I think stability (structured finance layoffs notwithstanding) is a key point. I know I-Bankers who fear that the axe is going to fall at any minute.
Losing some ground on what is undoubtedly still high pay in the grand scheme of the economy seems a fair trade off.

The dumb kids at my high school always had fancier cars and houses and clothes than the nerdy, deep-thinking, play-it-safe types. It was a really big deal and I'm still not over it.

Pity the lawyers? What about pitying the doctors like me? We were the first to drop out of the bidding in her story, and and we actually do something of value for society. And now after 10+ years of post-collegiate training, not only do we have to cope with the loomin threats of malpractice and socialized medicine, we are at the bottom of the heap.

this reminds me so much about that research paper that pointed out that your happiness is all tied up with your reference group. especially the whole eating at the same places relaxing on the same beaches thing.

people who think like that can NEVER be happy. this applies double to people who've had never had a hard day in their lives.

Hilarious article. Thanks for sharing. So what are associates - one step above the people who clean the bathrooms at the rest stops on the Jersey Turnpike?

The article forgets to mention that the hedge fund managers and private equity guys get the pick of the litter of the prostitutes, why the Biglaw partners have to settle for the crackwhore on the corner.

Pity the lawyers? What about pitying the doctors like me? We were the first to drop out of the bidding in her story, and and we actually do something of value for society. And now after 10+ years of post-collegiate training, not only do we have to cope with the looming threats of malpractice and socialized medicine, we are at the bottom of the heap.

i really enjoyed this. truth is, lawyers are middle class at best in the most desirable legal markets (NY, California). i can also relate to the "what does he [hedge fund manager] have that i don't?" line of inquiry. answer: initiative, balls.

ANYONE who can afford a "Hampton retreat" should not be envious -- or at least should not be expressing her envy -- over those who happen to have a more centrally located Hampton retreat. How stuck up and ignorant.

The fact is, as the article points out, those in finance generally can earn 10-100 times what a lawyer does because they take far more risk. Lawyers don't leverage their money, bankers do. And as long as lawyers continue billing by the hour -- even if at a rate of $1,000/hour -- they will remain second-class citizens to the bankers and financiers.

Jesus, if you're a BigLaw Partner and you're actually surprised that bankers and financiers earn [a lot] more than you, you need to readjust your view of the world.

How does an attorney switch to i-banking, private equity or hedge fund work? And how much do those places actually pay?

i really enjoyed this. truth is, lawyers are middle class at best in the most desirable legal markets (NY, California). i can also relate to the "what does he [hedge fund manager] have that i don't?" line of inquiry. answer: initiative, balls.

I am shocked that people could lose perspective in such a complete and amazing way.

My heart really goes out to the lawyer who can only afford a 15k meal. I mean, where can we go to get a decent meal anyways?

After the next Crash, lawyers will have the know-how and venture capital to recover the limelight.

This article is spot on. I live in NYC and my friends in banking are the ones who are well-off. In their late 20s, as I am, or early 30s, they are pulling in more than $500,000 a year at places like Goldman and more than a million a year at hedge funds such as SAC Capital. Who cares if they risk losing their jobs? They've made millions already and could take a year or two off work and be completely fine.

The bankers drop thousands of dollars in a single night popping bottles at hot spots around the city. They do this two or three times a week. Big law associates just can't roll like that. The income difference is exponential.

1) It's like anything else priced by the market: higher risk = higher reward. And clearly a hedge fund manager is on the razor's edge of risk. Partner at an established firm? Not so much.
2) How can a lawyer not know this going in? The people who pay your wage inherently make more than you...that's how they make a profit. Hedge fund owners pay our wages. Big deal.
3) Need I even point out how galling this is: go talk to a school teacher or someone with no medical insurance and "sniff" to them about how you are in all the best of everything, just not quite the best of the best. Unbelievable.
4) Once again, what law student doesn't know this going in? The ones who want to make the big bucks jump ship and take the risky move of going to the business side. Don't complain about stuff about which you were well aware.

bypass manhattan to take it to brooklyn? i don't get it.

4:28,

Many people go into law over finance because law, at its best, can be that much more academic. It often doesn't turn out that way, but the prospect of a more intellectually stimulating profession can provide an impetus to people who are concerned with questions other than "Where is the money?"

I am a first-year transactional attorney at a large firm, and an intellectual feast my job is not. That said, law school *was* a fantastic academic experience, and that's what many folks look at when considering law - not what comes in the immediate years after.

4:38: I like the intellectual challenge of law school too; I really do. But that is just absurd. The slice of kids going into law school either to later become an academic or who have no regard at all for what is on the other end of school is razor thin. Besides, its just snobbery to suppose that B-school and the business world is not similarly intellectually stimulating. To the extent that it involves managing people (which lawyers suck at), it probably is more so.

I'm wondering about the doctors, especially those in Boston. Thoughts, anyone?

I think there is a more nuanced issue to look at beyond the "get some perspective" BS:

Transactional lawyers work just as hard as bankers/hedgies/PE guys and are usually just as smart. Why take in a fraction of the income? Forget absolute numbers. On an effort/abilities basis, a smart transactional lawyer would move to the fund/banking side. The work is more engaging as well (you're not double-checking commas and other grammatical crap).

The more I think about it, I should have just gone to medical school and said fuck it. It would have been much nicer to do something significant with my life rather than work with people like the bitch-ass partner in this article who apparently has some major self-esteem issues and isn't afraid about putting them on display for us.

The money is nice. But I don't really care if I make more or less than a banker. It's the people who make money such a primary focus in their lives that generally don't have anything else to inspire them. Rich people but poor souls.

And so everyone moves to Chicago... you make as much (well more after taxes...) as in NYC and you get to be at the top of the socio-economic ladder.

Ok, yeah, there are some PE guys around (I mean we do need clients) but it is nothing like the way it is in NYC.

"The slice of kids going into law school either to later become an academic or who have no regard at all for what is on the other end of school is razor thin."

