That place sucks anyway.

Corporate isn't a subset of real estate/securitization -- but it might be the other way around...if so, there may be some corporate partners who might not want to have the albatross of CWT's securitization practice hung around their necks right now.

try reading this: http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=131521

Shuflle?

I CAUGHT YOUR TYPO SEN!!!! YOU SPELLED IT "SHUFLLE"

Try harder pls. Tyia

ROBERT DOWNEY JUNIOR IN BLACK FACE... THAT IS NEWS!

I think Lat needs to hire a second Alabama student to edit all of Sharon's posts for grammatical mistakes. By the way, great source on this one. Someone who no longer works at CWT. Brilliant. Give us something real please.

Adjusting groups is NOT news for a legal tabloid... you are OVER posting.. you had me at Vaccine Post w/ Retards

FACT: CWT is best law firm in NYC.

FACT: All news related to CWT is relevant.

why does everyone always jump all over guest posters?

Wow! This is more boring that we'd originally suspected!

What's with the hatin' on the newest author, though? I think she's great. Merck's problem was that he'd throw stones from his glass house. SEN isn't doing that... give her a break

I like the partner who told the associate to mind his own business. Nice place. Associate is legitimately worried about his career and partner dismissed him like a worthless weak rag doll.

I realize that Friday can be slow. But come on. Everyone out here who doesn't work at Cadwalader will agree that this is not a news-worthy event.

With all this posting CWT should issue a no-news to report press release denying rumors of ATL of news.

Impeachment

Lewinsky

WhiteWater

Waco Slaughter

Paula Jones

Welfare "Reform"

Don't Ask Don't Tell

Healthcare Task Force

Nannygate

Travelgate

"Talking" to Eleanor Roosevelt Through a Psychic

Perjury

Failure to Hunt Osama

Republican Revolution

George W. Bush

Iraq War

And you're taking the second comment at face value, rather than assuming its flame without verification? Good journalistic chops!

A comment on a blog is not "confirmation" of anything. Also, the proposed restructuring at CWT is not a secret. The firm has talked about it publicly.

http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=131521

I think it's a just a slow day -- at ATL, that is. You call reporting on "something" going on some form of news? And, you speculate that, alternatively, it must just be a slow Friday? Geez.

Yeah, I'd give it all up for the ability to pay MORE in taxes. Fifty grand plus in tax this year and no stimulus package check because I'm over the income cap isn't enough.

Don't kid yourself. The "rich" that Obama and Hillary are saying they're going to raise taxes on includes...(drumroll please)...YOU.

Someone needs to out that partner as a half-wit. if something is happening at the firm that is any more significant than a given partner's earnings for the year, then it's of interest to an associate. He was minding his business when he asked about what was going on. maybe that's why cwt is cwt--the have moron partners like the one above.

Why is everyone so tough on SEN? The people that are seriously p*ssed about her blogging need to look in the mirror and evaluate their lives.

She's doing fine...

FACT: Obama will be lower taxes (for the unemployed commentators and bar failures and bloggers on this board).

FACT: The rest of you SHOULD pay higher taxes.

FACT: 12:51 Left out Ruby Ridge, Somalia, Sudan, Justice Ginsberg, and Vince Foster.

FACT: The serial comma, of Oxford Comma, is best comma.

12:51 -

I am guessing your parents used the ferber method when you were a baby. And by baby, I mean they still use it. The only thing worse than your desparate plea for attention is that 1:02 actually took the bait. I would use 4 spaces between every sentence next time, then people will really notice you...clown.

Managing partner of another NYC firm, on being asked about CWT, described the place as " a rat's nest."

He was right.

FACT: we already pay higher taxes than they do.

FACT: a system that treats those earning ~$200K and those earning > $1 million a year as the same is NOT progressive.

Pablo says 1:02 is a homosexical.

Pablo says it's going to snow soon.

Layoffs are not a "scandal." It is the free market. The NYT may like your "investigative reports" based purely on innuendo and anonymous comments on a blog.

1:02 -

FACT: you are an idiot

Your beautiful statement about who "SHOULD" pay higher taxes is ridiculous. Contrary to popular view, the "rich" are not "rigging" the tax system"...the top 3.8% of income earners pay of income earners pay 56% of federal income taxes, and the top 50% of income earners pay 96% of federal income taxes. Take your warped, John-Edwards class welfare and go cry somewhere else. Until then, stop boosting your self esteem by making bs claims of who should pay for worthless government programs.

