Global 100 Rankings: Some Firms Are Doing Just Fine
With all the doom and gloom about the economy, it’s easy to forget that some law firms are doing really, really well.
American Lawyer has come out with their Global 100 rankings (subscription) report. Am Law reports that most stable global firms are based across the pond:
After madly shedding partners, doubling-down their bets on foreign offices, and tightening their management controls, the global Magic Circle practices—Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, and Linklaters—look a little better-dressed than many of their rivals in the United States. The irony is that the English firms have succeeded by following the lesson of their American peers: They’ve hedged their bets. For U.S. firms, in the past that has meant a healthy dose of litigation and bankruptcy work to balance a corporate shortfall. For the British, the strategy has been geographic: spreading their risk across several continents.
Whatever. Maybe someday you’ll be able to buy back an undesirable position in Yorktown.
The U.S.A. is still well represented when it comes to profits per partner:
Cadwalader’s inclusion on this list is … offensive (the list is based on 2007 numbers), but how about Quinn Emanuel! One of five firms worldwide with PPP over $3,000,000.
The firms with the most revenue after the jump
When it comes to gross revenue (subscription), British firms dominate the top:
Baker & McKenzie, last seen throwing Heller Ehrman under the bus, has kept pace with the other mega-firms. And Skadden continues to be the bloated engine that does nothing but mint money.
All of these numbers are based on 2007 returns. We expect more shaking at the top when the 2008 returns are calculated.
The 2008 Global 100: The English Advantage [American Lawyer]
The Global 100-Profits Per Partner [American Lawyer] (subscription)
The Global 100-Most Revenue [American Lawyer] (subscription}
(105) 
Comments
Firsty McFirst
first
Firsty McFirst
Fifttth
CWT will be lucky if the number next year is $275,000 per
anyway to get the rest of these lists posted?
"And Skadden continues to be the bloated engine that does nothing buy mint money."
Where can one purchase mint money?
"Cadwalader's inclusion on this list is ... offensive"
Is that supposed to be a dramatic pause? Improper ellipsis use.
While I suppose this is interesting with respect to the general state of law firms, I have to say that I now know no more about what is going on at WILDMAN HARROLD than I did before reading this post.
i'm a 1L and i want a job (preferably at one of those firms near the top of the list)!!!
-nervous T-10 1L
Thanks for posting to articles that require a subscription.
Other than the "across the pond" firms, this appears to be a list of places that bill the hell out of associates. I'm sure other prestigious firms are doing fine as well.
I work at No. 10 and I can tell you, we're very very busy.
And Skadden continues to be the bloated engine that does nothing *but* mint money.
Funny how no one mentioned that the Brits were atop the list because they get 2:1 on the exchange rate into $'s...
both charts in full:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202424834825
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202424832628
Wait...don't British firms collect most of their revenues in pounds, which translates into US pennies as this point?
Ummmm...Cadwalader will be fine.
I wonder what everyone thinks about the trend with Latham lately. It seems like in every ranking, whether quantitative or qualitative, they keep moving up every year. You look at the Vault rankings and they have moved up in just about every category imaginable since last year, and seem like they're getting dangerously close to the perennial all stars, even in regional rankings where they had been in the past considered second-tier to the local favorites. You think we're seeing a change in guard a little bit?
8 - maybe it's an aposiopesis.
- T10 1L who used to be a humanities major
19, I think we are seeing a Latham marketing troll on this thread a little bit.
I'm considering Quinn (SV) and don't know jack about it beyond the website. What's it like in terms of QOL? Standard biglaw misery? Worse? Better?
Where is Cahill Gordon?
if i only have to beat out goobers like 20, i'll for sure get a job!!! (he probably would somehow work 'aposiopesis' into his interview)
i want to be a 1L sa at quinn, what will it take?
-nervous T-10 1L
Where is Cahill Gordon?
TTTypo
Yes when I see charts like these my first thought Latham is dangerously close to the perennial all stars.
There is no trend with Latham, at least not in NYC. WLRK, CSM, S&C, DPW, STB, CGSH, and Skadden still get better work. Latham is more on par with Weil and Shearman.
10-You're being a bama...
