All Hail the Am Law 100!
O happy day! The AmLaw 100 rankings are out. For the rankings, click here; for commentary by Aric Press and John O’Connor, click here. (Note: registration / subscription may be required.)
We’re surprised that the WSJ Law Blog’s post on the release of the rankings has garnered so few comments (just four as of the time of this posting). The Am Law 100 is a big, big deal. As Ashby Jones explains:
The AmLaw 100, or the American Lawyer magazine’s annual list of the top-grossing law firms for the year previous, represents not only a boatload of work for AmLaw staffers. For law firm heads, it’s a report card of sorts. For law students and lawyers looking to move laterally, it’s a handy reference guide to who’s hot and who’s not. For GCs and other industry watchers, it’s a snapshot of BigLaw as a whole.
Membership in the Am Law 100 depends on a law firm’s total revenue. The top five firms all chalked up double-digit increases in revenue, and the top two broke the $2 billion mark. Here are the top five (which are in the same rank order this year as last year):
Although the Am Law 100 firms are ranked by revenue, industry watchers generally pay more attention to the hallowed metric of “PPP,” or “profits per partner.” More data and discussion, about PPP and other subjects, after the jump.
Some PPP highlights, from Aric Press and John O’Connor’s write-up:
Nineteen firms had profits per partner of $2 million or more, four more than in 2006. Three of the 19 firms each decreased their equity partner ranks by 4 percent last year: Dechert, Milbank, and Weil, Gotshal. Once again, Wachtell, Lipton led the pack, this time with a record-breaking PPP of $4.9 million.
Five million dollars per partner? That’s i-banking-esque.
Other strong performers on the profits front, noted by the WSJ Law Blog:
Wachtell was followed by Cravath ($3.3 million); Sullivan & Cromwell ($3.06 million); Quinn Emanuel ($3.01 million); and Simpson Thacher ($2.88 million). The year was especially good for Quinn Emanuel, which saw a 23% jump in PPP.
We’re not surprised by Quinn Emanuel’s strong performance — and we’d bet on this litigation powerhouse to fare better during the downturn than its more transaction-focused competitors.
So, what does the future hold for America’s large law firms? Aric Press, editor in chief of the American Lawyer, isn’t bullish on Biglaw:
It was fun while it lasted. In 2007, The Am Law 100-the top-grossing law firms in the United States-finished the best sustained growth spurt since The American Lawyer began tracking firm financials in 1984. For the first time, the firms showed five consecutive years of better-than-average growth in both revenue per lawyer, the key measure of law firm financial success, and profits per partner, the metric that has turned law firm managers into contortionists.How good was this run? Since 2003, average RPL [revenue per lawyer] has increased by $205,000. Before that, it took the firms ten years, from 1992 to 2002, to improve that much. The relative gain in profits was even more impressive. Since 2003, PPP [profit per partner] has jumped by $438,000, to an average of $1.3 million. It took the Am Law 100 firms 15 years, from 1987 to 2002, to make a similar gain…..
The great run may be over. The sharp decrease in deal activity is well-known. And the classic countercyclical practices-litigation and bankruptcy-have not yet lifted all boats. Also, there is a structural indicator that points to weakness. For the first time since the bust of 2001, the growth in head count noticeably exceeded the growth in RPL (in 2002, the two metrics essentially tied.) Coupled to the body count was the much brooded-about associate salary increases last year. Many consultants argue that those costs will be fully felt this year, precisely when demand for high-priced legal help may fall.
Two Firms Pass the $2 Billion Mark: The 2008 Am Law 100 (rankings by revenue) [American Lawyer (registration / subscription)]
The 2008 Am Law 100: Lessons of The Am Law 100 [American Lawyer (registration / subscription)]
AmLaw 100 Rankings: Is the Golden Age of Growth Over? [WSJ Law Blog]
(113) 
Comments
Second?
oh these poor partners...how will they ever survive...we better start shit-canning associates and staff before out ppp sinks below $3 million...
unreal!!
Lat, do you understand how annoying it is that you post links that either do not work, or that require one to login/register?
First link doesn't work Latster.
Can someone post the rankings so we don't have to go through the stupid "free registration" process. Thanks.
+1 on the annoying prohibited/password proteced links.
And it seems that ATL pretty much jumped the shark with this new format. No longer a must-read, as the dwindling comments make clear.
