I don’t know a single person making 7 figures

[Anonymous]

I only know 2 and they're married to each other. I also had no idea. The husband was on a business trip and the wife broke her leg and I went over to help with their kids. I was cooking dinner and moved a stack of papers off the counter and their w2 was on top. I was floored. So maybe you also know someone and just don't know it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of well paid lawyers on this thread. But reminder: No one on earth makes more money than successful business owners. The super rich don't get that way because someone is paying them a salary. They get rich from owning businesses that become incredibly valuable.

Very true.

Lawyers do, however, know how to read something, identify relevance, and respond accordingly.

You keep harping on business owners having a better chance of becoming “super rich”. No sh$t. It’s an entirely different risk-reward calculus: exponentially more absolute failures, proportionally much less likely to be a moderately successful low-level millionaire, and a slightly greater but still infinitesimally small likelihood of becoming “super rich”.

In any case, that’s not at all the subject of this thread, so I don’t know why you keep posting different variations of the same statement.

Oh wait, yes I do. Envy and insecurity.

PP here. This was actually the only post I wrote. I think you're confusing me with someone else who doesn't think being a lawyer would be incredibly boring. I'm not jealous. I own a TON of Nvidia stock I bought ten years ago so honestly I'm probably a lot wealthier than you.

It is hard to hold Nvidia for 10 years...so man ups-and-downs...you have some fortitude to hold. I was lucky that my kid who knows AI casually mentioned to me 18 months ago that he thought Open AI's new release may actually be something so buy Nvidia as a way to play it. What a ride since then.

I agree with you and I find the entire DC / BigLaw mentality to just be so silly. It reminds me of the scene in the Social Network when Sean Parker says "$1MM is not cool"...at which point the BigLaw partner would stand up and say "heck yeah it's cool" and walk out of the meeting.

I travel a ton to SFO and work with start-ups and the environment is electrifying and optimistic and people dream and think big...and DC BigLaw is all about just grinding to earn your $2MM per year.

FWIW, I know several BigLaw partners and NONE want their kids to follow in their path...a large part of that is because they know generative AI will be disruptive, because their own firms are figuring out how to incorporate it to make their lives richer, but cut down on the number of pesky associates. Anything to improve profits-per-partner baby!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of well paid lawyers on this thread. But reminder: No one on earth makes more money than successful business owners. The super rich don't get that way because someone is paying them a salary. They get rich from owning businesses that become incredibly valuable.

Very true.

Lawyers do, however, know how to read something, identify relevance, and respond accordingly.

You keep harping on business owners having a better chance of becoming “super rich”. No sh$t. It’s an entirely different risk-reward calculus: exponentially more absolute failures, proportionally much less likely to be a moderately successful low-level millionaire, and a slightly greater but still infinitesimally small likelihood of becoming “super rich”.

In any case, that’s not at all the subject of this thread, so I don’t know why you keep posting different variations of the same statement.

Oh wait, yes I do. Envy and insecurity.

PP here. This was actually the only post I wrote. I think you're confusing me with someone else who doesn't think being a lawyer would be incredibly boring. I'm not jealous. I own a TON of Nvidia stock I bought ten years ago so honestly I'm probably a lot wealthier than you.

It is hard to hold Nvidia for 10 years...so man ups-and-downs...you have some fortitude to hold. I was lucky that my kid who knows AI casually mentioned to me 18 months ago that he thought Open AI's new release may actually be something so buy Nvidia as a way to play it. What a ride since then.

I agree with you and I find the entire DC / BigLaw mentality to just be so silly. It reminds me of the scene in the Social Network when Sean Parker says "$1MM is not cool"...at which point the BigLaw partner would stand up and say "heck yeah it's cool" and walk out of the meeting.

I travel a ton to SFO and work with start-ups and the environment is electrifying and optimistic and people dream and think big...and DC BigLaw is all about just grinding to earn your $2MM per year.

FWIW, I know several BigLaw partners and NONE want their kids to follow in their path...a large part of that is because they know generative AI will be disruptive, because their own firms are figuring out how to incorporate it to make their lives richer, but cut down on the number of pesky associates. Anything to improve profits-per-partner baby!

