where is the love for DPW?

First

OHHH - OHHHH - Unbelievable! Linklaters - the slipper fits!

Dickie V

Number 6 post from last year's tournament:

"Happy to be a summer associate at LW. The coolest firm on the planet. "

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I wish there was a way that I could still somehow vote against Latham.

Prediction: Wachtell and Weil in the finals.

posted at 3:09 PM?

It's not that people don't love AIG.

It's that Debevoise's practice is probably safer, because it's less focused on investment banking clients.

Then again, it did do a lot of private equity work...

Kirkland underperformed because of all the unsubstantiated negative attention its received on ATL. Kirkland may have layoffs, but until it actually does, ATL needs to give it a break.

Wachtell, DPW and Skadden have small litigation practice and big corporate practice - make them much more vulnerable in this economy. GD&C is a financially strong firm, Debervoise has the Siemens case to keep them busy and Paul Weiss is mainly a litigation firm. Valut ranking might not indicate job security here.

B.F.D., not a single upset

(Latham doesn't count, obviously)

11, this is true. Nonetheless, ignorant law students who are unfamiliar with the general irrelevance of Vault rankings (and the way they work -- i.e., you and me giving a 1-10 vote to a bunch of firms about which we know absolutely nothing) are the majority of voters here and they'll just vote the Vault rankings (especially since none of the remaining firms have had layoffs or pay freezes). Latham and possibly Cleary will be the only exceptions. This poll is retarded.

10, Kirkland fired something like 30 NSPs in December. And its corporate associates have NO work. It is still probably safer than Linklater's though. The carnage in London has been pretty terrible.

-spouse of a K&E lawyer.

seriously? skadden over paul, weiss? seriously?

WilmerHale out in the first round is retarded, especially given they have had no layoffs of any variety. In a tournament ranking the safest place to work, bouncing a firm that has yet to layoff makes no sense in the first round.

The seeding should not have been done by Vault Rank. The 16 seed should have been the hardest hit with layoffs, the 1 seed a firm yet to layoff.

Correct order (most to least safe) of these firms:

1. Wachtell (small, gets ALL critical work)
2. Paul Weiss (litigation dominated, can subsidize corporate practice)
3. Davis Polk (regulatory work related to crisis, strong litigation practice)
4. Kirkland (bankruptcy practice)
5. Skadden (bankruptcy practice)
6. Debevoise (at risk)
7. Gibson (at risk)
8. Linklaters (at grave risk)

Any deviation from this is just ignorance.

I vote for Paul Hastings and a monogrammed coat hanger for the prestige.

Any speculation as to why so few of this year's crop of first years remain at Wachtell? Their website lists only 6 2008 grads. Is this normal attrition at the presumptive winner here?

"Correct order (most to least safe) of these firms:

1. Wachtell (small, gets ALL critical work)
2. Paul Weiss (litigation dominated, can subsidize corporate practice)
3. Davis Polk (regulatory work related to crisis, strong litigation practice)
4. Kirkland (bankruptcy practice)
5. Skadden (bankruptcy practice)
6. Debevoise (at risk)
7. Gibson (at risk)
8. Linklaters (at grave risk)

Any deviation from this is just ignorance."

Heh.

Again, these brackets are completely fucked up. You have two firms in the "sweet 16" that have publicly laid off associates and partners (Kirkland and Linklaters), and at least one that has been exposed for its substantial back-door layoff scheme (DPW).

Complete nonsense.

I didn't see Wolf Block in the seeding.

Paul, Weiss:

- premier litigation
- larger litigation department than corporate department (which not any peer NY firm can say)
- INCREASED PPP in 2008
- hiring, not firing

This is a no-brainer.

The choices voters are forced to make here are quite stupid. Instead, we should be given a list of, say, the top 32 firms, and asked to rank them from 1 to 32, with 1 being the safest. Then, once the bottom 16 are cut, maybe playoffs would make sense. But because the initial competitions are at random (so if two crappy firms compete, one will still make it to the next round, and if two great firms compete, one will nevertheless be shut out), the results will be somewhat randomized, and thus skewed.

Putting Jones Day up again Kirkland distorts things. Both are among the more stable places. Jones Day NY is having an associate's dinner at the Rainbow Room tonight ferchrisssakes.

I suspect Kirkland won mostly because of its higher Valut ranking, and not because of anything that voters on these boards know about "stability."