Who has a login and password to AmLaw?
So where is a list of the '07 PPP for these firms?
2007 Rank 2006 Rank Firm 2007 Gross Revenue Change From 2006
1 1 Skadden $2,170,000,000 17.3%
2 2 Latham & Watkins $2,005,500,000 23.5%
3 3 Baker & McKenzie $1,829,000,000 20.2%
4 4 Jones Day $1,441,000,000 10.0%
5 5 Sidley Austin $1,386,000,000 11.2%
6 6 White & Case $1,373,000,000 15.9%
7 7 Kirkland & Ellis $1,310,000,000 14.4%
8 10 Greenberg Traurig $1,200,000,000 15.3%
9 8 Mayer Brown $1,183,000,000 9.1%
10 9 Weil, Gotshal $1,175,000,000 11.9%
11 11 DLA Piper US2 $1,134,500,000 11.7%
12 12 Morgan, Lewis $1,033,000,000 12.0%
13 13 Sullivan & Cromwell $985,000,000 9.4%
14 16 McDermott Will $978,000,000 13.7%
15 18 Paul, Hastings $975,000,000 19.9%
16 21 Simpson Thacher $966,000,000 20.6%
17 14 Wilmer $944,000,000 5.2%
18 15 O’Melveny & Myers $934,000,000 7.5%
19 17 Shearman & Sterling $921,000,000 9.4%
20 20 Gibson, Dunn $907,500,000 12.2%
21 19 Cleary Gottlieb $894,000,000 10.0%
21 22 Morrison & Foerster $894,000,000 15.5%
23 30 Reed Smith $892,000,000 38.6%
24 23 Hogan & Hartson $880,000,000 16.6%
25 24 Dechert $836,500,000 14.7%
26 29 Davis Polk $789,000,000 21.4%
27 28 Orrick $772,000,000 15.9%
28 50 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart6 $755,000,000 N/A
29 25 Akin Gump1 $752,500,000 3.6%
30 26 Bingham McCutchen $743,500,000 8.4%
31 31 Ropes & Gray $733,000,000 19.0%
32 27 Foley & Lardner $720,500,000 7.9%
33 38 Debevoise & Plimpton $709,500,000 23.4%
34 33 Winston & Strawn $697,500,000 14.0%
35 41 Hunton & Williams $653,500,000 19.6%
36 35 Paul, Weiss $651,000,000 9.6%
37 34 Fulbright & Jaworski $649,500,000 7.8%
38 42 Milbank, Tweed $642,500,000 18.8%
39 44 Proskauer Rose $628,000,000 22.1%
40 36 King & Spalding $615,500,000 5.7%
41 32 Holland & Knight $612,500,000 -0.2%
42 47 Goodwin Procter $611,000,000 20.8%
43 40 Cravath $610,500,000 11.0%
44 49 Willkie Farr $603,000,000 20.0%
45 43 Vinson & Elkins $596,000,000 12.0%
46 37 Pillsbury Winthrop $590,000,000 1.8%
47 39 Cadwalader $587,000,000 5.6%
48 52 Wachtell $578,500,000 22.1%
49 48 Baker Botts $577,500,000 14.9%
49 45 LeBoeuf, Lamb3 $577,500,000 12.5%
51 53 Fried, Frank $537,500,000 14.2%
52 56 Wilson Sonsini $531,000,000 12.7%
53 54 Squire, Sanders $530,500,000 14.0%
54 55 Alston & Bird $518,000,000 12.1%
55 51 Arnold & Porter $508,000,000 6.9%
56 46 Heller Ehrman $491,000,000 -3.2%
57 71 Cooley Godward $485,000,000 44.8%
58 57 Sonnenschein $478,000,000 4.0%
59 58 Howrey $475,000,000 3.9%
60 61 Bryan Cave $469,000,000 14.1%
61 63 Covington & Burling $467,000,000 14.5%
62 59 Kaye Scholer $464,000,000 8.9%
63 60 Katten Muchin $461,000,000 9.6%
64 65 Nixon Peabody $456,500,000 16.3%
65 66 Seyfarth Shaw $442,500,000 13.0%
66 62 Dewey Ballantine3 $431,000,000 5.5%
67 68 Schulte Roth $419,500,000 13.7%
68 67 McGuireWoods $412,000,000 6.3%
69 69 Perkins Coie $394,500,000 10.7%
70 78 Quinn Emanuel1 $384,500,000 29.0%
71 70 Duane Morris $375,000,000 11.4%
72 80 Fish & Richardson5 $367,500,000 28.3%
73 72 Dorsey & Whitney $367,000,000 11.4%
74 99 Drinker Biddle4 $357,000,000 N/A
75 74 Troutman Sanders $349,000,000 13.5%
76 102 Thelen Reid8 $345,000,000 N/A
77 79 Steptoe & Johnson $335,000,000 14.1%
78 76 Sheppard, Mullin $333,000,000 10.6%
79 73 Jenner & Block $332,500,000 3.9%
80 87 Venable $321,500,000 19.7%
81 75 Edwards Angell $320,500,000 5.1%