They think reducing the number of associates is going to improve profits per partner? Do they not know how law firm profitability works? You need those associates billing hours to get those profits. No associates, no billable hours, no profits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know three. All husbands of my friends. We are stay at home moms. One’s a CEO with an eight figure salary , one is biglaw, one is in science research but not sure what.

Public companies have to publicize their executives salaries so you can get an idea of what they are paid.

If lawyers aren’t in biglaw they are nowhere near 7 figures. More like $150,000.

I worked a part time temp job years ago and one job had a high income, the sales people in high tech. More than the engineers but not 7 figures.

Do you talk about salaries? Hunt for compensation packages on SEC websites? In my circles that's not what polite people do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of well paid lawyers on this thread. But reminder: No one on earth makes more money than successful business owners. The super rich don't get that way because someone is paying them a salary. They get rich from owning businesses that become incredibly valuable.

Very true.

Lawyers do, however, know how to read something, identify relevance, and respond accordingly.

You keep harping on business owners having a better chance of becoming “super rich”. No sh$t. It’s an entirely different risk-reward calculus: exponentially more absolute failures, proportionally much less likely to be a moderately successful low-level millionaire, and a slightly greater but still infinitesimally small likelihood of becoming “super rich”.

In any case, that’s not at all the subject of this thread, so I don’t know why you keep posting different variations of the same statement.

Oh wait, yes I do. Envy and insecurity.

PP here. This was actually the only post I wrote. I think you're confusing me with someone else who doesn't think being a lawyer would be incredibly boring. I'm not jealous. I own a TON of Nvidia stock I bought ten years ago so honestly I'm probably a lot wealthier than you.

It is hard to hold Nvidia for 10 years...so man ups-and-downs...you have some fortitude to hold. I was lucky that my kid who knows AI casually mentioned to me 18 months ago that he thought Open AI's new release may actually be something so buy Nvidia as a way to play it. What a ride since then.

I agree with you and I find the entire DC / BigLaw mentality to just be so silly. It reminds me of the scene in the Social Network when Sean Parker says "$1MM is not cool"...at which point the BigLaw partner would stand up and say "heck yeah it's cool" and walk out of the meeting.

I travel a ton to SFO and work with start-ups and the environment is electrifying and optimistic and people dream and think big...and DC BigLaw is all about just grinding to earn your $2MM per year.

FWIW, I know several BigLaw partners and NONE want their kids to follow in their path...a large part of that is because they know generative AI will be disruptive, because their own firms are figuring out how to incorporate it to make their lives richer, but cut down on the number of pesky associates. Anything to improve profits-per-partner baby!

They think reducing the number of associates is going to improve profits per partner? Do they not know how law firm profitability works? You need those associates billing hours to get those profits. No associates, no billable hours, no profits.

Believe me...they are figuring out how to maintain or raise billings and reduce their associates. They are also starting to experiment with fixed contracts / fixed monthly billings.

I always found BigLaw to be a weird antagonistic business model...partners seem to kind of despise most of their associates. Also the weird dynamic of partners not receiving any benefits from the firm, but all the associates and staff do...and again, they kind of despise staff for having to pay for those benefits.

[Anonymous]

AI as it is will have less impact on law than those pre-made legal form software kits. I do think it will advance quickly though and we will know later on how much of an impact it can make. No firms are making current changes to their business models or practice to accommodate AI like PP is claiming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AI as it is will have less impact on law than those pre-made legal form software kits. I do think it will advance quickly though and we will know later on how much of an impact it can make. No firms are making current changes to their business models or practice to accommodate AI like PP is claiming.

Current, as in right now...true. Current as in the big firms are starting to figure out how they start using it...absolutely. My kid's college is working on a study right now with a major BigLaw firm out of NYC. Also, working with a major management consulting group as well.

Nothing will change...until everything changes. I doubt any law firm will hire any associate in 5 years who doesn't understand LLMs and how to employ them in their work.

[Anonymous]

I make 7 figures but tell no one. Maybe you know me. I’ll treat you to a cup of coffee next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Early retired Biglaw partner here. I remember sitting in partner meetings in my old firm over a decade ago and thinking to myself “how surreal is it that every person in this room with me right now is making $1 million a year or more?”

They definitely were. No lying involved.

