second ... why are the London firms listed as NY?

So you confirm that the rankings are not legit, then publish them anyway. Quality reporting.

third, truly Idiotic headline. A mistake is not a fake.

So Cravath and Skadden don't exist anymore according to the Vault? Vault has its head up its ass.

Weren't these rankings supposed to come out over a week ago? OCI season has already started. This would be like US News releasing the law school rankings in October.

3 - There is a point to this:

"It will be interesting to compare the two sets and see how much the fake rankings diverged from the real rankings."

no cravath in the top 62? a little blatant, not too subtle

TOP 10!

Touche, 6. Fake ranking indeed...

cravath WILL drop (no client base, etc)

CravaTTTh

Does anyone really care about the Vault rankings? In the "real" world these rankings are meaningless.

No Skadden, no Gibson Dunn, even though both have come out of the recession with really good reps (and are obviously among the 62 most prestigious firms).

To be believable, a hoax must at least be plausible. Come on, people.

small set of examples, but cravath associates are much less busier than others in manhattan

Doesn’t the vault guide usually come out at the start of august? I guess this year, the first year they ever had to actually add anything new in the yearly update has proven more difficult than they initially had anticipated.

There will be 200 comments on the fake rankings thread, another 500+ on the real rankings thread, with another 200+ on the follow-up rankings thread. We are all suckers for posting comments now.

LOL @ the Fordham grad/Weil associate's wet dream.

The most trusted name in career information indeed!

later Cravath.

No Skadden, GDC, or O'Melveny??? BS ... I doubt Cravath will far that far

PE,
Congratulations on the number 2 ranking for your peer firm, Sullivan & Cromwell.

Looks like the real rankings just went up. Refresh that site and look again -- it changed from five minutes ago. Similar to last year.

Real rankings are up (same link location) and the results are pretty much the same as last year. How is Latham still in 7th place?

Real rankings just went up. Congrats to Latham for RISING up a rank to 7th place!

Looks like Hogan is missing from this list as well. You've got to wonder how this list came into being, even if it is fake/preliminary. Perhaps this is a working draft and the missing firms were to be added once their data was finalized?

I went to the same link and the rankings did not come up

I am sad because I was hoping to see the Lady Soto commenter more often.

People hate on PE here, but the geezer has over 30 followers on Twitter! Bam!

#100 in 2009 (Manatt, Drinker Biddle) had a score of 4.317. Now they're saying that 4.056 is 62nd place? No way.

Vault has now blocked that link so it bounces you to the home page. Moreover they never posted the new rankings, you refreshed to the 2009 rankings, which are last years. We are are waiting for 2010 to come out.

Whoops. Good call, 31.

Seriously, after about 15 or so, you're picking names out of a g-damned hat.

Mentioning "prestige" and firms like Sonnenschein in the same sentence is high comedy (unless the 2 are separated by a phrase like "lacks any semblance of").

Was Duke Law's journal staff in charge of the rankings this year?

Just a friendly reminder...

I'm not going anywhere :)

Let's all be complete honest:

Sullivan deserves to pass Cravath

Gibson definitely deserves to pass Latham

PH should drop significantly

36 here --- * completely

Wilmer Hale 13?? Boies Schiller 25?? Hahahaha, what about White & Case or Latham? They're doing awesome and bursting with work too, didn't ya know?? Curious agenda for whomever is responsible for this phony list...

So that's where Elie was last week . . . .

36 = correct. Latham's presence at #7 is the most glaring example (among many) of how laughable these rankings are.

NY to 190
Kirkland to #1

Oh wait this is ATL...

Kirkland to #50.

Speaking of Kirkland, anyone else hear that they are the only firm in the V10 (2009) to not hear about offers?

The numerical rankings are incomplete but the prestige scores are probably accurate for 2010. Firms like Latham, White & Case, and Shearman & Sterling fell by a lot in their raw scores.

Howrey in the top 62.

Howrey supposed to believe that?

Thanks 35! I'd almost forgotten about you...

who cares.
big law will be over soon enough.

Fulbright & Jaworksi to 180(th)!!!

SKADDEN SECU...wtf.

Why isn't McDermott Will & Emery in the top 5?

Compared last year's results with these. My guess is that the results are correct, they simply do not include certain firms, Skadden, Cravath etc. LW dramatically down (7.7 to 6.7) , Weil up. Makes good sense but just a guess.