I will suck the dick of every Clifford Chance partner every night for a week for .00001 of the firm's revenue.
So do you own knee pads already?
@28:
19-Latham: 2.27
22--Cleary: 2.150
23-Weil: 2.115
28--Sherman: 1.84
So do you own knee pads already?
23,
My guess is Cahill doesn't make the PPP chart because of the criteria for inclusion in the chart ("Only firms included on both the Most Revenue and Most Lawyers charts qualify for this chart"). I have a feeling it's still easily in the top ten for PPP.
nobody knows what a bama is 29. will you hire me?
-nervous T-10 1L
Cahill isn't on here because they don't have enough lawyers and, hence, also don't have enough revenue to qualify. If it were simply PPP, Cahill would be in the top ten (tied for ninth with Paul Weiss).
"This chart ranks the most profitable firms on our Most Revenue and Most Lawyers charts. To be eligible, a firm had to appear on at least one of those charts."
I still laugh when I think of HofstraMagna claiming that PPP stood for "Profits per Paralegal," and that one firm's "Profits per Paralegal" was $10 million!
32 - PPP does not equal prestige or work quality. PPP means there are either proportionally fewer partners (CWT), the associates bill their asses off (Skadden) or both. Latham's selectivity at top law schools is much closer to Weil/S&S than it is to the city's top tier firms.
35-No bama!!!!!!!!
I think its despicable that partners are raking in such big bucks and their grubby little greedy selves are laying off like there is no tomorrow. And I think that chart is just for what the partners make and does not include what they make on top
#30, send your phone # and a pic, and we'll be in touch
35-No bama!!!!!!!!
I think its despicable that partners are raking in such big bucks and their grubby little greedy selves are laying off like there is no tomorrow. And I think that chart is just for what the partners make and does not include what they make on top
15/17, the pound is worth $1.76 at present. Not great, if you're starting in dollars, but nowhere near its recent highs. Any top US firm worth its salt will bill its UK work in pounds, its European work in euros, etc etc.
The real reason that UK firms are doing better than US firms is because they have been willing to expand into markets where the real growth is, and is going to be in the future.
Tokyo and Hong Kong are not enough - you've got to have offices in the UAE, Beijing and Shanghai, and your associates have to be willing to staff those offices. Americans don't travel well. And they don't speak Arabic or Mandarin.
PEP figures are distorted at some US firms that market themselves as "all equity" partnerships -- and then reduce the capital contributions of "junior" partners so that they don`t qualify as "equity" partners for AMLAW purposes. This artificially inflates their PEP figures, and overt ime creates a large group of second class "equity" partners. Avoid getting on the partnership track at a firm that plays these games.
PEP figures are distorted at some US firms that market themselves as "all equity" partnerships -- and then reduce the capital contributions of "junior" partners so that they don`t qualify as "equity" partners for AMLAW purposes. This artificially inflates their PEP figures, and overt ime creates a large group of second class "equity" partners. Avoid getting on the partnership track at a firm that plays these games.
35-No bama!!!!!!!!
I think its despicable that partners are raking in such big bucks and their grubby little greedy selves are laying off like there is no tomorrow. And I think that chart is just for what the partners make and does not include what they make on top
Hahaha. The 4 largest accounting firms have over $100 billion in revenues. You guys should work there.
Also, 43, you should figure out how a partnership works. The partners don't "take home" all of that money.
Hahaha. The 4 largest accounting firms have over $100 billion in revenues. You guys should work there.
Also, 43, you should figure out how a partnership works. The partners don't "take home" all of that money.
38- Vault prestige rankings:
7-Cleary
8-Latham
9-Weil
15-Shearman
Seems like Shearman doesn't belong with others on either list.
Elie: what are these "law firms" that you have suddenly began to post about?
38- Vault prestige rankings:
7-Cleary
8-Latham
9-Weil
15-Shearman
Seems like Shearman doesn't belong with others on either list.
Where on this list is WILDMAN HARROLD?
Why is DPW's PPP so far below it's peers?
If you’re sleeping with your head through the second rope, you’re in a bad way. He got clocked. He went down. According to the rules he was no longer defending himself and that’s the end of the fight.