I'm not entirely disagreeing, but let me ask you this - when did you first learn what due diligence is? Was it before law school?

Security yes, but insecurity also plays a major role. Lawyers tend to always need some type gold star to help convince themselves that they truly extraordinary. Often, whether one is in finance or law, the desire for a gold star starts off in High School ----GOT TO GET INTO AN IVY. Gold Star - Check.

From there, once said star is attained, the paths tend to split.

Financiers typically enter the work force and try to make their mark. The extraordinary ones make MD or Partner (depending on the Investment Bank) by the time they are 32 and are making millions. The very talented tend to work for a few years, go back to get their MBA and then jump back in the hunt.

Lawyers, well deep down, they are not so confident. That Ivy League gold star gets lonely fast. Have to Ace the LSAT…Have to get into a Top 5 law school…Have to make top 10%....Have to make Law Review….Have to get a summer position in a Top 10 firm….Have to Brag about my MPRE score….Have to ace the Bar…Need more gold stars…..Can’t everyone see how great I am, I have mastered the ‘Controlled and Structured Educational Environment.’

The best people in finance have an exceptional understanding of how to produce and stand out in amorphous environment (whether trading or I-Banking) and they typically have a working knowledge of the law that surrounds their field.

Lawyers tend know their practice inside and out and have cashed in their gold stars for very, very good pay…just not the type of pay that is going to win that aforementioned auction.

Lawyers usually buy insurance when the dealer asks; the financier balks and tries to count the cards so they can find the right time to go all in. More Risk More Reward.

Credited Doctor in Boston, you are smarter. However, you chose to do something rewarding and good with your life. I agree our incentives are skewed, but you get the intangible reward of actually helping people (as opposed to screwing them).

That ibankers > lawyers is a simple reflection of the fact that lawyers, while smarter, are bigger p**sies. Ibankers have balls. And balls > smarts in business.

4:45--what about the NYC cab driver who works 12 hr shifts 6 days a week, probably "smarter" than you--look in the mirror please

im just in shock that doctors read this site

that is a better thread idea - exit opportunities for transactional lawyers to get into banking. what kind of banking work do they do? what is pay like? because lawyers have less business experience, are they the first to be fired when the market turns?

Lawyers are generally risk-averse, plain and simple. Not every kid with a B- GPA from a state school who foregoes grad school to be an i-banker will be a hedge fund millionaire.

I may not become a millionaire with my next bonus, but there's a lot less chance that I'll also be unceremoniously sent packing next year, too.

And, wah, about the doctors. You might have been smarter in undergrad and worked harder for a few years, but in the end, lawyers work harder for a longer period and don't usually have the social clout. I'll gladly trade.

OK Mr. "Pity the lawyers?"

You've posted 4 times. Enough! Learn how to use the mouse button properly.

im just in shock that doctors read this site

that is a better thread idea - exit opportunities for transactional lawyers to get into banking. what kind of banking work do they do? what is pay like? because lawyers have less business experience, are they the first to be fired when the market turns?

if you're going to work for someone else, here you go:

If money is your number one concern -- go work for an investment bank right after college and forget grad school.

If prestige is your number one concern -- go slave away in med school and become a doctor. the world over respects doctors.

If quality of life is your number one concern -- screw the professions altogether and pick a 9-5 that pays well enough to live decently.

If feeling self important and a false sense of superiority is your cup of tea -- then join the rest of us lawyers.

Are lawyers at the top of the status latter anywhere?

if you're going to work for someone else, here you go:

If money is your number one concern -- go work for an investment bank right after college and forget grad school.

If prestige is your number one concern -- go slave away in med school and become a doctor. the world over respects doctors.

If quality of life is your number one concern -- screw the professions altogether and pick a 9-5 that pays well enough to live decently.

If feeling self important and a false sense of superiority is your cup of tea -- then join the rest of us lawyers.

I think all those bidders need to come down to my school of hard knocks for some perspective. I think I'm the only one of my kind left who will bother to read posts like this - all my classmates stopped reading this blog long ago in disgust and anger, due, e.g., to the aloofness of partners like this. Partners feel like the doorman? I guess that makes me like the Chinese woman who goes through my garbage for cans. However, she likely isn't 6 figures in debt.

Sigh. I should have gone to med school. Any idea what it's like for doctors in Boston?

The last Loyola 2L out - for good!

Hey!

I have to agree with 4:30, the lack of perspective is astounding. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average take-home of the American worker in 2005 was $40,677. http://www.bls.gov/cew/ew05table1.txt. Meaning first year associates at top firms are making four times the national average. A partner bringing in 2.5 is making over 60 times the national average. Meanwhile, folks are losing their homes because of predatory lending practices, which I-Bankers monetized into structured products that they hawked out while at the same time their own firm wouldn't touch them (see today's NYT article re Goldman). And maybe those of you born with silver spoons up your asses never learned this one from your housekeeper, but wealth does not equate to virtue. Once upon a time, there was a measure of responsibility expected from those who made the big money. Apparently that responsibility has been replaced by excess and self-absorbtion.

The fact is that many law students couldn't get into the financial world. I go to UNC and know tons of kids going to T20 LS's but only 1 going to a BB Ibank...if you're at an ivy it's one thing, but coming from a good state school it's much easier to get into ls then finance

LOL, 4:45.

Also, I have actually come to not only enjoy, but look forward to, FRAT STUD's comments. There's an irreverence to them that tickles me. One note, however: it's funnier when you only put up one per post.

This is a great article, Lat. Thanks for the heads up.

Security yes, but insecurity also plays a major role. Lawyers tend to always need some type gold star to help convince themselves that they truly extraordinary. Often, whether one is in finance or law, the desire for a gold star starts off in High School ----GOT TO GET INTO AN IVY. Gold Star - Check.

From there, once said star is attained, the paths tend to split.

Financiers typically enter the work force and try to make their mark. The extraordinary ones make MD or Partner (depending on the Investment Bank) by the time they are 32 and are making millions. The very talented tend to work for a few years, go back to get their MBA and then jump back in the hunt.