Linklaters? The firm that just laid off 450 people, including 20% of the partnership? The firm that is so committed to culling the ranks that they have even branded a name for the initiative, "New World"?

Has anybody noticed the smell in the lobby at Venable DC?

Corrected order (most to least safe) of firms:

1. Wachtell (small, gets ALL critical work)
2. Paul Weiss (litigation heavy)
3. Skadden (bankruptcy practice)
4. Gibson (litigation heavy)
5. Debevoise (corporate heavy, at risk)
6. Linklaters (at grave risk)
7. Davis Polk (known backdoor layoffs)
8. Kirkland (known public layoffs)

Any deviation from this is just ignorance.

QUINN REMAINS

Is it worth commenting the voting followed the Vault rankings exactly? Shouldn't have included those numbers. Stupid poll.

"Sweet 16" firms that have or are currently laying people off:

Linklaters
Kirkland
Davis Polk
Sidley

WTF?

21 and 31, let's be a little clearer. Kirkland has not yet (publicly) laid off any associates. It did let go some NSPs earlier. And there might be some aggressive reviews/stealth layoffs occurring. But, as far as things have gone, there haven't been any associate layoffs at Kirkland.

That likely will change in the weeks ahead, but let's not put the cart before the horse. We can speculate about if, and when, and how many, associates will be laid off. But there's not a historical comparison (yet).

If you work at Kirkland or have in the past worked at Kirkland, I highly recommend getting tested for AIDS.

Paul Weiss is safe for sure.

32 = mentally retarded. This is a survey of "the safest firm to work for." Is there a material difference between laying off associates and NSPs? NSPs at Kirkland are the functional equivalent of senior associates, and in any event, it shows that even NSPs are not safe.

29, Quinn is playing in the NIT

PW is losing to Skadden? Wow law students are idiots

ATL readers have an impecable track record at picking good firms:

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/04/atl_march_april_madness_and_th.php

35, "even NSPs are not safe"? You obviously don't work at Kirkland. NSPs have never been safe. It has always been an "up or out" existence -- if you don't make share partner in 3 or 4 years, you're out. In recent years Kirkland has allowed some NSPs to linger beyond the norm, but that is because Kirkland couldn't begin to handle all the work that was coming its way. Kirkland needed bodies, bodies, and more bodies -- now, due to the overhiring of the last several years, that is no longer the case, and NSPs are no longer needed beyond their expiration date.

That being said, Kirkland is seriously overstaffed and hours are way down -- significant layoffs are definitely on the horizon. Personally, I'd like to see Kirkland's absurdly overstaffed administrative area take a huge hit -- that is the one area of the firm more than any other that has layers upon layers of overpaid, underutilized redundancies.

17, 28 - correct.

I don't think Skadden is a sinking ship, but PW should edge past it.

If you're an associate, Debevoise is a much safer place to work right now than DPW, which has had a number of stealth layoffs. Debevoise is working on a number of deals related to the Wall Street crisis and there have been no layoffs. Most corporate and litigation associates are really busy right now.

@33 -- that was hilarious. thanks.

Debevoise is safer? Why would they be safer than DPW? Aren't they corporate focused? Are they superior to DPW in any practice area?

43 = law student.

I don't work at either firm, but I'm sure Debevoise is superior to DPW in some practice areas. Stop worshiping the Vault. Do you have any idea where those rankings come from?

Debevoise is stronger in fund formation (which, believe it or not, is still busy), and white collar defense (which is busy and will only get busier). Debevoise has a more diversified client pool and isn't as dependent on the big banks for its M&A deal flow.

DPW has already conducted stealth layoffs. Debevoise hasn't ruled out layoffs in the future (who could?), but has stated that they aren't currently being considered.

Most voters will go by the Vault ranking, but Debevoise should win this one by a nose.

43 - i don't think either is safer than the other. DPW is certainly better in some practice areas, but so is Debevoise in others (e.g., investment management, fund formation, internal investigations). I know Devbevoise is still busy in most of its corporate and litigation teams, and was "lucky" not to rely on Wall Street high-profile deals and I-banking work. DPW might be more diversified, though, so I thing DPW may get the edge in the end.

I think that the firms should be re-seeded. Skadden vs. Paul Weiss should be a final four matchup along with Weil and Wachtell.
Skadden gets the nod for not cutting bonuses, Weil is getting a ton of bankruptcy work, Paul Weiss' everything is up (corporate is actually going along well because of the varied client base and Paul Weiss has a nice bankruptcy group) and Wachtell is Wachtell.
In the words of Tony Kornheiser: That's it. That's the list.
Elie- I know your fat and lazy, but maybe next time do seedings a bit differently than pre-financial crisis Vault rankings.