Vault is a joke. There really is no way to do an "overall" ranking of firms since firms have different specialties (Weil - Bankruptcy, Cahill - High Yield, etc.). Its sort of like comparing apples and oranges.

"Prestige" is a rather fuzzy, subjective term. What the heck does it mean anyways? If you really want an objective measure, use the AmLaw 200 profits per partner grid - definitely a good indicator of whose services clients and lawyers really value.

The only people who care about Vault are Law Students who know nothing and Abovethelaw.com which simply needs things to talk about.

47 nailed it. SS is a total douche.

Thank you 50, you hit the nail on the head.

LOL at all the little prestige whores who jizz themselves over the Vault rankings. Most of you are pallid little contract law gunners who couldn't get laid in a whorehouse on payday.

50: You forgot self-absorbed lawyers who can't stand that they don't get semester grades anymore -- that is, ATL's base.

Paul Weiss should be #1

How about rankings comparing the relative worthlessness of big law "skills" to those possessed by people who practice real law?

If you look at the 2009 rankings and compare the numbers on this "mistake" list, they're very plausable. It's not that Weil climbed much, it's that other firms fell. If Weil had the prestige score reported here last year, it would have been in the same spot (9th). Simpson, Cleary and Latham fell significantly on a score basis. Actually, the score for every firm in the top 10 other than Weil fell on this chart. I think one can assume Cravath is still number two (it had a huge edge on last year's rankings). So that only leaves Skadden as the big question mark. If it's score fell proportionatly to the other firms in the top 10 (besides Weil), it'll end up in the same place as last year: 4th (assuming Cravath is #2). If it dropped a bit further it could come in behind David and Weil at 6th, but any further down than that would be a statistically unusual drop. I predict:

1 Wachtell
2 Cravath
3 Sullivan
4 Davis Polk
5 Skadden
6 Weil
7 Simpson
8 Clearly
9 Covington
10 Kirkland

-Nostrafirmus

Go Quinn Emanuel--19!

Eeek?

I know the list is fake...dickstein shapiro 56???

Agree with 49. My guess is that the prestige scores are correct, but the rankings will change as the missing firms are added. It simply seems like an incomplete list and, judging by some of the firms that are missing, the firms weren't added to the database in order of their prestige score. When firms like Skadden and Cravath are added, they will bump everyone below them already on the list down.

Ropes & Gray is #24 in the new rankings, according to their promotional materials that I received from my interview.

This reminds me of the "fake" U.S. News rankings that turned out to be real.

- GW law student

Quinn Emanuel? Really?

Isnt Jones Day based out of Cleveland?

Wow... I wonder if LaTTThm is really going to drop from last year? I love how Simpson TTThacher (who started the salary craze that led to the legal recession) will probably still rank high

50-- yeah, PPP is really any better when every law firm defines "partner" and "profit" differently. Heck, they even define"per" differently -- in respect to having different fiscal years, tax treatments, capex, etc.

Only lawyers w/ little or no business training whatsoever, would place any credence in these unaudited "ppp" rankings.

The only ranking that has any connection to reality is RPL -- it's very hard to game "revenue" and "# lawyers," though i'm sure many firms try.

LOL @ Greenberg TTTraurig cracking the top 50.

FAKE!

The V100 is supposed to be a list of law firms, and everyone knows that Locke Lord Bissell makes vaccuum cleaners.

Did Vault latham Latham?

Weil deserves the move to number four.

Latham doesn't deserve to even be a V20 anymore.

They laid off half the first years in NY, and in total about 45% of associates in NY.

Latham laid off a third of the first year class in LA, and 25% in DC. This was after these people had worked for about four months. They didn't even try to avoid mass first year layoffs even though they knew they'd be fucking up a lot of careers. To date no V20 has fucked first years or associates in general like this, so their "it's not our fault, it's the economy" bullshit is just that.

FUCK LATHAM, this is the third time they've done the staff up --> mass layoffs thing. Each time they do it they get worse.

Latham is like a wife beater. It abuses its associates, apologizes, promises it won't do it again (see Bob Dell, "there will be no layoffs"), then escalates things each time it mass layoffs.

Jones Day is going to overtake LaTTTham. Latham eats its young.

Latham was incredibly undiversified in NY. They decided to staff up during the boom and take the easy money. They probably planned to mass fire once things turned the whole time NY's management couldn't care less about the associates.

They'll do it again. Mass layoffs is LaTTTham's MO.