Lawyers, well deep down, they are not so confident. That Ivy League gold star gets lonely fast. Have to Ace the LSAT…Have to get into a Top 5 law school…Have to make top 10%....Have to make Law Review….Have to get a summer position in a Top 10 firm….Have to Brag about my MPRE score….Have to ace the Bar…Need more gold stars…..Can’t everyone see how great I am, I have mastered the ‘Controlled and Structured Educational Environment.’

The best people in finance have an exceptional understanding of how to produce and stand out in amorphous environment (whether trading or I-Banking) and they typically have a working knowledge of the law that surrounds their field.

Lawyers tend know their practice inside and out and have cashed in their gold stars for very, very good pay…just not the type of pay that is going to win that aforementioned auction.

Lawyers usually buy insurance when the dealer asks; the financier balks and tries to count the cards so they can find the right time to go all in. More Risk More Reward.

I am a rock star and was just reading through this site -- I am also disturbed at how much hedge fund managers make. It used to be that us rock stars -- along with elite athletes and actors -- were at the top of the social pyramid. Now, my $20-30 million a year hardly compares to what the hedge fund elite makes, and I can barely afford a decent home chef. Still, I probably bag more pu$$y than those guys, so it isn't all bad.

"Financiers typically enter the work force and try to make their mark. The extraordinary ones make MD or Partner (depending on the Investment Bank) by the time they are 32 and are making millions. The very talented tend to work for a few years, go back to get their MBA and then jump back in the hunt."

LOL@"talented."

God, you lawyers are a nervous bunch. "OMG, MY POST DIDN'T SHOW UP IMMEDIATELY. I guess I'll just keep hitting 'Post'." You all have to say something and then make sure everyone has heard you. It sounds like esteem issues exist among out-of-the-loop partners and ATL posters. Well, you all get gold stars in my book.

Okay, seriously. For a bunch of grad students and top-level professionals, you folks sure have a hard time realizing that you just have to press post only once. It will post. You are not smarter than the technology.

Anybody have an opinion on whether and to what degree insecurity plays a role in choosing to become a lawyer?

Anybody?

I'm wondering if bankers earn more than lawyers because they are more comfortable with risk. Any thoughts on this hypothesis?

Now the Star-bellied Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-bellied Sneetches had none upon thars.
The stars weren't so big; they were really quite small.
You would think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.
But because they had stars, all the Star-bellied Sneetches
would brag, "We're the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches."

Can anyone tell me how many times I should press this "post" button when I want to comment on the ATL?

How did Lat miss this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c6/Seinfeld_s6e18.jpg

I think people have to tell themselves that I-bankers and hedge fund managers are "talented," because otherwise, or society really doesn't make any sense. They produce nothing and the provide no service of value--they simply manipulate money; if every single one of them disappered, not only would they not be missed, the world would be better off. And yet, we give them our greatest material rewards.

This is crux of why people around the world no longer respect the U.S.--we've become a nation of pompous parasites who contribute nothing to the world while insisting on our "talent" and our virtue, and expect other nations to model themselves after us. It's both laughable and pathetic.

According to a recent article in the NY Post, the average salary for all people turning in a tax return for the island of Manhattan is $147,000. Brooklyn is around $43,000 which was slightly above the national average. I'm a v10 1st year in Manhattan and I am only earning very slightly above the average. I can tell every time I go shopping or go out. $160 base sounds like a lot of money, until you live here. After taxes you take home $3600 and then pay your student loans, absurd rent for a crappy 1 BR and bills. Honestly, I live only a little better than I did in law school and I'm in the same apt.

I'm not asking for pity -- but you've got to admit that this isn't living in the lap of luxury the way it might be in Charlotte, Austin, Atlanta, etc.

The beautiful thing about getting one of those $Mill+ a year gigs is that when you're 30 or 35, you can quit the workforce, retire to some tropical island and live a nice, stressless life. '

As a lawyer, I fear that I'm stuck in a life of 6 figures, which isn't bad, but I hate the profession so much I just want to get out as fast as possible.

Does anyone else dream of this -- making a couple million by the age of 35 and just living humbly off the interest, doing what you love everyday, or doing whatever your heart desires?

4:49 is dead-on, quit bitching and move to Chicago. Same salary as NYC, lower COL, less hedge fund pr!cks around.... lawyers are near the top socially here, especially when you go hang out in Lincoln Park / Lakeview with all the newly graduated big ten sorrority girls...

5:25 needs to take a chill pill. i am not american and generally agree that americans are often pompous. But i wouldn't say they contribute nothing tothe world...

Sorry for the multiple post -- I didn't go to Ivy school or even new england prep school, and only made it through grade 10 at Pinner County Grammar School, so I am not good with clicking the mouse (especially after a fifth of stoli...)

I'll be heading to a bank as soon as the market turns around.

I regret falling into the trap of thinking being a lawyer is prestigious.

And to think, it is much easier to get into a good b-school than a good law school!

5:25 - you're right on.

5:28 - suck it up. If you're fond of Charlotte or Austin, why don't you go there? I make 50k in Manhattan. I live in a small studio that is likely half the size of your closet. Perhaps you should tamper down your living expenses and then 160k will feel like a lot.

"According to a recent article in the NY Post, the average salary for all people turning in a tax return for the island of Manhattan is $147,000."

This seems way too low considering that the PE/HF guys should this up significantly. Are you sure you don't mean a median of $147,000?

As someone who did a graduate business degree with a finance specialization, and did the "tier one" law school schtick, I've got to call out the smarmy lawyers who insist they are so much smarter than ibanking types...
Really? Given the fact that so many law school grads are completely math phobic (and proud of it, apparently) I would love to see even some of these allegedly top school law grads who majored in Comp. Lit. and never had a math class since high school trig try to figure out a valuation, or figure out how to derive the Black-Scholes pricing equation...the math that even undergrad finance majors in decent business schools have to take would no doubt frighten away most of these people who are bitching and moaning about how much "smarter" they are than Wall Street finance types because they are so sharp in their wordsmithing.