82 82 Shook, Hardy $316,000,000 12.5%
83 77 Baker & Hostetler $315,000,000 5.0%
84 81 Blank Rome $314,500,000 10.7%
85 96 Patton Boggs $310,000,000 21.3%
86 85 Finnegan, Henderson1 $306,500,000 12.7%
87 101 Littler Mendelson $305,000,000 27.1%
88 95 Pepper Hamilton $297,000,000 14.7%
88 84 Stroock & Stroock $297,000,000 8.0%
90 91 Kramer Levin $296,500,000 13.2%
91 82 Dickstein Shapiro $294,000,000 4.6%
92 92 Mintz, Levin $291,000,000 11.7%
93 94 Sutherland Asbill $289,000,000 11.4%
94 98 Faegre & Benson $284,500,000 14.7%
94 89 Womble Carlyle $284,500,000 7.2%
96 86 Buchanan Ingersoll $282,000,000 3.9%
97 97 Chadbourne & Parke $281,000,000 10.6%
98 100 Ballard Spahr $280,500,000 15.4%
99 92 Cahill Gordon $280,000,000 7.5%
100 88 Kilpatrick Stockton $265,500,000 -0.2%
Can someone post the PPP?
12:49 / 12:54 / 12:55: Your problem is with law.com, not Lat. They're the ones who put their content behind a wall.
Better to have these excerpts than nothing at all.
PPP? I think it's PEP that they're really posting.
There are lies, damn lies and then there is the AMLaw 100.
Many of these firms don't release details publicly (in which case AMlaw just gueses) and the rest just lie about their results. Anyone who believes these figures or (worse still) makes a decision based upon AMLaw 100 is an idiot of the highest order.
wow. nice job paul hastings. most meaningful jump on the board.
Amlaw is meaningless. PPP and RPL are the numbers that really matter. A firm can keep getting bigger and having their revenue increase but it doesn't mean PPP or RPL are improving.
congrats paul hastings on a job well done. you definitely deserve it.
i would say this is the biggest jump:
28 50 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart6 $755,000,000 N/A
SKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDEN
How many partners did Weil let go (I know 4%)? Was this covered here? What criteria did they use?
1:28 - what is a "meaningful" jump?
1:28 and 1:33, really? "meaningful" jump from 18 to 15? i would think that if "meaningful" = biggest jump from last year cooley would be it (from 71 to 57/ up 44%)
thanks bitchy
Thelen is the biggest jump, up 26 spots!! Gooooo merger!!!!
bitchy posted the wrong list.
1:56, there was only one list.
I guess the AMLaw 100 list represents what biglaw is. Other than that, it's meaningless.
[1:28 responding]: You're right 1:49 - Cooley had a big jump as well, and deserve applause. But (1) Cooley had a series of acquisitions in the past year whereas PHJW did not; and (2) there's some cache in jumping in rankings within the top 20. A notable increase when you're in the top 15.
Just IMO though...
If this is the wrong list, then what's the right list?
what does this mean for the few firms that lost money in this growth period?
There is a small story commenting on PH's jump and overall firm growth. http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?&id=1209373531314
Does it become the Big 4, or does OMM drop out of the Big 3 w/ PH taking its place?
Cleary is fairly low on the "efficiency" rankings. I'm not sure if that's a good sign or a bad sign for associates. Maybe it means that it's not so highly focused on leverage? Or is it just that they pay a lot of money for every associate to have his or her own office...
Are Penn St. and UPenn the same? I'm confused.