Why does everyone think Weil should be anywhere inside the top 10? The class of 09 has been pushed to (at BEST) Jan 2010, but most have really been pushed to Jan 2011. The class of 2010 won't be starting until 2012. There have been layoffs and they closed an entire office! And some of you think Weil deserves number four?!? You've got to be kidding me.

72 - Weil has also worked on three of the largest and most high profile matters of the last year - Lehman, GM and AIG. Maybe that has something to do with it?

Please - the "REAL" rankings will reflect Skadden and Cravath once the checks from these sinking firms clear the bank and the monies are properly secured in Vault.com's bank account.

72 - stop being so cunty

Damn, some of you people are dim. The prestige scores are real. The list is incomplete. That is why it only goes to 62 and firms such as Cravath and Skadden are left off. It took me about two seconds looking at the list and reading that it was prematurely posted on vault.com to figure this out. What is wrong with you people?

Paul Hastings is NUMBER 1 (NOT!!!)

LOL at 72. It's funny to read your post right on the heels of the anti-Latham ranting. Weil chose to delay start dates and pay a substantial deferral bonus to furture classes in order to retain the maximum number of working associates through the downturn. Their logic was that the associates who'd worked for the firm deserved more protection than people who had not yet joined the firm. This was probably the most generous and fair approach among the options available to big firms. About 1/3 of the "2009" class was delayed three months with a modest bonus and 2/3 were delayed 15 months with a much bigger bonus. No one knows the percentages for the class of 2010 yet.

Weil associates are lucky to have such a strong bankruptcy practice group to keep corporate busy, but they're also lucky to have a management committee that values its current associates more than law students.

Sorry you're one of the law students. But seriously, look around you, I bet there are very few people in your class year who wouldn't happily trade places with you.

76 -- Agreed. Which was why the only open question is where to insert the missing firms. I've made my predictions.

- Nostrafirmus

why is there a thread on fake rankings, but not a story on the real rankings? atl has gone downhill so fast.

It's better to defer than mass lay off first years like Latham has. Getting laid off as a first year Latham style fucks your career like nobody's business. A deferral is a nuisance, but that is all.

5 years from now the deferreds will be in great in house jobs. The laid off Latham first years will be selling blow jobs on Santa Monica Blvd or scraping cum off the stalls at the peep show, you lucky deferred Weil bastards.

lol at covington higher than w&c. maybe in transportation law.

73 - those "high-profile" matters only get you so much work - Weil's closings and layoffs are proof of this.

75 - you first.

78 - you must be confused. I'm not a law student or a summer/incoming at Weil. I'm just an outside observer mystified at the Weil-love. I agree with your logic that it is better for Weil to screw future associates than current associates, but that doesn't explain how Weil can be thought of so highly when it's taking such drastic measures in the first place.

"Weil associates are lucky to have such a strong bankruptcy practice group to keep corporate busy, but they're also lucky to have a management committee that values its current associates more than law students."

Tell that to Weil's (former) Austin associates.

And just to be clear, I'm not comparing Weil to Latham or saying Weil should be ranked below Latham...that's ridiculous. Deferrals are of course better than mass layoffs. My question ("why do people think Weil should be ranked so highly?") has nothing to do with Latham.

-72

there is a new ranking in there now with Cravath and Skadden - but only with the first 25

Skadden was third. Weil 6th, Latham 17th. It's down now though.

Latham down to 14? LOL that's how you know it's fake. That's like looking at a list of the world's hottest chicks and seeing Megan Fox listed as number 14.

I'm getting pretty worked up just thinking about those two things...

I think some people need to be reminded of why firms are ranked where they're ranked. That Latham fired a bunch of under-performing assets has NOTHING to do with the quality of its work or the prestige associated with being a professional there.

Sounds like a few of you hippies out there want a ranking of "quality of life" firms or firms where you can just slide under the radar doing nothing for a few years. Sorry to disappoint you. People care nothing about your feelings, and neither does Vault.

Kudos to Vault for not weighing the opinions of crybabies and sticking with professional opinions.

It's still up --- check out the link --- these are probably legit

the link doesn't work for me

The link is up again with all 100 firms filled in this time. List is complete. Can deny it all you want, but the list is straight from Vault. The earlier list was simply incomplete, but now all of the missing firms are filled in.

"Latham down to 14? LOL that's how you know it's fake. That's like looking at a list of the world's hottest chicks and seeing Megan Fox listed as number 14."

With all due respect, Latham & Watkins is no Megan Fox.

Latham is actually down to 17 in the final list. Sorry dude. They deserve it, though.