"Layoffs are not a "scandal." It is the free market."

You are quite stupid.

People at my high school used to take their warped, John-Edwards class welfare and go cry somewhere else all the time. It was no big deal.

1:02 -

FACT: you are an idiot

Your beautiful statement about who "SHOULD" pay higher taxes is ridiculous. Contrary to popular view, the "rich" are not "rigging" the tax system...the top 3.8% of income earners pay 56% of federal income taxes, and the top 50% of income earners pay 96% of federal income taxes. Take your warped, John-Edwards class welfare and go cry somewhere else. Until then, stop boosting your self esteem by making bs claims of who should pay for worthless government programs.

* corrections noted

CWT should dequitize every partner. That way, their PPP would be INFINITE.

Why won't Hillary release her tax returns?

1:21

You're an a**hole. On this website, layoffs (especially stealth) most certainly are a scandal.

1:29 -- You are incorrect.

PPP is defined as PROFIT divided by number of partners.

FACT: Any number divided by ZERO is not infinity. It is not a real number.

hey morons:

http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=131521

1:12,
Are you disparaging the Ferber method? How dare you! Is that you, Spock?

Fact: Layoffs are not scandals.

Fact: You cannot, in a principled manner, decry free market regulation, higher taxes AND layoffs.

Fact: If attrition/suicide rates were higher layoffs would not be necessary.

MILBANK AND CWT ARE MERGING!!!!

FINKLE IS EINHORN!!!

All hail the Oxford Comma!

FACT: Laces out Dan!

As long as unconfirmed comments from anonymous sources qualify as "news" today, I might as well take a stab at it:

Cadwalader is raising the base to 190. That's what all the fuss is about. You heard it here first. Sharon, please add this as "Update #3."

CADWALADER PPP TO NULL SET!!!!

is there any reasong to believe that comment prompting the second update from a supposed CWT associate is genuine? why would a partner respond to an "is everything ok" inquiry with a nasty "mind your own business" when he could just say "yes"

"What's with the hatin' on the newest author, though? I think she's great. Merck's problem was that he'd throw stones from his glass house. SEN isn't doing that... give her a break"

Didn't she start "I judge you when you use poor grammar" and then post on a blog with several typos and bad grammar?

This is what happens when you post articles based on unsubstantiated Web site comments:

http://thestrippodcast.blogspot.com/2008/03/correction-of-breathtaking-proportions.html

HMMM --- sounds like real journalism to me -- A tip from someone in the Cadwalader office today---why shouldn't SEN believe it. Would anyone posting a comment on ATL be dishonest?

CADWALADER WICKERSHAM & TAFT
Corporate and finance tie-up in the pipeline

Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft is considering plans to radically restructure two of its core groups, corporate and finance, as the firm continues to battle the effects of the collapse of its structured finance and capital markets practice.

The plans, which have still to be agreed, coincide with an expansion of the firm's senior leadership and the introduction of a new standalone role of firmwide chairman, as first reported by The Lawyer (27 February).

Cadwalader is examining proposals to merge part or all of its corporate and finance groups, which are currently headed by Louis Bevilacqua and Chris White respectively.

Bevilacqua confirmed that Cadwalader is examining plans to restructure the two groups. "We're looking at the concept of being better focused on our clients' needs if we merge the groups to create a unified practice practically and formally," Bevilacqua says. "But this is a work in progress."

Cadwalader managing partner Bob Link echoes Bevilacqua, saying: "The merger hasn't happened yet. If it enhances the platform for our clients, we'll go through with it."

Cadwalader believes a merged corporate and finance group could provide a platform for its nascent private equity group, which was launched earlier this month when it hired former Latham & Watkins global private equity co-head Ron Hopkinson (www.thelawyer.com, 7 February).

It is considering whether the new private equity group could act as a natural bridge between M&A, corporate governance and financing.

"This is about synergy for clients," says executive board member Greg Markel. "As private equity develops the finance component is huge. This move isn't tied into the downturn in our point of view. It's not a restructuring but a great opportunity to build in private equity."