I think that the firms should be re-seeded. Skadden vs. Paul Weiss should be a final four matchup along with Weil and Wachtell.
Skadden gets the nod for not cutting bonuses, Weil is getting a ton of bankruptcy work, Paul Weiss' everything is up (corporate is actually going along well because of the varied client base and Paul Weiss has a nice bankruptcy group) and Wachtell is Wachtell.
In the words of Tony Kornheiser: That's it. That's the list.
Elie- I know your fat and lazy, but maybe next time do seedings a bit differently than pre-financial crisis Vault rankings.

13- why do you think cleary will be an exception like latham? are they in trouble or something? i thought they were doing pretty good with this bail out stuff.

19 -- I looked on the Wachtell website and saw that two associates I know who were listed very recently, and who I thought still worked there, are no longer listed. Don't know what that means...

49, because people will vote Weil based on its bankruptcy practice. (Note that the majority of these voters will know absolutely nothing about either firm other than that they've heard fourth-hand that Weil "has a great bankruptcy practice.") Nothing to do with Cleary - just luck of the draw.

-13

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2009/03/davis-polk-weil-sc-lead-on-new-aig-bailout.html

This is why the DPW v. Debevoise argument is silly. Perception is still king, particularly in this environment. Being flexible enough to operate on both sides (citi and the fed) and being called upon to do so is a sign of strength.

DPW may have had a tendency towards not getting rid of deadweight as much in good times. This is hard to test but may account for "stealth" layoffs. Those layoffs may have in fact been performance-related but the trigger was not pulled in good times. This may still go on at other firms. You would need data on the turnover of the various firms in the previous few years to test this.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2009/03/davis-polk-weil-sc-lead-on-new-aig-bailout.html

This is why the DPW v. Debevoise argument is silly. Perception is still king, particularly in this environment. Being flexible enough to operate on both sides (citi and the fed) and being called upon to do so is a sign of strength.

DPW may have had a tendency towards not getting rid of deadweight as much in good times. This is hard to test but may account for "stealth" layoffs. Those layoffs may have in fact been performance-related but the trigger was not pulled in good times. This may still go on at other firms. You would need data on the turnover of the various firms in the previous few years to test this.

According to AmLaw (http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202427137779) change in revenues for these firms:

Debevoise +7.2
Kirkland +7%
Paul Weiss +6.3%
Gibson +5.4%
Skadden +1.4%
DPW +0%
Wachtell and Linklaters haven't reported

Given Kirkland and Skadden's strong bankruptcy practices, and Debevoise and Kirkland's strong IP practices, I would say the safe firm list looks more like:

Kirkland (despite a tiny bit of blood letting in their income partner bloat, no significant layoffs)
Debevoise
Paul Weiss (mostly litigation)
Skadden (probably too leveraged to sustain in a long-term economic downturn)
Wachtell (mostly corporate)
Gibson
DPW (stealth layoffs across the board, and huge corporate practice)
Linklaters

And anticipating later flames, I do not work or have any relationship with Kirkland. This is based on numbers and practices, not personalities.

39,

I think that we might see some major changes in admin staffing in Chicago soon (likely just before the move, although maybe shortly after).

According to AmLaw (http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202427137779) change in revenues for these firms:

Debevoise +7.2
Kirkland +7%
Paul Weiss +6.3%
Gibson +5.4%
DPW +0%
Skadden -1.4%
Wachtell and Linklaters haven't reported

Given Kirkland and Skadden's strong bankruptcy practices, and Debevoise and Kirkland's strong IP practices, I would say the safe firm list looks more like:

Kirkland (despite a tiny bit of blood letting in their income partner bloat, no significant layoffs)
Debevoise
Paul Weiss (mostly litigation)
Skadden (probably too leveraged to sustain in a long-term economic downturn, and only firm to lose revenues)
Wachtell (mostly corporate)
Gibson
DPW (stealth layoffs across the board, and huge corporate practice)
Linklaters

And anticipating later flames, I do not work or have any relationship with Kirkland. This is based on numbers and practices, not personalities.

52 and 53 - why is perception king if the issue is which firm is more likely to lay off associates, as opposed to which firm is more prestigious or which firm has more high-profile work? The two don't necessarily go hand in hand.