30 --
.00001 of Clifford Chance's revenue is like $26,605.
Every night of the week eh? 26,605 / 7 = 3,800.
Now, divide that by the number of partners. (Or, at least, the number of male partners.) According to NALP, there are about 100 male partners in the US. If there are 200 firm-wide (a very conservative estimate), then you're offering the firm $17 BJs.
Talk about a volume discount...?
I want a job!
-Nervous T10 Preschooler
BTW, isn't it a little misleading to title the article "some firms are doing just fine" when the numbers are for 2007.
Where's Strooooooooooooooooooooooock?
Wow Allen and Overy coming in at #6 huh. Does anyone have any insight into their NY office?
57 - Well played, well played....
At least this post has something to do with law firms.
But it's still stupid.
61--#6 on revenues not profits. Revenues are meaningless, see e.g. Jones, Day.
20,
After wikipedia-ing "aposiopesis" I have officially learned something here today.
8 (not nervous second year IP associate)
30 - 57s math is wrong. It's less than $10/bj. I'll give you $20 regardless of what you look like.
PPP for last year
http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?&id=1202421595631
Heller first year associate here, wondering why my firm isn't at the top of the list.
nice subtle cleary trolling, 51/53:
http://www.vault.com/nr/lawrankings.jsp?law2009=2&ch_id=242&top100=1
28: quit being absurd. Latham is definitively on par with DPW/Skadden/STB, lining up with or against them on many/most major deals
69 - I am talking about NYC. The NYC Vault rankings for those firms are:
7 - Cleary
9 - Weil
11 - Latham
12 - Shearman
#57 hilarious...
I agree that these numbers aren't really indicative of what's going on now. Cadwalader is not making $2.7 million per partner and many other firms will not be doing as well as they did last year.
69: If Latham and Watkins "on par" with DPW etc., then where the hell have the been in these past three weeks?
Cleary was actively involved in: (1) the Treasury takeover of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac; (2) Barclay's purchase of Lehman's I-banking business; (3) Hellman's purchase of Lehman's investment management business; (4) Bank of America's takeover of Merrill Lynch; and (5) Citi's buyout of Wachovia. Cleary als advised (7) the Federal Reserve Bank of NY and (8) the SEC in relation to Lehman.
Once again--when the sh*t hit the fan--where was Latham? These Latham trolls are really unbearable--they must be the most insecure first and second year associates in NYC.
If Latham was a judge it would be Judge Halverson.
57 and 30 -- COMMENTS OF THE DAY!
57 and 30 -- COMMENTS OF THE DAY!
57 and 30 -- COMMENTS OF THE DAY!
57 and 30 -- COMMENTS OF THE DAY!
57 and 30 -- COMMENTS OF THE DAY!
With fewer useless mouths, Cadwalader's PPP is surely on the way up!
69: I'm going to have to agree with 72 on this. Deals I've been on with Latham have never been when they're running the deal. They're always company/issuer/seller side while one of the big guys runs the deal, drafting the definitive transaction agreements, etc. They're a solid firm, but they're not with the NYC heavy hitters. Also shown by their non-lockstep status.
Cleary dropped three spots in total revenue. They're definitely hurting. Associates are scrounging for work, hoping not to get laid off.
Clearly, Cleary = TTT.
77, 78: What exactly are you talking about? The CGSH associates I know are very busy. Cleary has gotten a lot of work out of the financial collapse. Also, their core practices (such as sovereign wealth, international M&A, Latin America/Russia investment) aren't dependent on NYC investment banks. I strongly doubt that Cleary associates are worried about their jobs--in fact, I would guess they are more confident than people at places like STB or other firms that have lost big clients in the last few weeks.
The inclusion of Elie's name in an ATL byline is . . . offensive (to all those who remember how good this site used to be).
49:
clearly you have never worked at any of the Big 4 accounting firms or know anything about that industry.
First of all, it takes 11-13 years to make partner at a big 4 accounting firm (if you make the cut and can last that long). Back in the day before the CPA required 150 credit hours of school to sit for the 4 part exam, you could come straight out of college at the age of 21 as a new auditor...but that means you still wouldn't make partner until you're 33 (same as law firms with 8-9 year partner tracks).