Outside Cadwalader, news of the group overhaul was received differently. One New York recruiter familiar with Cadwalader argues that the move says more about the failure of the firm's core markets than opportunities on which it is hoping to capitalise.

"Chris White had a $30m-$40m [£15m-£20m] business, but now it's down significantly," says the recruiter. "That business has just gone."

The discussions are taking place against a backdrop of significant change at Cadwalader. Last month the firm was forced to lay off 35 associates from its core real estate-related structured finance and capital markets practice following the downturn in the credit market.

And as reported last week (25 February), Cadwalader has also overhauled its top management, with White appointed as firmwide chairman. The new role, effective from 1 March, will result in an expansion of Cadwalader's management function, with two positions, chairman and managing partner, replacing the previous sole managing partner role.

Link will continue in his role as managing partner, but will focus primarily on operational matters, while White is expected to focus on strategy.

Link has faced criticism in some quarters as the public face of Cadwalader's bet on real estate-related structured finance. One former partner, however, argues that it would be unfair to lay the blame for Cadwalader's current woes directly at the feet of Link.

"I've heard that Bob's under pressure for not having hedged the practice enough, but it's very easy to blame someone after the event," says the partner. "No one was complaining when times were good."

Cadwalader says the new management structure is a reflection of the firm's efforts to diversify its service offering. Recently Cadwalader has brought in a succession of notable hires aimed at broadening its practice, the latest and arguably highest profile being Hopkinson's.

Cadwalader is not the only firm in town claiming that the best opportunities often come out of quieter markets. For Cadwalader the current downturn appears to have presented a way for the firm to muscle in on private equity.

"Last year the market was moving too fast, everybody was chasing their tail and focusing on their own practices to be able to look at anything new," argues Bevilacqua. Not now

Why does everyone hate CWT? I really like working here. No kidding - everyone I've worked with is very nice/collegial. Would I like to have more work? Yes. But that doesn't mean the work environment stinks. It's just slow right now, and I think that's the only problem most people have here. (I'm in Cap. Mkts.)
People are jumping ship b/c they are starting to realize that there will be no bonus for them this year, and they think the grass may be greener somewhere else. I don't think they're leaving b/c they hate life here.
Laura went to W&S b/c it was a great opportunity for her career. I never got the impression that she didn't like CWT (never worked directly with her though). I think other people are looking for similar things when they leave.

without making a statement on what tax rates should or should not be, i find it comical for someone to point out that the highest 50% of wage earners pay the vast majority of taxes. Of course they do ... they're the ones that make all the money! Hell, the average salary at your top law firm is probably $600K including your secretaries and staff. yet if you look at the top 50% of people (the lawyers) as compared to the bottom 50% (the staff) i think you'd notice a big discrepency in taxes paid. Mainly because the average lawyer makes $800K and the average staff pays $40K. It doesn't take a genius to figure out the lawyer group probably pays a great deal more than the staff group. Seeing as their incomes are approximately 20 times that of the staff, a 95/5 split in nominal dollars sounds just about right Think about it, you (presumably) are intelligent.

2:55:

Isn't that article the very definition of re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

2:55:

Isn't that article the very definition of re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

So not even a Cadwalader post can bring you more commentaries anymore, Lat... don't know.... change the strategy.

So not even a Cadwalader post can bring you more commentaries anymore, Lat... don't know.... change the strategy.

I heard that Cadwalader was cheating on McKee Nelson with Milbank. Seriously, Cadwalader is such a whore. I mean, how easy can you be???

I work at CWT and from everything that I hear and know, the posting above by Sharon Nichols, is 100% false. You cannot say that two unknown and perhaps unreliable "tipsters" are a "confirmation" of anything. The "something" going down is nothing -it's business as usual here. There is no scandal, although I am guessing that the voyeuristic writers and readers of ATL, hope otherwise. I do not understand the value added in making readers of this website paranoid for no reason. I understand that this is a tactic that many news organizations employ, but it is not beneficial to anyone (except those that work for this website), especially the readers who you are supposed to be servicing, by providing them accurate, helpful information.

5:08 = CWT PR Flak

5:17 = NOT TRUE at all. You are very cynical if you think that. I work here and that's it.

5:08, doesn't the article posted by 5:55 above confirm what the first tipster reported?