54- This is ATL; take your thoughtful analysis elsewhere, please.

I heard that not only did Kirkland just lay off the entire Chicago office, but Yannucci himself torched the new building for the insurance money.

58 -

Smart strategy on Kirkland's part. Do you think it would work with my NY apartment? What if I just torched my office...?

God help the brave souls who continue to work at Latham NY. Rumors about round 3 of layoffs have already started. The fact that Latham wasn't outright disqualified from this competition was ridiculous.

It's been noted before, but as NCAA commentator lingo would put it, this bracket has been all "chalk."

Folks are just generally following the lower numbers (except for Latham, which has apparently become a verb on ATL). Not sure what anyone is supposed to take from any of this...

55, I hope you're right. How many officers, senior directors, directors, associate directors, managers and supervisors does one firm need, especially when those same jobs exist in 5 different departments and none of them knows what to do, aside from hiring outside consultants to solve their problems?

5, that former Latham summer is probably now a laid off first Latham first year.

5, that former Latham summer is probably now a laid off first Latham first year.

C'mon now, 39/62. Don't be such a spoilsport. Didn't you hear that the Firm Administrator, strike that, make that "Executive Director, formerly known as Firm Administrator" is going for a ratio of 1 admin do-nothing for every K&E attorney or staff member?

Looks like Latham really got Lathamed during the first round, by LINKLATERS of all places.

52 & 53: You obviously know nothing about Debevoise's reputation as a top-tier insurance M&A firm. The firm's portion of the insurance-related work from the economic crisis may not have resulted in an AmLaw headline, but that does not mean that it has not been a prominent player.

Check out Chambers 2008 and http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS172395+30-Jan-2009+PRN20090130 for some guidance on reputation.

Cleary should win it all.

The V10 is going to have a major shake-up over the next 2 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if firms who train their lawyers to be generalists (aka experts in more than one area) rise to the top.

Cleary is one of the few that had an increase in revenues and an increase in profits per partner last year. Unlike other members of this Sweet 16 and the V10, there have not been layoffs (not even stealth).

I'd predict Cleary, S&C, Weil, and Wachtell in the final four. The rest of the sweet 16 have had layoffs (some stealth), decreased revenues and/or profits per partner, or come up with "creative' ways to tell summers and/or 3Ls that the ship is shaky.

I'd predict Cleary, S&C, Weil, and Wachtell in the final four. The rest of the sweet 16 have had layoffs (some stealth), decreased revenues and/or profits per partner, or come up with "creative' ways to tell summers and/or 3Ls that the ship is shaky.

Cleary should win it all.

The V10 is going to have a major shake-up over the next 2 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if firms who train their lawyers to be generalists (aka experts in more than one area) rise to the top.

Cleary is one of the few that had an increase in revenues and an increase in profits per partner last year. Unlike other members of this Sweet 16 and the V10, there have not been layoffs (not even stealth).

I'd predict Cleary, S&C, Weil, and Wachtell in the final four. The rest of the sweet 16 have had layoffs (some stealth), decreased revenues and/or profits per partner, or come up with "creative' ways to tell summers and/or 3Ls that the ship is shaky.

Cleary should win it all.

The V10 is going to have a major shake-up over the next 2 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if firms who train their lawyers to be generalists (aka experts in more than one area) rise to the top.

Cleary is one of the few that had an increase in revenues and an increase in profits per partner last year. Unlike other members of this Sweet 16 and the V10, there have not been layoffs (not even stealth).

68, what about PW

71--Paul Weiss has had stealth layoffs. I'm surprised that ATL has not run a story on it yet.

68 -- I am a PW troll, but still curious: what layoffs, decreased revenues and/or PPP, or creative communications to Summers and 3Ls has Paul, Weiss done? As far as I know, none of the above relates to PW.

Safest?

Wachtell - deal wizards in any climate with no leverage. Should win this poll.

Skadden - diverse practice and still making headlines with deal work. Leverage is a concern for this behemoth

Debevoise - Siemens gravy train is finished and IP does not make up for lack of activity in corporate, where the firm traditionally makes largest % of $$. White collar ramp-up will help going forward.

DPW - capital markets work may start to pick-up now. Stealth layoffs show lack of class, but across the board? Considerable reg and finance expertise so wouldn't write them off yet

Gibson: corporate folks are playing Wii in the office. Not a good sign. But lit is strong and leverage is not a big issue.