As for the posters who scoff at these lawyers as merely “servicing the rich” or having to work around the clock to make their money, that’s only true to an extent. After a few years as an equity partner most Biglaw partners have made enough money that they could walk away rich if they wanted to and just let the money that they’ve already earned work for them. They just choose not to because it’s not in their nature.

My own personal situation is a good illustration. When I left my law firm around a decade ago, in my early 50s, I had been an equity partner for about ten years. I was counsel for about 10 years before that. As counsel, I made in the low six figures. As an equity partner, I started in the mid six figures and finished at just under $1 million. I was one of the lowest paid equity partners in my firm - a very well known one in DC.

My current net worth is about $8 million. I haven’t worked at all since leaving Biglaw. My net worth is about double what it was since leaving my firm thanks to the market, etc.

So, no, personally I’m not rich but I have to figure that my former partners - who all made more money than me and who all keep working - have net worths well into 8 figures. It’s impossible for them not to have that much money at this point. That they are continuing to work is a personality thing. They just can’t stop themselves.

I wonder if your partners who continue to work really do have those net worth figures. A number of partners in my firm, who have been here for a while, have surprisingly little saved. At least the ones who will admit it. Notwithstanding the fact that they’ve been working as partners for 10+ years making easily more than $2 million a year, a handful of them said they don’t even have $2 million saved. One of them told me that he was hoping that he could save at least $300,000 this year, which will be the first time he’s ever been able to do that. It’s breathtaking.

But they each have multiple homes, they fly first class or private, kids are in private schools, they vacation overseas, at least once a year, so at deer valley and vail with private lessons and private chefs, etc. etc. etc. There’s no shortage of ways to spend your money, and these guys seemed to have found many of them.

Golden handcuffs at its finest.

Early Retired Biglaw partner here. I doubt you’re right. For one thing, most Biglaw firm force equity partners to contribute ungodly amounts to tax-deferred retirement plans. You wouldn’t believe the amount of forced savings. So, yea, there are without a doubt many Biglaw partners who don’t save a lot of their take home earnings, but those same lawyers are getting richer and richer just the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I only know 2 and they're married to each other. I also had no idea. The husband was on a business trip and the wife broke her leg and I went over to help with their kids. I was cooking dinner and moved a stack of papers off the counter and their w2 was on top. I was floored. So maybe you also know someone and just don't know it?

Admit it. You snooped. Some friend you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know several married persons making 7 figs, but no one single.

I make 7 figures. Law

You are married.... to the job

This. I cannot speak for other professions, but for lawyers to crack $1M they need to live the job. Even rainmakers work long hours away from family…they just spend their time landing clients rather than grinding out billable hours. But it is still work.

To get rich, you either have to inherit, work harder than anyone else, invent something that a large number of people need, or invest very very wisely. Other than inheriting, all these take either special talent or extremely hard work. There is no substitute. Most people don’t have enough brains or a strong enough work ethic to get there. Period.

This X1 million

[Anonymous]

I think I know someone who makes that much. But I would never be so bold to ask, and they have not told me, so I can't be sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Early retired Biglaw partner here. I remember sitting in partner meetings in my old firm over a decade ago and thinking to myself “how surreal is it that every person in this room with me right now is making $1 million a year or more?”

They definitely were. No lying involved.

As for the posters who scoff at these lawyers as merely “servicing the rich” or having to work around the clock to make their money, that’s only true to an extent. After a few years as an equity partner most Biglaw partners have made enough money that they could walk away rich if they wanted to and just let the money that they’ve already earned work for them. They just choose not to because it’s not in their nature.

My own personal situation is a good illustration. When I left my law firm around a decade ago, in my early 50s, I had been an equity partner for about ten years. I was counsel for about 10 years before that. As counsel, I made in the low six figures. As an equity partner, I started in the mid six figures and finished at just under $1 million. I was one of the lowest paid equity partners in my firm - a very well known one in DC.

My current net worth is about $8 million. I haven’t worked at all since leaving Biglaw. My net worth is about double what it was since leaving my firm thanks to the market, etc.

So, no, personally I’m not rich but I have to figure that my former partners - who all made more money than me and who all keep working - have net worths well into 8 figures. It’s impossible for them not to have that much money at this point. That they are continuing to work is a personality thing. They just can’t stop themselves.

