below and know what to expect. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:00 AM Author: opaque bateful menage prole urghhhh, you keep on missing my point
the above poster said he was interested in transactional work. I was making the point that an M&A associate at Skadden will work as much as an M&A associate at CSM. In no way does this depend on if the CSM has a disproportionate number of M&A associates.
I will spell it out for you in simple terms: C is an M&A associate at CSM, S is an M&A associate at Skadden, C and S work equivalent hours. In no way does this survey go against these statements. We can't tell from the survey, so I am giving some anecdotal evidence, which is on point. You've got nothing.
I have worked at two different firms in their M&A departments. The hours at both were terrible, and I have heard similar things from friends at other firms. M&A is bad everywhere, but especially at the big guns like Skadden. Have you ever worked in a law firm? |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:15 PM Author: lascivious institution the results are basically the same every year, so they are pretty accurate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887829) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 6:30 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish They are also pretty consistent across firms (most of the top NY firms are in that 57-60 range). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6887879) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 7:42 PM Author: comical orchid halford Why are people so afraid to work hard? Do you think you become a good lawyer by working as few hours as possible? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6888222) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:18 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I don't think anyone here is "afraid to work hard." I doubt many of us could get where we are had we not.
However, there is a distinction between "working hard" and working 70 hour weeks... week after week... after week.
It gets exhausting. You get home and you have no energy left. It strains your relationships with friends and family. So on and so forth.
Sure, I like working hard, and putting in an 80 hour week is rewarding because you learn a lot. But there's a balance to be achieved between work and the rest of your life. Many of us want to reach that balance, not destroy it. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:26 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Can the difference in the hours from the survey you linked be explained by the fact that the survey is looking at Cravath's NY hours vs Skadden's averaged hours between NY/Dallas/Delaware and other secondary markets?
if so, that survey is meaningless. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:42 PM Author: lime contagious brunch jap skadden has a huge mother ship in new york: i think we can safely say that the survey is biased to new york associates (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6888555) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 10:00 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask I believe the survey is more meaningful than your anecdotal experiences. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6888973) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:58 PM Author: provocative candlestick maker Subject: Cravath doesn't work on int'l deals This deal was just announced last week:
Cravath represented CEMEX S.A.B. de C.V. in connection with its offer to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Rinker Group Limited for approximately $12.8 billion.
Secondly, one reason why Cravath didn't make the European vault list is because they don't hire laterals, i.e. it would be impossible for any reader of the Vault list in the U.K. to get a job in their U.K. office. This is not the case for all other firms.
Thirdly, while I agree with you that the CS&M COULD hurt them in the long-run, their is really no way to know. Cravath has relationships with the best independent firms in every country abroad. While global clients may want to reduce the number of firms that they deal with, they also want to ensure that they have the lawyers with the best knowledge of local law. Is that S&C or Skadden in London? I think not - you do see, however, Freshfields and Cravath teaming up on transactions. Who would you rather give your business to? |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 9:03 PM Author: magical idea he suggested Subject: Cravath has no international presence. Schneider Buys APC for $6.1B
Uninterruptible power supply giant American Power Conversion bought by French company. October 30, 2006
American Power Conversion said Monday it had agreed to be acquired by French electrical distribution technology provider Schneider Electric for $6.1 billion, driving up shares of the backup power supply giant 26 percent....Goldman Sachs provided APC with financial advice on the deal, while Clifford Chance offered legal advice. For Schneider Electric, Lazard Freres and Merrill Lynch served as financial advisors, while Cravath Swaine & Moore was the legal advisor.
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 9:06 PM Author: magical idea he suggested Subject: Well, except for $25 BILLION in cross-border just in past week.
Cravath scores key Royal Dutch Shell role
Cravath Swaine & Moore and Canadian firms Stikeman Elliott and Ogilvy Renault have scooped lead roles on Royal Dutch Shell’s acquisition of Shell Canada’s minority interests that it didn’t already own for CAD7.7bn (£3.64bn).
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 9:08 PM Author: magical idea he suggested Subject: faceless, have a seat. You've just been bitch-slapped back to reality. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6888674) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 9:57 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Like I said, it is all relative. I never said Cravath doesn't have deals abroad. However, if you compare Cravath's business with the V3-V6, you'll see there really isn't much of a comparison.