Not to mention what has already been stated here; how ungrateful can these people be. They can afford a Hamptons house, and they are bitching because they can't have one on beachfront property? But they work just as hard as the ibankers...please, take a number...many people work just as hard (and are just as smart) as these lawyers and ibankers and are struggling to make their first mortgages.

"Okay, seriously. For a bunch of grad students and top-level professionals, you folks sure have a hard time realizing that you just have to press post only once. It will post. You are not smarter than the technology."

Copying other's posts verbatim so it looks like they double-posted is the new game - like being "first" or a frat stud or an outraged rehasher of a summer associate story. Just copy someone's post and name (particularly if they are bitching about double-posting) and repost it. So much fun.

::waits for this post to show up again::

"According to a recent article in the NY Post, the average salary for all people turning in a tax return for the island of Manhattan is $147,000."

This seems way too low considering that the PE/HF guys should this up significantly. Are you sure you don't mean a median of $147,000?

Pity the Portsmouth lawyer! I hope there's an income freeze for bankers so we can catch up. Or at least get a government issued Taylor Pork Roll sandwich.

Average salary in Manhattan = most meaningless statistic of the day. I concur with 5:37 - median would be better. When some jerks are making $35 million, that'll skew any 'average' regarding a population under a few million.

I love it when I-Bankers and hedgefund a-holes look down there noses at lawyers. First off, they cant so much as take a p!ss without having a lawyer holding their d!ck. Second, they think they're such hot sh!t until they get wrapped up in an SEC investigation or indicted for 10(b)(5), then you bet they love their lawyers. Lawyers might make less than bankers, but at least we can put them in prison.

Why is this a story?

Live Off Savings you are dead on -- but of course, I am a 5th year living in a smaller market making the same NYC salary + bonus, live in a 5000+ sf home, drive a Quattroporte, belong to a country club and still save significant $$, so that actually is a reality for me in my current job, which I love and at which I work far fewer hours than most of my peers. The posters above are right -- you clearly must love NYC enough to be living there despite the shitty pay, so either stop bitching or just be happy you are living where you want to.

I have accepted the fact that when I leave work, I have only 5 wine bars to choose from instead of 45, but that was a sacrifice that I was willing to make.

"The income difference is exponential" - 4:35

Clear example of why you shouldn't use terms you don't know... Exponential defines growth rate, so you could say that Law vs. I-Banking salary potential varies exponentially, as those would be defining growth. But you were referring to instantaneous comparisons, in which case, all you needed to say was "it's like x times what mine is." Please stop using words you don't know how to use to boost your letter count and/or your perceived intellect.
Thank you and good day.

Jesus 5:43, chill out. It's just a damned blog post, this isn't for the New Yorker. And your showing off your math skill is nothing more than a cheap parlor trick performed to shore up your possibly over-inflated ego.

The article seems exactly right about NYC. Certainly through the 1980s the expectation was still that successful lawyers and doctors would live in the fanciest places (usually with a lawyer as president of the coop board), belong to the fanciest country clubs (usually with a lawyer as president of the club) and send their kids to the fanciest schools (usually with a lawyer as head of the trustees). It started changing longer ago than the article suggests and is completely changed now. Lawyers are definitely stuck on the outside looking in if they were hoping to have economic status in NYC. And doctors? Per a recent WSJ article, thanks to HMOs and other economic pressures on doctors, in many regions doctors are now routinely out-earned by dentists.

The tradeoff with being a hedge fun hotshot, it seems, is having no time to spend with your family. The manager who "won" the bid wasn't actually there; it was his wife who raised the paddle. Smart money says that he was at work while she was in the Hamptons buffing the pool boy.

"5:25 needs to take a chill pill. i am not american and generally agree that americans are often pompous. But i wouldn't say they contribute nothing tothe world..."

So?

Additionally, no one says "take a chill pill" anymore. But thanks for posting from 1992.

5:47 - Would you blast someone for using "tort" or another legal term incorrectly, if they weren't a lawyer but were inferring that they had legal knowledge? What's the difference? And don't go into this "grammatical / spelling" type of argument either. He didn't spell exponential wrong, he used it wrong. And he used it to sound smart, or he's just used that terminology for some time, and either way, needs corrected. Maybe it is true, as someone else posted, that most lawyers are completely math-phobic...

I am an orthodontist and a patient of mine was showing me this blog while I was fitting her for a retainer. I too feel like I am out-earning my attorney friends, and I was recently elected as the president of my coop board, the president of my country club and as a trustee of my son's very exclusive private school. Oh, and I just bought a house out in the East End. On the good side.

5:25: There is a huge difference between HF and PE in terms of contribution to society. HF just shuffles money around and does not produce anything; PE buys companies and make them more efficient and valuable, and their profits are taken as a percentage of the value created.

5:56,
I actually think the hedge fund folks work fewer hours than lawyers. Afterall, they don't have a motivation to stay in the office after their work is done.

I know they work hard, but there is less pressure for face-time with hedge funds. The stress from 9:30-4 is almost unbearable, but I think lawyers are actually the ones with the worse schedule.

5:56 wrote "The tradeoff with being a hedge fun hotshot, it seems, is having no time to spend with your family. The manager who "won" the bid wasn't actually there; it was his wife who raised the paddle. Smart money says that he was at work while she was in the Hamptons buffing the pool boy."

I would agree that the wife is in the hamptons buffing the pool boy, but I would also bet some of my measley 160K that the hedge fund manager is not "working" at that hour, but knee deep in cocaine and high priced hookers....

Look, I'm not arguing that lawyers are math-phobic, or bad managers. But it's just petty to call someone out on misusage or a typo when they're shooting out a quick post to a blog. And when someone does make an error, it's tacky to use that oppurtunity to show off your own talents at the expense of others. Once upon a time a top tier lawyer was measured by his or her sense of class and taste, rather than just net worth. It's a shame that's no longer the case.