I could be totally wrong, but I suspect 3:21 is a junior associate. CWT’s bad reputation among associates is well earned. For as long as the midlevel associate satisfaction survey has been up and running, CWT’s own associates have consistently ranked it dead last or within a couple places of dead last. And because of the firm’s incredible attrition rate, almost everyone in the city either works with or knows former CWT associates that have more than their share of horror stories to tell. As a result, the firm is universally reviled by associates across New York.

5:08 - business as usual to get told to mind your own business? Awesome! Where do I sign up?

You can add Bob Link and Chris White's influence on law firm culture generally to the reasons CWT is despised. It would be nice if that poison got flushed out of the system now that CWT has cracked up.

CWT is a shithouse in an industry that is already filled with human shipwrecks. I love the "synergy" rationale made by CWT partnership -- yes, because business synergy couldn't already exist in a firm if the two practice groups (in the same firm) remained separated. Lawyers can be so funny when they try to act like the know business or operations concepts. What's next CWT? A Six Sigma study? The poster who made the Titanic deck chair metaphor was dead on.

Yeah. 5:08 is a stupid shit. CWT is a dying shithole. The firm sucked a year ago, but at least it was making money. The bottom fell out of its bag, and now its an empty shell. All of its departments are slow. I'd follow 10:27's lead and say that its people should find better opportunities, but that place is so full of idiots, I doubt they have the credentials to find other jobs in this economy.

to the previous 3 posters: you sound like a little baby. Just thought i'd let you know.

Keep up your sense of self worth; and while you're at it, double-check that Word doc for commas, you fucking bitches.

Welcome to 2008 - the year everyone found out what they're really worth.

Wow, this is really cutting edge stuff. Do you think all the associates in the newly organized group will report to one person or two? Will they have subgroups? I can't wait to find out. If another firm decides to reorganize its internal departments, please be sure to let us know. I think internal organization really is the key to understanding the legal markets.

CWT Partners desperately trying to justify their failing organization through the use of managerial and operations concepts. "The economies of scope and scale warrant that we combine groups to take advantage of our core competancies in an effort to provide synergy to our clients." Translation: Our firm is a dying organization and we need to combine groups, cut away mid level associates making too much money for the menial work they perform -- I only pray I'm not de-equitized before I can pay my summer home HELOC off.

CWT is the best firm out there.

Other than the fact this confirms that CWT is in the middle of a spectacular collapse -- what healthy firm allows the guy who's practice has dried up to take over absolute control of the firm and encroach on other partners' clients? -- the most interesting aspect of this "story" is that neither ATL, WSJ nor apparently any other U.S. media or blog noticed that the above article was published on March 3, 2008 in TheLawyer.com (link below), a British online publication. ATL put out a "tipster" post 4 days later.

ATL, can you say "Google?"

http://www.thelawyer.com/item/131521

10:27 -- What firms have been laying off your friends?

10:27 is right on. CWT is (deservedly) a pretty easy target. Their treatment of associates is terrible and a lot of people were looking forward to the day when the firm could not longer hide behind their "The financial ends justify the means" philosophy.

That being said, creating two different blog posts with no actual information is distracting from the real issue: How many firms are trying to hide behing the CWT/Thatcherr/McKee news to show associates the door? Who is manufacturing bad reviews as an excuse to fire associates? What is happening to the partners at these firms who aren't bringing in the volume of business they had before? How will this slowdown affect recruiting? Should current 2Ls and 3Ls be worried?

I thought the law was supposed to provide more job security than banking. When the next wave comes I am getting the out of the practice.

12:05 -- I agree 100%. I went into this profession because I thought it would provide a steady (and relatively high) income. This is clearly not the case.

Basically lawyers get the worst of both world: we get all the risk, but no reward.

Rabid CWT detractors = 4 or 5 poor souls who were rejected by the firm during OCI and have decided to extract revenge by smearing it whenever possible. While there is certainly some legitimate criticism out there, you lose all credibility when you call the firm a "sinking ship."

LOL @ 1:07

Who the hell gets rejected by CWT during OCI?

Why do you people care how a firm treats attorneys? Half of you refer to your fellow peers as "TTT" so it's clear that most of you don't give a shit about associates either. If you are going to judge a firm by how it treats associates then try not to be so hypocritical about it.

second the LOL @ at 1:07, yeah you go to Skadden, Kirkland, Weil, Cravath, you meet tons of people who are driven by jelously at having not had a callback at CWT.