Deals Announced Worldwide 2006 [as of 09/30/2006]
Skadden YTD Value: 572BN (Rank 1) S&C YTD Value: 565BN (Rank 2) Freshfield YTD Value: 343BN (Rank 3) Linklators YTD Value: 340BN (Rank 4) Simpson Thacher YTD Value: 333BN (Rank 5)
You see "Cravath" anywhere there? Exactly, it isn't anywhere near those numbers. Sorry.
|
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:23 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur OMG STATPWNEDD !! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891566) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 11:55 AM Author: comical orchid halford Gosh, I don't see Wachtell either. Obviously, from these stats, Linklater's NYC office would be a much better place to start a career than Wachtell. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891967) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:00 PM Author: lime contagious brunch jap Gosh, I got pwned. Let me falsely exaggerate the argument being made to make myself look right anyways.
Turd. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 7:47 PM Author: House-broken lodge toilet seat Never forget working conditions at Cravath
http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/dea453_653/students/hda2_wfs4/ny1.jpg
|
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 10:08 PM Author: Deep Milk i don't get this but its kinda funny. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6889036) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 11:05 PM Author: Chestnut Cuck 1/2 of Cravath's lawyers are litigators. Cravath has always been recognized primarily for being a great litigation firm. Especially compared to the other New York firms you mentioned (Skadden, Simpson, etc.), which have relatively minor litigation practices vs. their corporate work. And for litigation-International presence is IRRELEVANT!
Not to mention that more hours--> more learning, especially when you're being supervised by partners and senior associates who are not only crazy workers (otherwise they wouldn't be there) but crazy smart as well. If you're looking for a cakewalk don't go to Cravath, but there are those who love and thrive in that sort of environment. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 11:53 PM Author: Exciting bearded office roast beef Why the FUCK would Cravath be ranked by Vault in Asia?
You have got to be the dumbest fucking person ever. Let me spell this out for you...They don't have a fucking office in Asia.
Why in the world would a firm be ranked in Vault for a geographic area when they don't have an office in that geographic area?
Guess what? Cravath isn't ranked in the top 20 law firms in Des Moines, Idaho. Does that mean that a lawyer in Idaho doesn't regard Cravath as a superior firm to the firms in Idaho? Does that mean that when the biggest company in Idaho has a "bet the company" situation, they choose a Idaho firm over Cravath?
I can't even believe I wasted 3 minutes of my life responding to this horseshit.
If you want to attack Cravath, there are many ways to do it. Many of which may be valid. But the fact that they aren't Vault ranked in an area where they don't have an office is borderline retarded.
Go away.
|
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:22 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur That's his whole "fucking" point, dumbass. Cravath ISN'T well known outside the U.S. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891563) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:31 AM Author: Exciting bearded office roast beef oh my god. You're even worse than the first poster.
I'll talk real slow...the fact that cravath isn't ranked in the Vault Asia guide does not mean that they aren't well known outside of the U.S.
They aren't ranked in Vault Asia BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE AN OFFICE IN ASIA. Hence, they obviously aren't ranked in that guide.
That doesn't have ANYTHING to do with whether they are respected in Asia. Just like the fact that they aren't ranked in Vault Idaho doesn't mean that they aren't respected in Idaho.
This isn't brain surgery. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:47 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Earth to batg: READ THE FUCKING SURVEY !!!
Did you even read the Vault survey? It doesn't ask attorneys what the most prestigious office in Asia is. Rather, it asks attorneys what the most prestigious law firms in Asia are.
Cravath isn't on the fucking list. WHY? BECAUSE IT HAS VERY LITTLE BUSINESS IN ASIA. Now shut the fuck up. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:49 AM Author: painfully honest impertinent center "Rather, it asks attorneys what the most prestigious law firms in Asia are. Cravath isn't on the list because it has very little business in Asia."
Or because it has no office in Asia and, like you said, the survey asked people to rank law firms IN ASIA.
|
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:51 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Dude, you are fucking crashing and burning. Stop making shitty excuses for your firm's shitty presence in Asia.
CRAVATH HAS VERY LITTLE BUSINESS IN ASIA.