Everywhere on ATL, comments are dying. Just this evening, 22 comments in this very thread were mercilessly culled. You can save the comments. Just send $0.75 a day to United Comments Fund. With a little of your help, we can save the comments.

5th year drives a Quattroporte? What's a Quattroporte? Is that like a rag-top Mini Cooper?

Frankly, I think the clear winners in this pissing contest are the journalists. What else but a facetious article could possibly cause so many otherwise intelligent, hard-working professionals to gnash their teeth? Ms. Chen deserves both a slap on the back and a slap to the face for writing such a manipulative, pointless piece.

Also, from what I've seen, the more senior and accomplished lawyers and business folk tend to acknowledge and respect their dependancy on one another. Not so much for their more junior counterparts. Something to think about, I guess.

There's plenty of lawyers doing good things for society, they're just not getting paid very much to do it.

I was fitting a valued customer of mine for a new pair of shoes at the New Market Mall when she showed me this website.

You may love living in New York, but between my job and where I live, I can afford a Plymouthduster and all the private chef's meals that I want, which is a good thing since my wife does not cook or clean.

In fact, just the other day my wife, who stays home and shops (and I think boffs the neighbor Marcy D'Arcy), outbid a partner at a major firm in town at the annual Polk HS Panthers auction to have Charlie Trotter come and fix us a dinner.

Bottom line is that I took the risks when it mattered and you stayed in school.

Actually, Exponential is a San Antonio, Texas based independent record label launched in 2000 by Ernest Gonzales (aka Theory of Everything). The label is quickly developing a roster of talented DJs and producers and is emerging as one of the innovative labels to look out for.

A Quattroporte is a Mazerati sedan.

at 5:56 -- how can you say nobody says "take a chill pill" anymore when I just said it? Obviously, at least someone still says "take a chill pill," namely me.

If the point of your post was that I am not cool or am using outdated terminology, you could be right. But outdated terminology does not detract from the point of my post. Be an individual my friend and stand out. Don't follow the herd and remain a sheep. And you wonder why ibankers and the like are trumping lawyers....

The funny thing is that lawyers, particularly BigLaw lawyers, were the primary enablers of the obscene wealthy. If only the lawyers/lobbyists didn't work so hard so push down marginal tax rates, capital gains taxes, and financial market restrictions...they might have had a shot at a beach place in the Hamptons then!

People don't get the difference between prestige and salary. It's not prestigious to make $1M/yr. It's not prestigious to make $160k/yr. I hate to make it all Chris Rock, but it's being *wealthy*, not being *rich*, that makes you prestigious. Being rich doesn't get your kid into Harvard nearly so well as being wealthy does.

anyone that compains about *only* making 2.5 mil a year needs to be punched in the face.

7:33 good point.

It's not like lawyers haven't enabled the accumulation of these outrageous sums of money. Take for example the recent IPO of Blackstone, the private equity firm. It relied on the advice of Simpson Thatcher, which endorsed a tax structure that allowed Blackstone to claim profit as a capital gain, rather than real income, thus reducing Blackstone's effective tax rate. Do you know how many of hundreds of millions of dollars that little trick saved Blackstone and its executives??

So to all the lawyers out there who go to work everyday trying to save your corporate clients a few extra dollars, don't bitch about the fact that you're "underpaid."

You lose all credibility when you voluntarily participate in a system, and then sharply criticize it when you realize you're not its biggest beneficiary.

Why aren't we talking about Skadden's award winning poet/first yr associate Spencer Short? Spencer write that novel on law firm life and get back to being a poet, quick!

Cry me a fucking river.

7:38 good point.

Got to love people complaing about how hard they work while posting on a tabloid law blog. You know while working so hard.

THIS IS WHY ALL SMART LAWYERS ARE IN VIOXX LAW! WE ARE THE ONES WHO GET PAAAAID

7:23,

Did your mother drink diesel fuel when she was pregnant? Marginal tax rates are raised and lowered regardless of how you earn your living, and partners and hedgies both are in the same one. So what on Al Gore's super-green earth are you talking about?

LOL@"how can you say nobody says "take a chill pill" anymore when I just said it? Obviously, at least someone still says "take a chill pill," namely me."

Exactly--namely you, and you alone: the rest of us moved on to hip new slang like "bust a move" and "getting jiggy with it" sometime around "Y2K." Won't you join us in the new millenium?

Vivia Chen is a LOSER in my book, simply based on the fact that she has a coat made of DEAD ANIMALS.

I'm sorry, I am a PETA person and I am offended that an "educated" and "successful" person would be so stupid as to wear fur.

Vivia, if I saw you on the street, I would most certainly throw red paint all over you.

these comments are absolutely hilarious to read. i am so fucking entertained. my only point to add is that people in finance in nyc present the single most compelling reason our tax system should be massively more redistributive than it currently is.

Vivia Chen is a LOSER in my book, simply based on the fact that she has a coat made of DEAD ANIMALS.

I'm sorry, I am a PETA person and I am offended that an "educated" and "successful" person would be so stupid as to wear fur.

Vivia, if I saw you on the street, I would most certainly throw red paint all over you.

**while using a car that runs on dead animals**

Skimming over some of these posts is hilarious. So very, very lame. Oooh, they make $XXX and they make $XXX... Wow. Complete lack of any grasp of how even simple stats work. "Uh, oh, uh, manhattan's avg is XXX and I only make a bit above that as a first year, ugh, uh, oh..." Laughable. Ha-ha-ha. Ever consider median is across the age spectrum? All the doctor/banker talk is laughable too. A typical MD makes a "touch" more than the typical biglaw partner at a top-20 firm. The expected income (giving probability of layoff etc) is probably even. Hedge fund discussion is even funnier. Anyone think how much more difficult it is to land a hedge fund job and actually keep it? Anyone? Anyone? No? I didn't think so. This whole post is good for a laugh, but the blind leading the blind leads to people walking off cliffs.