The firm is a sinking ship. It's business model had a chance, if it had worked Link would have been a genius. The firm has crashed. For those of you who say this sounds "childish," whatever, this is a forum for positing opinions about NY law firms: CWT is a ratsnest as characterized by its partners, it is a sinking ship as characterized by its economic predicament.

I agree with 3:26 you sound like an angry 5 year old. Do you want your bottle or something?

$2.7 million PPP
Vault rank 26 (an increase from last year)

vs.

Anonymous posters on a legal blog calling it a sinking ship.

Hmmm which is credible here...

CWT is a great firm--one of NY's most prestigious. I find it interesting that most of those who write otherwise do so in posts riddled with grammar errors. See, for example, 4:19.

6:06 you mean errors like using a noun to modify a noun.

If you think CWT is prestigious, you are saying that you did not go to a top 14 law school nor do you likely know anyone who did.

What the heck is a top 14 law school? There are the top five or so and everyone else. And if 6:06 had gone to one of those schools, you'd know that law firm prestige is utterly meaningless, although it is nice to being able to walk into steady MS business at DPW or whatever, it's the same garbage turning pieces of paper everywhere. Grow up and stop being so pathetic.

Probably more appropriated addressed to 7:29...

7:29--"grammar error" is, in fact, the proper term. Ask William Safire.

Further to 4:19

You can't spin it any other way. CWT is a sinking ship, and they're desperate. They brought in a dozen patent prosecutors with a few million $s in business to replace hundreds of millions of $s in lost securitization and real estate work. Their patent gambit has no chance of success in replacing the lost work and won't even turn a profit in and of itself. At CWT's PPP, they'll be paying the partners they brought in more than those partners are bringing in in revenue, and that doesn't even factor in what they're paying the suppprt staff and associates who do the commodity prosecution work.

People have characterized CWT as a "sinking ship" for a few years now yet despite all the whining, their PPP and Vault/Amlaw/ChambersandParnters rankings are still very impressive. In fact, their Vault ranking improved since last year. Clients continue to bring their business to CWT so they're obviously doing something right.

You can complain that the firm treats associates poorly and whatnot but you are a fool if you call them a "sinking ship."

I disagree with 11:23 but his argument is not unintelligent. The fact is, however, that CWT's plan was to build a powerhouse on the foundation of its cap markets practice. The markets on which that practice group was based disappeared overnight. 10:36 is right, although the recently hired patent attorneys are impressive, a patent team is not going to replace hunders of millions in securitization work.

10:36 -- its simply wrong to say they brought in the IP partners to "replace" their CMBS work. They brought in IP counsel so they don't need to retain outside IP counsel all the time, which they otherwise have to do on every transactional deal you see them on with any IP component.

If that's your best argument for why they are "desperate" I'd say you were a third tier law student.

12:33 -- I didn't come up with the argument that CWT brought in patent guys to replace securitization work. CWT management has been telling the press that forming a patent group is part of their "practice diversification" effort for the past six months. Even a third tier law student knows that. Please save us all some time and google the news before you post in the future. Also, you don't pay the big bucks CWT is paying their new patent partners just to be on hand to do IP due diligence on deals they already have -- you pay that kind of money for RAIN, and nothing else. A third tier law student may not know that, but anyone with even a minimal knowledge of the legal business should. I thus assume you are either a third tier law student or completely ignorant of the economic drivers of law firms, or both.

CWT is, and will continue to be, one of New York's more successful firms. Whether or not there are some associate treatment issues, I can't say. But the idea that the firm is "sinking" is beyond ignorant.

1:37 -- Thanks so much for setting my mind at ease (not).

You offer no basis for your statement that CWT will continue to be one of New York's more successful firms. I assume by successful you mean high PPP. You seem to believe that success in PPP can somehow be divorced from associate treatment issues. There may be some truth to that view in the down associate market we're in now, but CWT has to have the revenue to support its high PPP, even if they fire half their associates. Where is the replacement revenue going to come from? 1:11 nailed it. CWT is scrambling to replace lost revenue with other practices which cannot possibly replace the lost CMBS work.

yeah 1:37 - try to have a real debate - ie - you've got to back up what you say. "to say the firm is sinking is beyond ignorant" - Ok - maybe collapsing is more accurate, as the firm was never afloat.