Partner salary as a 1st year partner buying into a big 4 accounting firm = $250k. That's a 100% jump from the senior manager position as an 8th-12th year working there and earning barely $105-115k.
Its just not worth it. Average PPP at Deloitte and Touche 4 years ago was $500k.
Read this. This will show the true pecking order of firms, at least on the transactional side. Latham and Skadden -- while great firms -- are nowhere in the same universe as CSM, S&C, or DPW. Be sure to look at both the Legal Advisor and Legal M&A tables...
http://about.bloomberg.com/professional/data.html
5 - you, sir, are a complete moron.
How close is the relationship between profits per partner and the actual cash compensation the average partner recieves? How much gets reinvested into the firm, paid up to more senior partners, deffered until later, etc.
44: good post but for the end. if you think Brits speak 2nd languages (let alone Arabic or any Chinese dialect) any more than their US colleagues, well, you haven't spent much time in the UK. and they aren't known for travelling any better than Americans.
61: I highly recommend it
I know both are currently not amongst the very top tier in NYC, but between Kirkland and Latham NY, where would you go?
"Baker McKenzie = the WalMart of big law." Discuss.
16:
Thanks for the hookup.
Lots of Clearly and Latham trolls out tonight. Pretty douchey. You guys notice how no one ever comes on here and tells you how sweet S & C is right (just an example, im not sweet enough to work there). Stop ruining the integrity of this terrible blog.
Re 89: I was the poster for 72/79. I don't usually troll for Cleary (I don't work there), but I guess I was responding to Latham trolling (which IS pretty common). With regard to NYC/the financial explosion, S&C has been right up there. Actually it really seems as though Rodge has been involved with everything...I'm not sure how much other firm partners have been involved. In any case, firms like S&C and a few others will be busy no matter what the market is.
85, 44 here. Thanks for the agreement - I actually live in London although am not British. Educated Brits tend to speak foreign languages much better than their American counterparts, on the whole.
You're right though that (outside the Foreign Service) precious few of them are speaking Chinese or Arabic, I did overstate the case there. But Brits are generally much more willing to live outside their country for an extended period of time than Americans are - it's how they built the Empire, unfashionable though it may be to speak of it.
81,
Where did you find those numbers? Also, outside of audit, isn't it pretty much a 9 to 5?
I never understood why anyone cares about the ppp stated here. It doesnt really reflect any reality.
i hate baker
Can someone post the rest of the list, are link to a subscription-free source for it? TIA.
95 see 16
So, do most people agree that the Magic Circle firms have been economically resilient because of their foreign office diversification?
Also, do you think it would be wise for a junior associate to accept a position abroad, and return to the States in two-three years time?
Or, do you think that the current global crisis makes accepting an abroad position more risky?
Seyfarth Shaw has problems. Some claim that the firm is profitable, but this could be due to the revenue they generate selling illegal tax shelters. See
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0602/126.html
and
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv08060.htm
Graham Taylor was a partner at Seyfarth Shaw until a few months ago.
Aside from money problems they re being sued and have more serious ones.
Seyfarth Shaw has problems. Some claim that the firm is profitable, but this could be due to the revenue they generate selling illegal tax shelters. See
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0602/126.html
and
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv08060.htm
Graham Taylor was a partner at Seyfarth Shaw until a few months ago.
Aside from money problems they re being sued and have more serious ones.
Seyfarth Shaw has problems. Some claim that the firm is profitable, but this could be due to the revenue they generate selling illegal tax shelters. See
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0602/126.html
and
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv08060.htm
Graham Taylor was a partner at Seyfarth Shaw until a few months ago.
Aside from money problems they re being sued and have more serious ones.
Seyfarth Shaw has problems. Some claim that the firm is profitable, but this could be due to the revenue they generate selling illegal tax shelters. See
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0602/126.html
and
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv08060.htm
Graham Taylor was a partner at Seyfarth Shaw until a few months ago.
Aside from money problems they re being sued and have more serious ones.
what do slaughter look for? if an american
You think Linklaters will be able to stay on top?
You think Linklaters will be able to stay on top?
Yah all --- go to Covington & Burling --- nice place to work. Contented cow.