The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
How much do partners make?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:35 AM Author: Puce indirect expression and how do they determine how much they actually get for:
BigLaw? MidLaw? SmallLaw? |
 |
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:35 AM Author: vibrant gas station deer antler It depends. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248207) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:37 AM Author: Puce indirect expression I cant find any data on anything, only associate pay and median salaries.
Approximate please if you have any know-how on the subject. |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:40 AM Author: vibrant gas station deer antler That's because it fucking depends.
It's going to vary WIDELY between firms, and then even more so between each partner.
Generally, how it works is this. Once you make equity partner, you are given the chance to buy 'shares' of the firm. Your alotment of shares you can buy each year is determined by how much work you bring in. Then, after all costs are taken out of the firms gross income, the profits are divided amongst the partners according to share %.
Make sense? |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:52 AM Author: Puce indirect expression Is there any place where firms report net profits? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248289) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 8:50 AM Author: peach 180 university well, they report gross profits per partner (PPP) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249329) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:06 AM Author: provocative lay factory reset button 2005 PPP: http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=373243&forum_id=2 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249373) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:58 AM Author: splenetic brunch keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248323) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 8:42 AM Author: Aromatic party of the first part You realize this makes no sense, right? PPP is the average; if everybody makes the average or less, it wouldn't be the PPP. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249313) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:00 AM Author: Purple naked library faggotry Exactly, I was gonna ask: how does the claim that all those partners make less than PPP account for the fact that only *two* partners making a mere 25% more than it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249349) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 10:20 AM Author: splenetic brunch keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249572) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 10:17 AM Author: splenetic brunch keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249565) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 10:41 AM Author: Purple naked library faggotry obviously it doesn't mean that all partners make the same. but the jump from 33% to 100% must be pretty quick, otherwise the three partners who are making 125% would be more than outweighed by the partners making less than 100%. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249632) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 11:36 AM Author: sable elite milk alpha And there must be *some* people other than the name partners who are bringing in over 100%. Otherwise, like you said, the new partners have to go from 33% to 100% virtually immediately. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249760) |
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:39 AM Author: autistic bat-shit-crazy parlour http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1145803851927 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248236) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 2:43 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle associate There are people in firms of two who make almost nothing. There are partners at plaintiffs firms who make 8 figures. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248251) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 3:00 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle associate At eat-what-you-kill firms, you usually get credits for the work you bring in. At the end of the year, you get the percentage of profit that corresponds to the percentage of work you brought in.
At lock-step firms, they figure some scale and pay you according to that.
Some firms are hybrids.
|
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 3:03 AM Author: splenetic brunch keepsake machete (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248351) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:01 AM Author: Purple naked library faggotry survival of the fittest baby. the real question is why the douche who can only bring in $175K in profit was ever made partner. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249352) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:03 AM Author: vivacious flatulent state does it even matter? he was probably made partner because he's been with the firm a long time and it boosts the morale of associates to see people get promoted. i don't think it matters in any event because the firm's not really wasting any extra money or resources by making him a partner. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249364) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:06 AM Author: Purple naked library faggotry you are right that one of the benefits of eat-what-you-kill is that the partnership decision is much less weighty. if the guy doesn't perform, sucks for him, whereas in a lock step system, an underperformer is subsidized by people who are better and/or harder-working than he is. but the vibe at those partnership meetings must be painful. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249372) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 3:03 AM Author: Puce indirect expression Interesting. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7248352) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 11:20 AM Author: Jet school cafeteria to add to this, you can usually get credits for things other than bringing in work. for example, a rainmaker often brings in far more work than he can supervise on his own. so some other partner takes over the project and runs it. the rainmaker gets some credits for this (but less than if he had brought it in and supervised it) and then the receiving partner gets some. also, you can get credits for being on committees- this way the managing partner and other high ranking guys who don't really practice much can still make money. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249713) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 9:02 AM Author: vivacious flatulent state ONE MILLION DOLLARS (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#7249354) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 10:49 AM Author: Idiotic stage JUDGE JUDY PWNS ALL YOU FAGGOTS: $28 MILLION. YOU FAGGOTS WILL ALWAYS BE POOR, ALWAYS!!!!
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/53/ZIEX.html |
|
Date: December 18th, 2006 10:53 AM Author: provocative lay factory reset button From Greedy Junior Partners, here's an example of how partner comp works in practice. Example is for Latham (known for being relatively transparent for stuff like this) but the idea is similar to how other firms work.
"If you're at Latham, you should know the answer to this. When I was there (only a couple years ago) it was disclosed in the annual financials that they distribute to everyone -- or at least you could figure it out. New partners get 300 units and senior partners have 900 units, with parity partners having 700 units (most partners top out at 700 and only the superstars can move beyond that). Unit value from year to year varies, but it's often around $1400. Multiply that by 300 units and you get $420,000. That number is subject to some manipulations (new partners have to buy their units for example) and there is a "bonus" pool of sorts as well for partners who do something extraordinary during the year."
http://www.infirmation.com/bboard/clubs-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002P4V
Most firms will have a comparable unit/point/credit system, determined partly by seniority (more so for more lockstep firms) and partly by performance, and with excess profits given out as bonuses (for performance and/or to attract/retain key laterals). At e.g. Latham the disparity in base comp between seniors and juniors would be 3:1, but bonuses could conceivably push that up much higher. |
|
Date: May 5th, 2007 8:01 PM Author: swashbuckling locale athletic conference interesting, thanks (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=548302&forum_id=2#8067388) |