"Ok - maybe collapsing is more accurate, as the firm was never afloat."

2:36 - Aren't you doing the same thing that you just criticized 1:37 for doing--making an unsupported statement on an anonymous message board?

Some of you dramatically overestimate how much time third tier students spend thinking about New York firms.

1:11 -- How does practice diversification (bringing in some rain maker partners?) suggest that CWT is a sinking ship? It's a stupid argument. Obviously those rainmakers don't think CWT is a sinking ship. If they did they would have gone elsewhere. Seems like only common sense to build up practices which are likely to be active and reduce the ones which won't be as busy. It may be that CWT is in trouble, but they fact they brought in IP partners doesn't logically support that. Any monkey can write a bunch of nonsense and say "therefore, CWT is a sinking ship". Well, not any monkey ... just you .

1:37: You're too focused on the patent nerds. CWT also brought in bankruptcy and private equity laterals. I don't think anyone with two firing neurons would disagree with you as to patent nerds making any kind of real difference at a firm like CWT, but don't these other groups stand a chance of at least partially replacing all that lost CMBS revenue? If I were a CWT associate (which thank the Lord I'm not), I would not be jumping ship just yet unless my own work had dried up. Of course the reality is there may not be anywhere to jump to a few months from now. It's a tough spot for CWT associates trying to figure out whether the place has a fighting chance or whether they should lead the exodus as opposed to following it.

5:33 - Ouch! A tad testy there. Did someone fail to meet his rainmaking quota last month? Thanks for recognizing me as a special monkey. I know guys like you don't give out compliments carelessly.

This is an absurd thread started by a posting by a law student about a non-event. I hear someone went home at 5 at STB on Friday. Discuss the consequences for STB's PPP and lateral opportunities for peer firms .

5:33 - all of the rainmakers that CWT brought in came in before it was known that CWT was laying off, was having tremendous difficulty financially. The bankruptcy team came in almost a year ago, the IP team over the summer, I think. Only The PE partner came in recently and his deal was presumably locked up before the lay-offs. The question is, will the laterals stay or go elsewhere? will CWT be able to land any more star laterals? (I doubt it).

You guys have forgotten that this "sinking ship" has been around longer than any other firm in the nation.

9:05 - Isn't the whole point that CWT brought in laterals to start different practice groups "before" anyone outside CWT management knew the trouble that was coming? Would those laterals have come in knowing they were going to face such immense pressure to replace CMBS revenue? You make a good point, but it tends to support the opposite of your conclusion, i.e., it is evidence tending to prove 5:33's thesis.

9:21 - And would be around far into the future if Link et al. had not changed the game for law firms back in the early nineties. They will die by the very Darwinian system they created. Ironic.

Most of the comments on this thread are made by law students or bottom-tier graduates. Most of the "biglaw" attorneys I have work with and fellow T10 graduates are much more mature and intelligent than this. We are certainly much too busy and mature to waste our time criticizing other firms with ridiculous language like "shithole" or "sinking ship."

I think we're seeing some XOXO spillover onto ATL.

If you think top attys and t6 law grads are much more mature than this, you are obviously not one of us.

9:59 - Why are you and your fellow "biglaw" T10 sophisticates wasting your valuable time reading this plebian blog unless there's some valuable information on it? As to use of "shithole," some of the most successful "biglaw" T10 attorneys I've dealt with make that language sound like tea party banter. Cut the shit, your pretensiousness doesn't impress anybody.

Unfortunately ATL is starting to sound a lot more like XOXO lately... how unfortunate.

I wake up every morning and thank god I didnt accept CAD's offer.

Ms. Ellis is busy posting. Kevin Bacon's role in Animal House comes to mind.

All IS WELL!!!

5:37, why should an associate stay around to find out whether its going to get worse when the firm has already shown they will have ZERO loyalty to you if their PPP was in danger of dropping dollar one? You can make better money at a bonus paying firm, get equal or better prestige on your resume and escape the screamers, creeps and jerks that make CWT so special.

Where isn't it going to get worse and what firm isn't going to fire associates when it does?

I like screamers and jerks. Who wants to work on Sesame Street?