A notable exception to the "Special Bonus" seems to be Morrison & Foerster - New York. Has anyone heard if they plan to offer this bonus?

Recently, I was asked by a friend of mine (who is at a top 5 law school) what I thought of the law firms with which I work. I do have some views, but I also wanted to do some internet research and ran into the Morrison & Foerster "Special Bonus" question. Interesting ... I had initially thought about recommending the firm, but this throws a wrench into that plan.

All that said, I'm not convinced that my internet research is exhaustive enough to figure out if Morrison & Foerster pays fairly and values its employees as much as other firms do. While not the only criteria for picking a law firm, pay is certainly important.

Can someone let me know if Morrison & Foerster has announced the "Special Bonus"? If not, what do others think of this?

Guys in finance are pussies. They brown nose their way to the top and stab their friends in the back on the way up...lawyers on the other hand are straight up about being pricks, and will stab you in the chest if you f@ck with them

I think the point that lawyers are generally math-tarded (and some seem to be proud of this) shows a desire to not step out of their comfort zone. Finance, especially buy side jobs like PE and hedge funds, requires constant exploration of new areas. Do lawyers constantly constantly stick their necks out and take the risk of jumping into a relative unknown?

Live Off Savings, you nailed it. I'm considering foregoing the firm job after law school for i-banking. I don't think I would like either types of work, but if I could save $2M I could live very happily off the interest for the rest of my life (back home in Texas).

I just wish there were more resources for figuring out how to bag these jobs. I don't even have a basic concept of the salary figures involved. How many years would it take?

I don't give a crap about fancy restaurants. I just want to retire at 33 and spend the rest of my life doing crossword puzzles.

Any advice?

Best line ever!

"Lawyers might make less than bankers, but at least we can put them in prison."

"I'm considering foregoing the firm job after law school for i-banking. I don't think I would like either types of work..... but if I could save $2M I could live very happily off the interest for the rest of my life (back home in Texas).

"I just wish there were more resources for figuring out how to bag these jobs.

"I just want to retire at 33 and spend the rest of my life doing crowss-word puzzles.

"Any advice?"

This entire post is so pathetically unrealistic one does not know where to begin.

Trust me: Not going to happen.h

A Quattroporte is an $80,000 Maserati. it's purty and makes nice noises.

NYU 1L who wants a job in finance -

The best advice is to do as well as you can first year and snag a summer associate position at a law firm that typically acts as counsel to large banks and finance companies (S&C is Goldman's go-to law firm, Simpson represents Blackstone, ect.)

Having some finance credentials won't hurt either. Passing round one of the CFA exam as a 2L would get you noticed (it's an intense test though). Do everything you can to take some finance and accounting classes at the business school too.

You should also start reading the Journal regularly (the business parts of it, not headlines and editorials). If nothing else, it'll get you conversant in the language of business and finance.

Other than that, you just have to make sure you apply. Finance companies aren't going to seek you out or seriously recruit associates at the law school, so you'll have to do a lot more leg work.

Kind of funny that all the catering to the law students on all these lame topics has resulted in ATL comments turning into xoxo.

NYU 1L - you should also keep in mind that banking is more intense than law and the compensation structure is much more merit based (it's definitely not a lockstep system based solely on seniority). If you're not an extremely driven and ambitious person, you're probably not going to thrive in that environment.

5:22 - that is the most insightful comment I have read yet on this topic.

The people on this board (and the petulent NY lawyers in general) should go read some books from their childhood and readjust their outlook on life.

this "hedge fund managers should be rewarded b/c they take more risk" is a bunch of crap. they take 2% of assets of the fund and 20% of profits. if the fund doesn't match its high water mark they liquidate. most of them put relatively little of their own money at stake, other than "carried" interests. they are living high off the hog on other people's money but they all think they are god's gift to humanity b/c their spending keeps the economy humming.

now don't get me wrong, they played the game the american way and made off with a pile of dough. we lawyers are their servants. this is the business we've chosen.

DEAR GREEDY PARTNERS WHO FEEL LIKE ALSO-RANS:

Imagine working harder than you do, and being expected to jump and roll-over at any hour of any day on command, while being paid approximately TEN TIMES less than you are paid while having the same schooling and lots of loans to pay off. We are your associates. And due to these facts, we work as damn little as we can, we don't do a great job, we don't respect you, we don't really care too much about how your deals and cases turn out, etc. etc. Note that there are some partners earning only a couple times more than us, at certain firms that nonetheless pay market rates. We respect them infinitely more. We work infinitely harder for them. We are infinitely more dedicated to their clients. Etc.

The original article's opening scene (private school parent's auction) unwittingly points out another unfortunate truth of modern America, particularly of the young upper middle class, and to a lesser extent, the young newly rich-- the declining commitment to charitable giving, and the related reluctance to donate unless there is some sort of personal benefit (in the case of the auction, helping one's own child's school, improving the admissions chances of the student's siblings, etc.).

Essentially nobody tithes (ten percent of gross salary to charity), and very few more give the "modern tithe" (ten percent of net income). In fact, most professionals under 40 probably do not even give 2 percent of their take-home pay to charity, and when people do donate now, studies have shown it is largely with gifts that have some element of self-interest (e.g., auction at kids' school, donation to college alma mater in the hopes of helping children's admission or gaining preferential access to sporting event tickets, art museums that include free membership and/or exclusive cocktail parties with donation, etc.)

During this holiday season, when you get your bonus check and celebrate with bottle service at Marquee and try to act like a finance type, maybe buy one fewer bottle of Grey Goose and give that extra 400 to charity.

