The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Kirkland non-equity partners
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 2nd, 2007 12:21 PM Author: mind-boggling idea he suggested How much do non-equity partners make at Kirkland? 400K? 500K? More?
And how is their compensation determined? |
 |
Date: October 2nd, 2007 12:25 PM Author: black irradiated affirmative action i think it's somewhere in the 400k range. i think they get a base (somewhat about what market would be for associates in their class year at other firms) plus a bonus based on firm profits + their value added (business generated, hours billed, etc) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717554) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 12:30 PM Author: mind-boggling idea he suggested so that's really not that much better than most 6-8th years? or is it? i would think it would be in the 300-350 range at most non-NY firms. so if you're a NEP at kirkland's chicago or california offices, you're doing much better than everyone else your year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717568) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 12:54 PM Author: black irradiated affirmative action i think it's quite a bit better. base is higher, and bonus is WAY higher. plus, you have the "partner" title, which makes it easier to interact with clients, etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717692) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 12:59 PM Author: mind-boggling idea he suggested Yeah, I know some people in the LA office + that's their take too. But something weird is happening there - ATL said something about the LA associates flooding the mkt with their resumes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717707) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 1:48 PM Author: black irradiated affirmative action well, i think the move from non-share partner to share partner is as difficult (or about as difficult) at K&E as it is at any other v10. if they were rapidly growing the LA office a few years ago, there would be a glut of non-share partners who are realizing that they're never going to make the cut. so they all start looking for lateral opportunities.
that would be my guess, anyway. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 5:48 PM Author: concupiscible metal indian lodge queen of the night "But something weird is happening there - ATL said something about the LA associates flooding the mkt with their resumes." Link? |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 3:43 PM Author: glassy bat shit crazy gas station mood Subject: So, an eighth-year associate at Kirkland... ...oh, sorry, non-equity partner gets about 400K a year and an eighth-year associate at Cravath, oh, I mean first-year equity partner gets about $1.4M a year? Ouch. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8718429) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 3:49 PM Author: flushed prole I haven't heard any info that it's any harder to make equity partner in 8 years at Kirkland than at Cravath. Main difference is you're pretty much assured of getting the partner title at Kirkland (and a couple years earlier), and Cravath you run the risk of becoming this guy: http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=373592&mc=37&forum_id=2
Cravath PPPs are higher but Kirkland's are still very high, and as a junior partner it probably doesn't matter anyway. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 3:53 PM Author: glassy bat shit crazy gas station mood Subject: You mean seven years? I can tell you, at Kirkland it's zero. Average EQUITY track at Kirkland is closer to ten...and almost impossible.
Partner title? Are you joking? Everybody in the legal world knows that you're just a senior associate. Nothing more.
And why do you say as a junior partner it doesn't matter anyway? What doesn't matter? |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 5:36 PM Author: autistic self-absorbed milk church building Subject: Income comparison 1. It usually takes 6 years to become a non-share partner and an addition 4 years to get equity. Non-share partnership is automatic; I have heard that about 25% of those eventually receive equity.
2. Because of it's PPP, share partners at Kirkland earn more than peers at most other law firms.
3. Because of their bonuses, associates and non-share partners at Kirkland earn more than associates at almost all other firms.
4. Compared to a lawyer at a firm with an 8-year partnership track, a K&E lawyer will earn less in his 8th and 9th year. But he will have made more money in years 1-7 and will make (much) more from years 10 onward. Overall, he's done better at Kirkland. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 5:53 PM Author: glassy bat shit crazy gas station mood Subject: The above was comparing Cravath and Kirkland. So, an eighth-year at Kirkland making a full $1M less than his counterpart at Cravath will do better? In what bizarro universe? What about the ninth year when the guy at Cravath is making $1.2M more? Kirkland guy still doing better? The Kirkland guy is already at least $2M behind.
Oh, and what about when/if the Kirkland guy actually does make equity? With Cravath's lockstep system, unless the Kirkland guy becomes a top 5% rainmaker superstar, there will never be a year -- not one -- that the Kirkland guy makes more than the Cravath partner.
|
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 6:10 PM Author: autistic self-absorbed milk church building 1. It's true that I was generally comparing K&E to other firms. My point about pre-equity partner income remains.
2. Your point about partner share distribution is meaningless because you probably don't know how Cravath shares are distributed, and almost nobody outside K&E knows how Kirkland shares are distributed.
3. I readily admit that I don't know how Cravath's share system works. I assume that it is lockstep per year--but I don't know which years receive more money. If it is the senior partners at Cravath that are receiving the lion's share of...um, shares...then a young K&E partner may earn more.
4. I think Hazelrah picked on a big element of the comparison. The great majority of Cravath associates don't make partner. Most Kirkland associates can make non-share partner. And it apparently does make a difference for career prospects, despite your denials. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 6:20 PM Author: glassy bat shit crazy gas station mood Subject: I think the Cravath spread is common knowledge. It was referenced in an article last year. Lockstep -- 1 to 3 spread. With a PPP of $2.9 you can do the math. The Kirkland point distribution bloodbaths are infamous with any equity partner with less than 10 years of tenure basically screwed.
So are you really arguing that a Kirkland equity partner who begins his partnership with $2-$3 million less in cumulative earnings that the Cravath partner and who will more than likely not have a single year after where he takes home more is still better off?
I'm speechless. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 6:24 PM Author: concupiscible metal indian lodge queen of the night "The Kirkland point distribution bloodbaths are infamous with any equity partner with less than 10 years of tenure basically screwed." No. K&E has a 4:1 spread from top to bottom. |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 6:26 PM Author: glassy bat shit crazy gas station mood Subject: Thank you. Making the disparity even greater. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8719248) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 6:41 PM Author: autistic self-absorbed milk church building 1. Listen, if you go to Cravath because you think you're going to make a lot of money as a partner, then buona fortuna.
2. If you are like the great majority of Cravath associates who don't make partner, then you probably would have earned more at Kirkland.
3. If you stay at Kirkland, you will make non-share partner. You get the same nice office as all partners. And if you lateral, you will do so as a partner, not an associate.
4. Obviously, Cravath has great lateral opportunities, too. I think it's relevant that a Cravath 7th year is essentially a generalist. But they seem to do just fine.
|
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 5:48 PM Author: autistic self-absorbed milk church building Subject: Partner /= senior associate 1. You're completely wrong on your senior associate angle.
2. Kirkland associates usually have more practice area expertise than lawyers from firms with rotation systems. By comparison, Cravath associates are generalists who have spent only 18 months in any particular area.
3. K&E non-share partners can frequently lateral to equity partnership at other firms. See this guy: http://www.mofo.com/attorneys/13491/summary.html. He made non-equity partner and almost immediately was offered a share partner position at Mofo. This is faster than Mofo's own partnership track. And he wasn't required to lateral in as an associate first, which is a requirement for senior associate laterals (according to Mofo's career website). |
Date: October 2nd, 2007 1:50 PM Author: flushed prole There was a little here: http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=514615&mc=2&forum_id=2#6955825 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717920) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 1:52 PM Author: mind-boggling idea he suggested Thx for the pointer Hazelrah (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8717939) |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 2:07 PM Author: Vigorous Liquid Oxygen Persian ROFLMAO that's HORRIBLE
good god law sucks |
|
Date: October 2nd, 2007 7:31 PM Author: transparent fat ankles marketing idea anyone who thinks that "non-equity partner" is anything more than a marketing gimmick is a reTTTard who deserves to work at a festering shithole like kirkland & ellis. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=695324&forum_id=2#8719511) |