QUINN RISES to 23rd

Wow -- Skadden above S&C? I don't think so...

- (Still working for a V2)

Can anyone with Vault Gold tell me the top 5 in Partner Prestige? I bet it hasn't changed as much as the Associate survey.

87

Sorry, but part of being a "prestigious" firm is being able to function without destroying the lives of half your first years. These people weren't "underpeforming" assets. It's not their fault the Latham partners couldn't bring in work and idiotically overhired.

AND, one of the Lathamed first years works for Wachtell now. Sorry, but Wachtell is a much better firm than LaTTTham and there's no way she's good enough for them but not good enough for Latham.

Well managed firms don't can 45% of an office. The legal community seems to agree (see new vault rankings).

Seriously, Skadden moving above S&C is strange.

Seems as though they have locked the new rankings down - anybody get a screen shot?!

Agreed, 97. Further proof the Vault rankings are whack. I assume the partner rankings have S&C #3 and Skadden probably #5.

What are the regional rankings? Someone please provide non-BS info.

Latham should Latham Bob Dell and Dave Gordon for this.

Latham was always overrated

It is not clear that these rankings are real.

Latham at 17, out of the top 10.

*Places Dave Gordon's stuff in a box, orders a car, has security escort Dave out to car*

Who cares? Vault is worthless. Look at Chambers for practice area leaders and Amlaw for firm economics.

This is where Bob Dell has a talk with Dave Gordon and tells him he's not going to be laid off, then lays him off two months later.

105 - Amlaw 100 is pretty useless as well because it ranks firms based on revenue, rather than PPP. This leaves Wachtell somewhere in the 50s, and behemoths like DLA Piper in the top 10. The PPP chart, on the other hand, is extremely useful. I don't know why they don't use that as the main Amlaw 100 chart.

Is it down again? I don't see it.

Hey Bob Dell, Dave Gordon you dumbshits. Look at Cravath on the new raknings. Look at Skadden. Look at STB. All corp heavy, none with significant drops. You know why? Because they didn't mass Latham their associates, particularly first year.

Cravath deferred a whole class and they didn't fall.

You dumbshits would have been better off deferring people than laying off en masse. Really, did you think laying off half a first year class would go unnoticed? Did you think you could cut nearly half of Latham NY and no one would care? I hope both of your stupid asses get fired.

here's the V25 before they yanked it... still might not be correct, but seems plausible:

1. Wachtell
2. Cravath
3. Skadden
4. Sully
5. Davis Polk
6. Weil
7. Simpson Thacher
8. ClearGo
9. Covington
10. Kirkland
11. WillCo
12. Debevoise
13. Paul Weiss
14. Gibson
15. Sidley
16. WilmerHale
17. Latham
18. Arnold & Porter
19. Jones Day
20. White & Case
21. Shearman
22. O'Melveny
23. Quinn
24. Ropes & Gray
25. Hogan & Hartson

LOL at latham falling 10 spots.

Even the janitors in my LA firm make fun of Latham. I still think they're overrated.

AmLaw is useful because it has tables for a number of financial metrics (PPP, RPL, Total Revenue, Leverage, etc.) and in total they give a sense of how a firm operates, how levered it is, how agressive its rates are, etc.

Vault is a bunch of surveys with zero quality control. Take a look at their methodology. Its a joke.

110 -- Paul Weiss should totally be among top 10!

114, a single year in which a firm rides out a recession because it has an underdevloped corporate program and is litigation heavy does not necessarily mean that a firm should be in the top 10.

Of course, grossly mismanaged and undiversified firms like Latham should not be in the top 10 and never should've been. The bloodbath they were forced to inflict is symptomatic of much larger problems.

Top 10 firms should be firms that are superior across numerous practice groups and have high PPP and RPL. Diversification should play a larger role as well. We've seen what a boon it is via firms like Kirkland and Weil to have well-developed and superior practice groups across the spectrum (IP Lit, bankruptcy, etc...)

83 -- Didn't Weil offer every associate in the Austin office a position in the Dallas office? I thought the only reason they closed Austin was because the partner that brought in the most bsiness in Austin was relocating to the much larger Dallas office. Your supposition that closing an office is indicative of economic problems is seriously weak. Weil closed a small office with only a few partners that did basically exclusively IP work because the partner was relocating and then offered every associate a job in the closest office. I can see why it would suck to be an associate with a house and life in Austin who had rto pack up and relocate to another city to keep his job, but that's got nothing whatsoever to do with the health of the firm.