11:24. Ever heard of something called taxes? Note the amount of work these people do, the sacrifices they make in their personal lives, and the investment risk they took on at the beginning of their careers. Add on ludicrous taxes at the junior level (205K total comp turning into something under $130K) and I can understand why charitable giving is low. Poor people lazying themselves away does not inspire giving. I don't hand out charity anymore. I only feel sorry for those who have succumbed to something unfortunate -- an illness for example. I understand social birth is a big factor, but I came from a poor family and it's no excuse. Intelligence is another big factor, but having pity for any causal factor would have us let murderers go free...hell, it's their mental impulse that made them do it! I think if a more reasonable tax system were in place, you would get more giving. I think the uber-rich ought to be taxed like hell on holdings/assets, but the current system makes the new rich bear the burdens.

The fact that you came from poor birth and were still able to overcome that social standing is completely irrelevant in assessing whether "poor people lazying themselves away" have an "excuse." Such a single-minded approach to the problem discounts myriad other factors that play a role. And what kind of absurd strawman are you setting up with the "having pity for any causal factor would have us let murderers go free" bullshit? Are you fucking joking? Are you seriously suggesting that we should view poverty and our treatment of the poor in the same way we treat murderers? Why on earth would you do that? Sounds like you've succeeded in convincing yourself that it's not totally fucked up for one person to make as much money as you or big-law partners do. I understand it's "what the market will bear" and that lawyers aren't to blame for that, but don't for a second try to act like it's not totally screwed up and that you "deserve" in any grand scheme the amount of wealth you have. Prick.

Richie, did you read half of what I said? The tax system itself constitutes plenty of "charity". I pay my taxes. But it is a substitute and NOT a complement to charitable givings for a person in my position. As for just deserts, it is entirely relevant that I come from a modest background. I do deserve the payoff from the hard work and financial risk taken. Poverty is addressed by government policy, good or bad. What I said in my post was that taxes take plenty. The fact that some people continue to suffer is in large part due to socialization away from responsibility and towards laziness. Ever conduct a survey on how many welfare recipients have cable tv? How many buy brand name shoes? Do you seriously believe there is no self-separation between those that climb out of poverty and those that rely on charity. Once the government/society has chosen the track it has (to tax the hell out of new wealth) then the repercusions I describe are actually quite rational. Your anger towards me suggests a complete lack of understanding of what I wrote, economics, social theory or all of the above. You glossed over my tax system comment entirely. You, sir, are a prick.

11:52, I understand your frustration, but you are simply wrong.

First, as many on this Board know (including those who knew me as Eagle Scout from the old Greedy Associates Boards), I am a BigLaw veteran, and thus part of the BigLaw "these people" you refer to, and I suspect I have made more sacrifices than you ever have, but somehow I still find enough money and compassion and thankfulness to donate money, as well as time, to numerous charities.

Second, you refer to my supposed ignorance of "taxes", but my post repeatedly refers to "net income" and "take-home" pay. I am merely suggesting that people give 1 or 2 percent of their actual take-home paycheck, not their gross income. For the 205k gross comp associate in your hypothetical, that is just fifty to one hundred dollars from each bi-monthly paycheck, 1000-2000 for the year. Heck, even one-half of one percent of your take-home salary would be great, which would be that one bottle of Grey Goose served via bottle service, if you include tip, etc.

Finally, you suggest that most charity is simply to support lazy poor people, but you admit that some (such as sick people) "deserve" charity, just not from you. If you want a good charity to donate to, try Project Sunshine. They provide arts and crafts and other fun activities for chronically ill children in pediatric hospitals, as well as services for the children's families. Or perhaps the March of Dimes, which focuses on birth defects. Or, even give to one of the "self-interested" charities, such as your undergrad or college alma mater, or even one of the city's museums or other cultural institutions (orchestra, opera, etc) - if you give enough, you get good tickets and invited to cool parties. Or even Gay Men's Health Crisis, which provides free and reduced price STD testing and related services for men and women in this city, and allows all those hot struggling artists and actresses to stay clean and alive.

"Ever conduct a survey on how many welfare recipients have cable tv? How many buy brand name shoes?"

Why don't you do an informal poll at your local welfare office, jackass? I work with many people on welfare and they can't even afford diapers for their children. Please STFU.

complaints about Big Law comp are kind of ridiculous. Does Keith Richards' guitar tuneup guy complain that he doesn't get paid like Keith? After all, he's a really good guitar player. I still cannot believe that I get paid as much as I do. I feel like I won the lottery some days (like when a bonus check hits). Anyone here ever had a minimum wage job or maybe pull an all nighter as a paralegal? Instead of looking at how much more the 0.5% above you makes, maybe you should contemplate the other 99% below you.

I’m not sure that commitment to charitable giving is actually declining among young professionals or that the giving that does take place is more self serving then it was in the past. The overwhelming amount of charitable giving in the U.S. has always come from people who were either extremely wealthy or old/dead. When middle and upper middle class people tithe, it’s usually to their church/synagogue and 95% goes to pay the mortgage on the building and the salary and living expenses of the pastor/priest/rabbi.

Most biglaw associates don’t give a substantial portion of their salary to charity because (a) they already give away 40% of their salary to the government in taxes; (b) they spend a substantial part of their after tax income on student loans; (c) non-homeowners need to save an outrageous amount of cash to be able to buy a first home (a 1 BR in NYC costs $750K, you need to put 20-25% down and most co-op board require you to have an additional 2 years of mortgage and maintenance payments in the bank, which means you need a minimum of $280K in cash sitting in the bank. If you’re trying to pay off your student loans too, this will probably take you 6 to 7 years, and that’s only if you stick it out to become a sixth or seventh year associate at a large firm); (e) most of us already do pro-bono work, which everyone inevitably ends up doing late at night and on weekends, tacking it on to their already absurd workload; and (e) working as a lawyer at a big law firm is an incredibly miserable and stressful job and none of us are doing it so that we have extra cash to give away.

I’m not saying that lawyers shouldn’t give, but it’s not like associates are incredibly greedy for not giving away more of their unfortunately hard earned money.

They cannot afford diapers because they are blowing money on water melons, fried chicken, Nike shoes and CRACK--the white man's poison.