PEP is the right list.
Where'd you hear that Weil let Partners go? Some partners left and 4% might even be the right percentage change, but that doesn't mean any were "let go." The news reports on the BFR partner departures last year did not even hint at partners being let go.
none of the firms "lost "money since they presumably all had profits to distribute. some firms' revenue fell, but there are a number of reasons for why that might be.
don't know if we can count a big merger as a meaningful revenue increase; no % change for the big jumpers:
28 50 Kirkpatrick & Lockhart6 $755,000,000 N/A
74 99 Drinker Biddle4 $357,000,000 N/A
76 102 Thelen Reid8 $345,000,000 N/A
nobody reads this turd blog anymore
Someone put up the PEP rankings!
sutherland's on it, bitch.
yes, please post PEP
I had a nightmare last night that I worked at an AMLAW 100 firm with PPP below 1MM and nobody liked me.
PPP and PEP are not that great of measures. High PPP can be achieved through leverage, and high PEP can be achieved by de-equitizing partners.
The number that is really interesting is RPL. High RPL shows either that a) lawyers at the firm are really productive and efficient and/or b) the firm gets high end work that isn't too cost sensitive.
can someone post the PPP and revenue per lawyer figures?
even my TTT firm which doesnt pay lockstep market salary is in the top 100 for total revenue, but I'm sure that PPP-wise it's far down.
RPL?
Yes, it goes by UPenn State though and its law school was ranked 77 this year in U.S. News.
You do realize that registration is free right?
There are no PPP or PEP lists available. You have to buy the entire report for $300 to get those lists.
2:43 - RPL = revenue per lawyer. As the name suggests, it's gross revenue divided by the total number of lawyers at the firm. Dunno if this includes temp or contract attorneys.
They only give a sneak peak on the real numbers:
Measuring the Efficiency Factor
Rank Firm 2007 Profitability Index /Leverage /Profit Margin
1 Cadwalader 2.99 /8.49 /35
2 Quinn Emanuel 2.76 /4.46 /62
3 Dechert 2.60 /5.66 /46
4 Cahill Gordon 2.45 /4.13 /59
5 Paul, Weiss 2.44 / 5.50 / 44
6 Schulte Roth 2.32 /5.24 /44
6 White & Case 2.32 /6.63 /35
8 Kirkland & Ellis 2.28 /5.48 /42
9 Cravath 2.23 /4.58 /49
10 Simpson Thacher 2.22 /4.41 /50
The profitability index looks at a firm's ability to convert revenues into profits. These scores are based on the ratio of profits per partner to revenue per lawyer. The profitability index seeks to demonstrate which firms most effectively balance leverage and overhead for the highest possible profits.
On this chart, the profitability index is derived by dividing profits per partner by revenue per lawyer. Leverage is the ratio of all lawyers to equity partners; profit margin is the ratio of net income to gross revenue multiplied by 100. For a more complete set of definitions, see "A Guide to Our Methodology."
Did someone really just post a comment giving props to Thelen?
Penn State is the really good law school, UPenn simply feeds off of Penn State's tremendous ranking in US News..
can you actually see the list without having to sign up or in?
I've heard the true measure of a firm is revenue per lawyer. Total revenue doesn't give props to firms like Watchell or Quinn which are small but generate tons of revenue per lawyer. Total revenue also allows firms like Thelen or Littler to get into the top 100 even though they each have PPP of under 1m.
The true measure may actually be the logarithmic average weight per lawyer ratio. Theory is that the more time lawyers sit in their offices billing, the more money is made. Opponents counter that other factors such as time spent surfing the web, including posting on ATL, are not factored into this ratio and that more studies need to be made before any conclusions can be drawn.
Although I've never heard of them Reed Smith's 38% increase is seriously impressive.
"The profitability index looks at a firm's ability to convert revenues into profits. These scores are based on the ratio of profits per partner to revenue per lawyer. The profitability index seeks to demonstrate which firms most effectively balance leverage and overhead for the highest possible profits."
aka, "who screws their associates the most." this is my complete lack of surprise at the top few names.
it's amusing that some associates take pride in how much money their firm's partners are taking home.
props to thelen
Where are all the Detroit firms?
SEN killed this fucking blog.
detroit what?
what what wha?