Repeat that to yourself a few times. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:58 AM Author: Exciting bearded office roast beef very simple question-is there a single law firm ranked in the Vault Asia guide that doesn't have an OFFICE in Asia?
If there is, I stand corrected.
But I'm pretty sure there isn't. So if that's the case, my point is 100% valid-the fact that cravath isn't ranked has NOTHING to do with whether they are respected in Asia or do a lot of deals involving Asian companies. It merely is a product of the fact that they don't have an office in Asia. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 10:02 AM Author: Maniacal Harsh Market Boltzmann I think if Cravath was a big player in asia, it would probably have an office there. But their office there closed about 5 or 10 years ago. So I don't think it would be a wild stretch to infer that they don't have a lot of business in asia. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891650) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 10:10 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur TITMFCR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891676) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:27 AM Author: Demanding black forum This thread sucked. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6890302) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 12:32 AM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building titcr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6890352) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:22 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur You all hate on this guy, but I don't see any good arguments that would tend to disprove his claims. Kind of makes you wonder, doesn't it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891565) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:24 AM Author: Curious House You are all lawyers or in the process of becoming ones, right? Well, I would say to all of you....Ding! Fags! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891567) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:26 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Quick summary of his pionts: Cravath has significantly less prestige outside the U.S. than Skadden, Simpson, or S&C. Thus, on the global prestige scale, Cravath is small fries. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891569) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:41 AM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Simpson troll. Everyone knows Cravath > you.
HTFH |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:48 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Sorry you work for small fries, dumbass. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891609) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:49 AM Author: Curious House Lawyer? Ding! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891611) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:52 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Hi Cravath3L !!!! *waving* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891620) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 11:59 AM Author: comical orchid halford I love how you throw Simpson in there with Skadden and S&C, but forget to mention, oh say, DPW or other firms you might have mentioned.
Seriously, my impression while interviewing at Simpson was that all the associates were ultra-insecure about their prestige level. They spent well over half of their time throwing in remarks about how prestigious Simpson was. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 9:59 AM Author: red space rigor faceless got it right.
that's why i chose s&c over cravath. |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 10:33 AM Author: lime contagious brunch jap Cravath reminds me a lot of Cahill... I think both of those firms are going to have some problems in a few years, especially with the recent law firm downsizing in corporate America (companies choosing to have only a handful of law firms do their work, rather than picking and choosing on an ad hoc basis). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6891724) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 4:25 PM Author: Hideous alpha Subject: Okay. This reminds me of a debate about the New York Yankees.
"Gosh, they are on the decline! All they do is buy talent! They haven't won four consecutive titles in several years! I hope they lose! Their players stink! Furthermore, they have no presence in Asia!"
Nobody on the associate levels needs to worry about how much business Cravath is doing in Asia. Especially nobody who works at STB or the like has to worry about this. You'll never work there. Period. Ever. Hence, you will not make partner there, nor will you ever leave and have to worry about exit options.
|
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 5:24 PM Author: comical orchid halford Yankees = Skadden.
HTH. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:14 AM Author: Cracking Tank Site there's no difference in skadden and cravath except in the minds of douchebags such as yourself. Both are well regarded firms, and as far as anyone is concerned, practice area strengths are much more important. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6897912) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:17 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Cravath is too small of a firm to be considered a global player. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6897915) |
|
Date: October 31st, 2006 5:34 PM Author: Outnumbered appetizing windowlicker this presumes that the partners at cahill and csm and other firms like wlrk don't keep abreast of what's happening in the legal market around them. the executive partners at these firms I'm sure are aware and are contemplating how to adapt their firms without radically changing their culture.
Besides, adding branch offices around the globe doesn't necessarily do anything to improve profitability for a firm, but it certainly increases firm overhead. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:07 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur Cravath is a sweatshop cleverly disguised as a law firm. HTH.
Oh, and to settle the score, Cravath has a shitty reputation in Europe. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:12 AM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=508082&mc=44&forum_id=2
Get back to work. My slacker friend wants his bonus. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 9:14 AM Author: titillating round eye voyeur No, you see, I work a lot less than Cravath.
For the same pay.