Kirkland: PE practice, largest part of corporate, has been dismal. Lit and bankruptcy strong but expect more layoffs of non-equity "partners" and associates if things don't pick up in PE world.

Links - In the process of reinventing itself! don't know how it even made this list. "Guess what, we have decided to go in a different direction - out of this market entirely."

I was in Kirkland's Chicago office in December for a depo and I think I got AIDS from the conference room table. God help me.

68 -- I am a PW troll, but still curious: what layoffs, decreased revenues and/or PPP, or creative communications to Summers and 3Ls has Paul, Weiss done? As far as I know, none of the above relates to PW.

72, where did you get this news? just curious

LATHAM LAID OFF MORE THAN HALF THEIR 1ST YEARS IN NY???!!!!??!!!!!

OOOOHHHHH DEAAAAAR GODDDDD, WHYYYYY, WHYYYYYYY???!!!!!!

Could PW associates who have received those pink slips and NDA please confirm anonymously? I've only heard it from a few PW associates.

The Kirkland hate is silly. Just because ATL and posters keep saying Kirkland has laid people off doesn't make it so. What ATL first reported was 15 or so NSPs let go in Chicago has now morphed into 30 through a game of telephone. The posters who've said that those NSPs were a casualty of the up or out system are correct and it's no different from any other top firm. How many firms made a lot of equity partners this year?

80 -

Posters are confused by what Kirkland means by NSP, because Kirkland includes both attorneys that would be traditional NSPs/Special Counsels and attorneys that would be senior associates. That is evidenced by the fact that Kirkland actually has more NSPs than SPs, which is not true for other firms with NSPs (e.g., Weil, Latham, Sidley, etc.).

80 -

Posters are confused by what Kirkland means by NSP, because Kirkland includes both attorneys that would be traditional NSPs/Special Counsels and attorneys that would be senior associates. That is evidenced by the fact that Kirkland actually has more NSPs than SPs, which is not true for other firms with NSPs (e.g., Weil, Latham, Sidley, etc.).

The whole generalist line is BS. You can't be an "expert" in everything. Even at the firms that big-deal the generalist line like S&C, midlevels are still pegged as being in the M&A, FIG groups, etc.

YES! As absurd as this is, its so fetch.

But what does safest mean? Least likely to lay off? Thats tooooootally different than least likely to close up shop. If its the later, then the big boy firms with the most diverse client and practice base are the "safest" (Clifford, Linklaters, Skadden) If its the former art boutiques with specialized practice groups for in demand practices the "safest"?

Also, why is Bob Loblaw not on here? Does anyone is their right mind think he isnt getting some mega work?

Wachtell's first years are dropping like flies. Surely it cannot all be attributable to exhaustion.

84, may have a point.

But, i'm more concerned with why Alexander & Catallano isnt on the list? Heavy Hitters are a safe bet in any market.

85 -- how do you know that? looks flame to me.

Folks -- you are really missing the real 'safe law firm" news story. Jones Day has opened offices in Mexico City and Dubai and added serious numbers to the partnership during this so-called downturn. How is that not strong evidence of "safety"? A simple review of the JD web site confirms all of these facts. Post some good news once in awhile or, at least, make your March Madness bracket realistic. This bracket is worse than Obama's selections.

88 -- you are retarded, enjoy your layoff at Jones Day, pumping up that shit firm on here won't do you any good.

Actually, Jones Day may end up as one of the true "success" stories from all of this - its hard to buy shit about the firm not being respectable when so many other firms are laying people off in HUGE numbers.

That's sad, but 90 is correct. Who knew TTT firms would be a success? Too bad for our prestige.

Dubai?? You think that's going to be a money maker? They had over 3000 cars abandoned at the airport from people who are leaving and not coming back.

92 -- if you knew anything about firms, you'd know that you don't open an office for it to be immediately money-making. it's all part of a strategy. a firm always subsidizes a new office for quite some time. if you think that having a Dubai office is far-fetched, you should just flush the toilets. once you've put your head in it.

When was Wachtell ever "safe?"

The associate washout rate is legendary, economy notwithstanding.

Even Lat himself, couldn't survive. How many individuals that post on this web site think they would be "safe" at this firm?

I can confirm the PW rumors. Where do I send you my info?