3:43, I am in a top 70 firm, that is in top 40 in the profitability list, I am a 4th year associate and I actually do take pride in how much my partners take home as I want to work in a profitable enterprise, that is successful, generates good and prestigious work.
That is because I, unlike some (i.e. you), expect to be a partner in my firm one day, and then, my son, all this will be mine.
detroit to 70k
can we discuss why Baker and DLA are such large, overstaffed shitholes?
I think the deal with the "N/A" firms (at least Kirkpatrick Lockhart) is that they merged in the last year
No seriously guys, I am from Detroit and go to Wayne State; I own six Barry Sanders jerseys; I wear one Monday through Saturday (even God took a day off - LOL :0). Firms are breaking down the doors trying to get into this market, but the old boys in D-town, and their superior legal minds, are keeping all that business to themselves...do they not report their earnings or something because most other firms would be jealous?
Texas firms are underrated!
http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/04/vinson-elkins-b.html
4:16
Underrated? I didnt even know they were rated to begin with.
The AMLAW100 is actually pretty irrelevant to associates. All we should look at is starting salary and whether it's lockstep in subsequent years. Oh, and bonuses. We want the maximum possible pay for the minimum hours of work.
The only benefit the AMLAW100 possibly has for us is that it tells us if our firm isn't doing too well i.e. Heller, Thelen, etc.
Some idiot mentioned that it's helpful because one day he'll be partner and benefit from his firm's PPP. Nice thinking moron. A. You'll probably never make partner either because you'll burn out after a few years or your firm won't like you. B. Even if you make partner you'll probably be non-equity and it will take you at least a decade to reach the average PPP of you're firm. You'll be in your mid-40's and the only people who will benefit from your high salary will be your wife's plastic surgeon and you're children's private boarding school. Good luck.
DLA Piper is the true #1 with about $2.3B in revenue. The problem is that AmLaw (unlike NLJ and others) doesn't count DLA Piper's international offices as part of the same firm. Thus, it's misleading to count that revenue from other offices for every other firm.
4:05, the profitability index only measures how EFFECTIVELY partners can squeeze money out of you, and not necessarily HOW MUCH money the partners take home. It's kind of a misnomer. Case in point: Wachtell isn't an "efficient" firm by this metric. The type of profitability that you seem to be describing isn't reflected in this index; better to look at RPL.
Skadden associates do coke in the break room.
2007 PPP in M
1. Wachtell 4.945
2. Cravath 3.300
3. SullCrom 3.055
4. Quinn Emmanuel 3.010
5. Simpson 2.875
6. Cadwalader 2.725
7. Cahill Gordon 2.595
7. Paul Weiss 2.595
9. Milbank 2.525
10. Kirkland 2.475
11. Schulte 2.355
12. Dechert 2.350
13. Davis Polk 2.3
14. Debevoise 2.290
15. Skadden 2.280
16. Latham 2.270
17. Willkie 2.235
18. Cleary 2.150
19. Weil 2.115
20. Paul Hastings 1.920
21. Gibson Dunn 1.9
22. Shearman 1.840
23. White & Case 1.670
24. Orrick 1.660
25. O'Melveny 1.635
@4:34 - DLA isn't the true #1 because their US and international operations are completely separate legal entities and do not share profits.
4:41 Sign me up!
The actual issue came out over a month ago. This is old news.
4:28, sucks to be you. Obviusly you are a feeble lawyer in a TTT firm. Me, I'M 27, 4TH year, book of business already, will be income in 4 years, equity by 10. A 10 year goal is not miles away, and it will let me know that teh firm I am at is on track. As I get closer I will continue to pay attention.
The PPP numbers are wildly manipulated. Revenue is a bit more difficult.
5:10 wrote: "Me, I'M 27, 4TH year, book of business already, will be income in 4 years, equity by 10. "
or, you're a 1L sitting in the evening division Property class at Stetson Law, who is wetting his pants over the difference between an easement and a servitude.
27 y/o 4th year?
So how was it going to college at 16 Doogie?
Wow. Again w/ the PHJW. They beat GDC and OMM in PPP as well?
I think the "Big 3" --> "Big 4"
Or make Latham happy and say it's still "Big 3" and dont count Latham, because they say they're a "International firm"...
Massive layoffs at Shulte
Skadden gives cocaine to summers.
I'm a 2L at UVA, is it possible to get my foot in the door at Wachtell?