Weird, isn't it? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:44 AM Author: Hideous alpha Subject: Yes, weird. What is even weirder is that any remotely diligent Cravath associate could just lateral over and take your job one day. This associate would not want to, however, since she could have just taken your job in the first place. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898442) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:47 AM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig This is a pretty persuasive argument. If one is thinking of global prestige, Cravath does rank sorta low on the scale. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898461) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:49 AM Author: tripping talking laser beams You're the OP.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:51 AM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig Everyone, the reason why this guy keeps dogging me is the following:
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=517012&forum_id=2#6898257 |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:54 AM Author: tripping talking laser beams I keep "dogging" you because you're an idiot who keeps saying stupid things. Stop saying stupid things, and I'll stop "dogging" you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898495) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 11:56 AM Author: painfully honest impertinent center Good thing I could care less what some bumbfuck in Bangladesh thinks about Cravath v. Skadden. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898504) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:00 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish Huqpwn3d! http://www.chambersandpartners.com/global/results33.aspx?loctype=&cid=9&pid=242&solbar=1 |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:06 PM Author: tripping talking laser beams Haha
Nice find.
Huq is best in Bangladesh! |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:04 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig Bangladesh? I was thinking more like London. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898536) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:09 PM Author: Hideous alpha Skadden = High deal volume factory. Gives out hoodies with its logo on it. Partners yell and compete with each other. Extends offers freely.
Cravath = Pleasant little niche practice. Lockstep. No hoodies. Rumored to sometimes give offers, but these rumors are unconfirmed.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:15 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig "Pleasant"??? Pleasant for partners maybe, not for associates. Associates get underpaid for the hours they actually put in.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:16 PM Author: Hideous alpha fair. it's a messed up trade that some people make when choosing to work there. by all accounts, the firm should clearly pay more. unless there is actually some value to one's resume.... nah. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898594) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:21 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig I think Cravath's thinking in this is that because it is such a coveted law firm in Manhattan, it can get away with paying people at market. Demand is there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898620) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 2:27 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle Corner Friendly Grandma actually, i think a ton of top people choose other cities precisely because the top few NY firms don't pay well given the COL and hours. particularly people who aren't set on corporate/M&A. WLRK probably can overcome city preference, but I doubt Cravath can. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6899365) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:08 PM Author: Exciting bearded office roast beef If Cravath is ranked low in global prestige, how can you possibly explain the fact that Cravath has "friendly firms" (or best friend firms or whatever you want to call it) across the world that are ranked at the very top in prestige in their countries? And that associates at those firms literally line up at the door and beg their firms to be able to spend a year at Cravath on a temporary rotation?
Why on earth would associates at the most prestigious firms around the world fight to work at Cravath on a temporary basis if Cravath had low global prestige? |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:13 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig The survey doesn't lie.
And for the record, all large law firms have so-called "friendly firms." For example, in litigation, this is a routine part of business (you don't have locations in every district, so you partner with "local counsel" and have them do the shit work for you).
And, yes, there is a line outside Worldwide Plaza every morning at 10am with associates everywhere just begging for a job.
In summary, your argument can be summed up like this: OMG CRAVATH IS PRESTIGIOUS BECAUSE WHY WOULDN'T IT HAVE GLOBAL PRESTIGE OMG OMG |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:13 PM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building The OP's logic is piss-poor. Although I get your basic point, a lot of your responses make no sense. Did you even get a callback at Cravath? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898579) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:17 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig I read this entire thread and I keep reading how the OP's logic is so wrong. But, no one seems to explain why the logic is so flawed? There really isn't much to it. Cravath is a niche practice (as someone else pointed out) and they don't have the global mindset that a lot of other firms have. Less global mindset, less global prestige. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898598) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:18 PM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building You are the OP, but I will pretend that you are not. Just look at her responses to each of these counter-points. If you can't see the flaws, then I can't help you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898605) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:20 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig What are the flaws? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898615) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:21 PM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building Like I said, some people aren't capable to seeing them. You are one of these people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898618) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:22 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig You are basically saying her logic is wrong because it clearly is.