They cannot afford diapers because they are blowing money on water melons, fried chicken, Nike shoes and CRACK--the white man's poison.

They cannot afford diapers because they are blowing money on water melons, fried chicken, Nike shoes and CRACK--the white man's poison.

A typical MD makes a "touch" more than the typical biglaw partner at a top-20 firm. The expected income (giving probability of layoff etc) is probably even.

Lol. The average physician (internal medicine) makes 159k a year, less than a 1st year biglaw associate.

http://secure.salary.com/jobvaluationreport/docs/jobvaluationreport/jobsellhtmls/Physician-Internal-Medicine-salary-job-description.html

Even your "average" cardiothoracic surgeon (a far more elite profession than a biglaw partner) makes $422k a year. http://secure.salary.com/jobvaluationreport/docs/jobvaluationreport/jobsellhtmls/Surgeon-Cardiothoracic-salary-job-description.html

That's not even close to a biglaw equity partner, let alone a T20 biglaw partner. It's closer to a senior associate w/ bonus, or a service partner.

Not to mention there are far fewer CT surgeons in the world than biglaw partners. Hell, there are probably more biglaw partners in NYC than CT surgeons in the entire world.

IBankers DOWN to $190K!

why does every obnoxious buttmunch feel the need to challenge any use of an average by asking if you really meant a mean?

November 20, 2007 -- Moneybag Manhattanites are set to earn an average salary of $147,000 this year - 16.7 percent more than in 2006, new labor statistics show.
Boosted by Wall Street bonanzas, residents' average weekly paychecks for the first quarter of this year soared to $2,821, the highest in the country.

But as for the rest of the city, fuhgeddaboutit.

Queens was the only outer borough to even come close to the national averages, and it still fell short.

While US workers earned an average of roughly $855 a week, or about $45,000 a year, residents in Queens pulled in $831, or just over $43,000 yearly.

Bronx residents followed with an average weekly salary of $788. Brooklynites typically raked in about $742, and Staten Islanders earned $733.

Those numbers - based on first-quarter figures for this year - did represent increases over the same time period last year, but they were much smaller than Manhattan's boost.

Among the outer boroughs, for example, the highest jump, in The Bronx, represented barely more than 5 percent. That just matched the national average.

Clearly tipping the money scales in Manhattan's favor was the Financial District, where workers can net multimillion-dollar bonuses in good times - and bad.

The average weekly paycheck for a Manhattan financial worker hit a staggering $10,156, for an annual salary of $528,000.

That's nearly a 25 percent increase over last year, according to the figures from the US Department of Labor's Bureau of Statistics.

And it's nearly four times what Manhattan residents in the information industry earn: $2,586.

The numbers only drop from there for other workers.

For example, Manhattan residents in the hospitality industry, such as hotel workers, net an average $769 a week.

Coming in second to Manhattan in terms of wages nationally was Fairfield, Conn., where residents pulled in average weekly paychecks of $1,979.

In the metro area, helping to round out the top 10 counties were Somerset and Hudson, both in New Jersey.

Overall, New York state ranked first nationally in terms of wage increases, with an 11.8 percent jump. Its residents earned an average $1,397 a week.

Those living in Washington, DC, top that at $1,428 a week.

The lowest paid in the nation reside in Montana ($600).

5:57--guess what? You're president of your coop and whatever, but you're a fucking orthodontist. Well done. You have easier hours than we do, but you spend your life fitting braces on pimply teenages. Talk about brainless, monotonous job.

4:37: Yeah, providing a needed service to somebody must really suck.

5:23--I'm not saying it's not a needed service (though query whether straight teeth is a necessity--oh, wait, I live in West Hollywood, yeah, it's a necessity) to be an orthodontist.

But it's hardly intellectually stimulating or thoughtful.

One point that has been raised here is the fact that lawyers actually play a fairly substantial role in helping the finance people make these absurd amounts of money. This is especially true when it comes to deal structuring.

People tend to focus on the menial tasks of lawyers like checking for missing commas or typos. But they ignore the really crucial parts that lawyers play. The PE funds are formed by lawyers (who devise the structures and web of holdings that allow the funds to gain the myriad exemptions, esp on tax). Same when it comes to acquisitions of target companies in more peculiar situations. Same when it comes to lawyers thinking of important provisions to put into certain quirky agreements, that would later greatly protect the client.

Unfortunately for lawyers, we charge by the hour. So, a brilliant partner may take 30 minutes to devise a superb structure that would allow the PE firm to form a new fund or acquire a target in a peculiar situation. The partner will charge $500 for this service, even though the client stands to save perhaps a few billion dollars in taxes.

This represents an inaccurate valuation of the respective roles. The top law firms should thus find a way of greatly increasing the success fee. The main problem that will be faced here is that excellent legal advice cannot clearly and immediately be seen by non-lawyers. If I am drafting your contract or structuring your deal, the greatness of my work cannot be easily seen until and unless you get sued or prosecuted - only then will you fully appreciate how brilliant I have been in protecting you. If you never get sued or prosecuted, I am just like any other lawyer to you.

5:02 PM - Yes, this is exactly the issue. How do firms get a largere piece of the pie? I have an in-law who works for a small firm that is apparently not just a law firm but also participates in the equity part of the deal, whether it concerns acquisitions, funding or what have you. The amount of money they make is obscene - far more than what biglaw partners make.

I suppose it's easier to do this when you're talking about representing PE or something like that, as opposed to representing investment banks. In any case, it does seem at some point the law firms need to think of some way to get paid that goes beyond billables.

I know some arrangements get fixed amounts per year based on doing X number of deals per year. That is a start but not sure if that takes you much beyond the billables threshold.

Maybe there could be some sense of requiring payment of a periodic premium just for the mere retaining the firm as counsel.

…a question to ponder: is it wrong to openly cheer on the impending recession if you’re thoroughly vested in a countercyclical area of the law (i.e. bankruptcy, debt restructuring)?

seems like one man's curse is another man's blessing...