94 - In good years, they tend to hang on past the six month point, however. I can't speak to upper classes, but there are definitely a lot of first years who are MIA. Nor is it just that they haven't had their bios put up - you can still access cached versions for the missing associates. Perhaps Lat can ring in on whether this is usual. I suspect not, since a lot more of the 07's are around still. Why they'd specifically target first years for layoffs is beyond me, though.

95 - post supposed confirmation of PW rumors here

93 -- you are a shrine to failure

I'd love to hear evidence of Paul Weiss layoffs besides some BS anonymous pussy commenters. Don't besmirch the name of a firm just because you're jealous.

Where is the PW stealth layoff evidence? Their corporate department has been going around to schools asking MORE people to join corporate. Exactly how does that fit with stealth layoffs?

No layoffs at PW.

72- Give some evidence or shut up. You are full of it.

72- Give some evidence or shut up. You are full of it.

I'm at PW, not corporate, and I've heard from two separate people (at PW) that there have been stealth layoffs in corporate. Unclear if those two people were referring to the same person, how many people were involved, what years, whether actual "cause" existed or not, etc. It was second-hand info to me, so take it for what it's worth, but I think pretty reliable.

104: I am at PW, corporate, but I never heard of any layoffs.

I think its safe to say that stealth layoffs at PW is bullshit

94 - Sounds like some asshole might have gotten what we call "fired." Not the same thing as "stealth layoffs."

94 - Sounds like some asshole might have gotten what we call "fired." Not the same thing as "stealth layoffs."

@107--meant 104. My bad.

PW layoff rumors = 2000 John McCain illegitimate child rumors.

Nice try.

104 here. Happy to be wrong, if that's the case.

I wonder how many people are actually voting in this thing. For example, the current Skadden/PW results (55.2 to 44.8) could be achieved mathematically with only 29 votes (16 to 13).

no layoffs at Jones Day, eh? all those years of shafting 90% of the associates on comp. has really paid off...

hey 112, click on the "comment" link after you cast your vote and you can see full details on how many people voted and where they voted from

1. Pie
2. 1966 Thunderbirds
3. Luther Motherfucking Vandross
4. The US-Malta Tax Treaty
5. World of Warcraft

Any deviation from this is just ignorance.

I think this contest would have been much more interesting if it had been framed the opposite way, i.e. 'which firms are most boned?'

Kirkland beats Jones Day? This poll is screwed up.

Snore. Must suck to hang your hat on posting here.

Can't believe Pigs Hastings even made it to the tournament.

96 - Only 6 of the 17 '08 JD's who, according to NALP, began working at Wachtell this year are still around. Rather suspicious, indeed.

All your firms are belong to Weil!

PW is back on top. interesting

Paul Weiss has a rising PPP and saved 10-15 million by shaving bonuses. Given that Skadden paid full bonuses, doesn't it have to make cuts soon?

@123: Not necessarily. I doubt it will _force_ them to make cuts--Skadden isn't likely to hurt its image if it doesn't have to (especially after the prestige bump it got from giving the highest bonuses in the known universe).

But you have to think that the extra cash they laid out is coming from somewhere and could put them in a worse position vis-a-vis retention at some point in the future.

PW rocks my world.

this topic is inane. how about a bracket for the firms with the hottest female associates? now there's something substantive. Latham vs. Gibson, bikini mudwrestling at the LA Staple Center for the championship - live on pay per view. all revenues go to each firm's PPP. i'm telling you, this is gold.

This all depends on what "safest" means. Skadden is obviously not going to go under, but it seems like it's going to have to make concessions to the ongoing recession. Cravath cut bonuses and shortened 2L summers. While these can't be fun, it saved the firm millions. Skadden's revenue per lawyer is lower than Cravath, so some delayed start dates or layoff have got to be coming soon.

It's likely still safe for the partners, but Skadden has hundreds of associates whose livelihood might be less "safe" in the near future.

@114 -- Must give credit where due. That is awesome, thanks for pointing it out!

127-

not really sure why you're comparing skadden to cravath...

anyway, it seems pushed back start dates are inevitable at skadden. they already started offering public interest fellowships to incoming 3Ls (outside of the skadden fellows program, that is)?

PW is actually interviewing laterals. They are not doing stealth layoffs.

@130: PW is also hiring 3Ls who didn't summer there, and has a start date in September--quite the opposite of the many firms who are no-offering summers, pushing back start dates, and pre-firing 1st years before they even get to start.

This bracket is retarded! Gibson is laying off staff but the idiots on this site still voted it over WilmerHale which has been in great financial position (increased PPP and NO layoffs).