OH! Makes sense. This line of reasoning will make a good appellate court brief. I look forward to reading it, my friend. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:25 PM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building I am saying that her logic is wrong (mostly in her responses to the counter-arguments). Others have explained why. I understand why it is, they understand why, but you don't. Your skills will go far when drafting responses to my appellate court briefs. At least the judge will be smart enough to understand me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898636) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:29 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig The thing is, others haven't explained why. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898643) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:30 PM Author: sticky aphrodisiac fanboi church building they have, you just don't understand. you can't even understand what I'm trying to tell you. You are too dumb to know that you are dumb. I suggest you drop out of law school now. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898648) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:33 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig Like I said, I asked you to point to anywhere in this discussion that would indicate why her logic is flawed. You couldn't point to a single one.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 2:16 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Exactly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6899293) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:22 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish I get his point too, even though it's stupid.
It is really sad that this thread has gotten so long. Even 10 posts would have been too many. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:23 PM Author: Hideous alpha I think the lifespan of this thread speaks volumes. If someone titled a thread "WHY I WILL NEVER WORK AT (Firm X)," and Firm X were not Cravath, Wachtell, DPW, or possibly Cleary or Debevoise, I think the thread would last all of four posts and be obviated by commonsense general agreement.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:27 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig I don't think you would ever get consensus on any topic in this forum. But that's largely the purpose of this whole thing. Discussion is good. And this anti-Cravath argument is not something I considered before. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898639) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:30 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish Unfortunately, the reason you never considered this argument before was not because you were smart, but because you were stupid. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898649) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:32 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig Someone regrets goings to Cravath... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898654) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:33 PM Author: Hideous alpha Wait, does this mean that smart people all have already considered Cravath's lack of global prestige?
Cravath lacks global prestige the way some powerful, revered U.S. Senators lack global prestige. Skadden has global prestige the way Justin Timberlake has global prestige. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:35 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig In London, Cravath is not even close to the top of the prestige rankings. Hope that helps. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898678) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:37 PM Author: Hideous alpha In London, Justin Timberlake is at the top of the charts! Hope that helps. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898687) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:38 PM Author: Nubile cocky goyim filthpig But not for law firm prestige. Sorry! Facts don't lie. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898697) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:42 PM Author: Hideous alpha You are obviously a master of subtle argument by analogy.
|
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 12:36 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish The smart people *didn't* consider Cravath's supopsed lack of global prestige because it's a ridiculous argument. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6898682) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 2:28 PM Author: boyish lake lay pocket flask Everything that you type is ridiculous. Why? Because you spew it without any support. Moving on.. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6899372) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 2:30 PM Author: Zippy underhanded death wish Hey, you finally respond to a post of mine in this thread! Can't wait to see what's next! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6899392) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 3:17 PM Author: painfully honest impertinent center If Cravath wanted to merge with or buy up the #1 firms all over the world, they easily do so. But that's not how they roll.
Cravath doesn't show up ANYWHERE on London's Vault list of "50 most prestigious firms to work for" because it doesn't hire London lawyers. You're really not going to convince anyone that Cravath is just such a bad law firm that no one in London wants to work for them. They simply don't hire there, or anywhere else outside of NYC.
The OP's answer to this is that if Cravath were a better law firm, or more prestigious or whatever, they would be able to have large and prestigious offices all over the world like some other NY firms. This reasoning is erroneous because it ignores the fact that Cravath's business model is nothing like other NY firms. Cravath never has been and never will be about trying to grow large and expand its offices. Instead of simply merging with or buying up some locally prestigious Italian or Asian firm, they simply work closely with that firm and do business with them. Cravath doesn't do mergers. All of their partners come from their NY office. They don't want to grant a bunch of randoms in some foreign country the title and reputation of being a "Cravath Partner."
Cravath is so prestigious because they are able to service the entire country/world through their NY office. Being a Cravath partner is royalty in the legal field, and Cravath isn't going to grant the title to 1,000 other random people all over the world.
If the survey asked a question such as "What are the fifty most well-respected or prestigious law firms in the world," then there is no doubt that Cravath would be at or near the top. But whatever...the OP is just an anti-Cravath troll that is trying to justify his employment elsewhere. |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 3:20 PM Author: tripping talking laser beams I highly doubt that he's employed anywhere beyond the local fast-food joint or his mommy's office. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6899706) |
|
Date: November 1st, 2006 4:13 PM Author: Light Persian Hairy Legs ti,of,tcr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=515838&forum_id=2#6900084) |