For an associate, the idea firm would be:
- highest prestige possible
- large size possible
- highest practice area diversity possible
- lowest leverage possible
- lowest PEP/PPP possible
- lowest revenue per attorney possible
Thanks for posting these. These rankings along with Chambers are very helpful to law students.
I know some nice folk at Paul Hastings, but no one in L.A. considers them as elite as Gibson, O'Melveny or Latham. Not even close.
How about a post on Cadwalader's projected $20M PPP in 2025?
http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1209373531390
I don't give a shit what some of the naysayers on this site think; I'm lateraling to CWT the first chance I get.
any more info on schulte layoffs?
4:53 = OMM troll.
So few of the top PPP firms are single-tier lockstep. They're the only places where everyone is actually making the PPP. Everywhere else (ex: Dechert) a few rainmakers pull $10mil and for every one of them 20 partners make $700k.
The "big 3" is a stupid idea anyway. Latham>Gibson>>OMM> Paul Hastings. That being said, OMM is falling apart (at least in some offices) and Paul Hastings is on the ups.
7:00, are you looking for a paralegal position?
You also might be able to deliver stuff to them (like Delaware certificates) from other firms.
7:00 - if you have to ask that question, you are nowhere close
my friend's father works at wachtell. got me an interview without a problem. i turned them down, though.
yeah, those guys at watchell were begging me to come work there. managing partner was swingin from my balls
speaking of detroit: those intrepid U of D law students, unwilling to be tied to one toilet market, will now be able to practice in the lucrative mexican legal market
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080429/METRO/804290453/1409/METRO
guys from my high school used to turn down made up offers from wachtell all the time. it was no big deal.
lat stud
I'm a 800 lb gorilla, can I get a job at Cravath?
Anyone have all 100 PPP?
I have your wife's PPP. I didn't think you were using it.
(waiting for OMM troll to spaz about suggestion that OMM is falling apart...)
An OMM troll . . . is that, like, a stuffed Dalai Lhama?
when I interviewed at OMM, I remember a mid-level associate telling me how cool and open the firm was and citing, as an example, a guy down the hall from her that had a pony tail
that brings up a good discussion topic - is a pony tail (on a guy) acceptable in biglaw? how far can you stray from the preferred short hair with side part?
9:28 - you killed it. also, ponytails were only cool for about 10 minutes in the early 90s, in LA.
Sutherland's PPP to 190k !!!
Latham > Gibson > OMM >>> PH
Hey 6:35, yup I'm 27 and a 4th year. I also got educated in England where law is an undergrad degree, and could take bar in NY without additional study.
Pretty sweet actually. NY pay, bonus, on a nice partnership track and no debt. Not sure if you are the loser at teh TTT firm that doesn't think they will ever big a partner at an AM100 firm, but if you are not then while it may not suck to be you, it is great being me.
5:10
7:00, get in good with dooley. he knows people.
Detroit firms are in the AmLaw 200, not the AmLaw 100 (last near, Dykema was 149, Miller Canfield 154 and Honigman 166). I don't know where they are this year, because I only saw the top 100 on the website.
One day you're going to die. Make sure they put your firm's rank, how much money you made, and how many deals you closed on your tombstone.
To whoever tried to stir the pot with the "Massive layoffs at Shulte" comment...hilarious. A) It's spelled SCHULTE and B) Sorry, no layoffs.
Schulte is on the ups, taking partners away from Mayer Brown and rising up the ranks after a relative short existence.
Jesus 10:07, why don't you S their D a little more?
11:07 ---
1990s thinking. It is hard to argue that you are a better law firm, when you are have less revenue, less revenue per lawyer, lower profits, lower PEP, lower associate BONUSES. OMM has been destroyed -- the numbers don't lie.
You'd think that with $1.4B in revenue, Jones Day DC could afford to pay associates bonuses.
Hey, I grow up to big partner one day. I type on teh message board.
"Hey 6:35, yup I'm 27 and a 4th year. I also got educated in England where law is an undergrad degree, and could take bar in NY without additional study.
Pretty sweet actually. NY pay, bonus, on a nice partnership track and no debt. Not sure if you are the loser at teh TTT firm that doesn't think they will ever big a partner at an AM100 firm, but if you are not then while it may not suck to be you, it is great being me."