I wonder if your partners who continue to work really do have those net worth figures. A number of partners in my firm, who have been here for a while, have surprisingly little saved. At least the ones who will admit it. Notwithstanding the fact that they’ve been working as partners for 10+ years making easily more than $2 million a year, a handful of them said they don’t even have $2 million saved. One of them told me that he was hoping that he could save at least $300,000 this year, which will be the first time he’s ever been able to do that. It’s breathtaking.

But they each have multiple homes, they fly first class or private, kids are in private schools, they vacation overseas, at least once a year, so at deer valley and vail with private lessons and private chefs, etc. etc. etc. There’s no shortage of ways to spend your money, and these guys seemed to have found many of them.

Golden handcuffs at its finest.

Early Retired Biglaw partner here. I doubt you’re right. For one thing, most Biglaw firm force equity partners to contribute ungodly amounts to tax-deferred retirement plans. You wouldn’t believe the amount of forced savings. So, yea, there are without a doubt many Biglaw partners who don’t save a lot of their take home earnings, but those same lawyers are getting richer and richer just the same.

PP here. I am right. They told me. Why would anybody lie about not having any money saved? Plus the firm has an unfunded pension, which is why these guys aren’t saving anything in addition to the Measley tax advantage accounts that are available to them like a 401(k) and a Keogh plan. Yes, there is some forced savings, but these guys do the minimum and save nothing on top of it, and wait till they’re 60 and hope to God. The firm continues to fund the pension. Not me, I’m getting out early like you did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of well paid lawyers on this thread. But reminder: No one on earth makes more money than successful business owners. The super rich don't get that way because someone is paying them a salary. They get rich from owning businesses that become incredibly valuable.

Very true.

Lawyers do, however, know how to read something, identify relevance, and respond accordingly.

You keep harping on business owners having a better chance of becoming “super rich”. No sh$t. It’s an entirely different risk-reward calculus: exponentially more absolute failures, proportionally much less likely to be a moderately successful low-level millionaire, and a slightly greater but still infinitesimally small likelihood of becoming “super rich”.

In any case, that’s not at all the subject of this thread, so I don’t know why you keep posting different variations of the same statement.

Oh wait, yes I do. Envy and insecurity.

PP here. This was actually the only post I wrote. I think you're confusing me with someone else who doesn't think being a lawyer would be incredibly boring. I'm not jealous. I own a TON of Nvidia stock I bought ten years ago so honestly I'm probably a lot wealthier than you.

It is hard to hold Nvidia for 10 years...so man ups-and-downs...you have some fortitude to hold. I was lucky that my kid who knows AI casually mentioned to me 18 months ago that he thought Open AI's new release may actually be something so buy Nvidia as a way to play it. What a ride since then.

I agree with you and I find the entire DC / BigLaw mentality to just be so silly. It reminds me of the scene in the Social Network when Sean Parker says "$1MM is not cool"...at which point the BigLaw partner would stand up and say "heck yeah it's cool" and walk out of the meeting.

I travel a ton to SFO and work with start-ups and the environment is electrifying and optimistic and people dream and think big...and DC BigLaw is all about just grinding to earn your $2MM per year.

FWIW, I know several BigLaw partners and NONE want their kids to follow in their path...a large part of that is because they know generative AI will be disruptive, because their own firms are figuring out how to incorporate it to make their lives richer, but cut down on the number of pesky associates. Anything to improve profits-per-partner baby!

They think reducing the number of associates is going to improve profits per partner? Do they not know how law firm profitability works? You need those associates billing hours to get those profits. No associates, no billable hours, no profits.

Believe me...they are figuring out how to maintain or raise billings and reduce their associates. They are also starting to experiment with fixed contracts / fixed monthly billings.

I always found BigLaw to be a weird antagonistic business model...partners seem to kind of despise most of their associates. Also the weird dynamic of partners not receiving any benefits from the firm, but all the associates and staff do...and again, they kind of despise staff for having to pay for those benefits.

Law firms have been trying out different billing arrangements for years. I started my legal career in biglaw over 20 years ago and they were saying back then that there were going to transition off the billable hour. It's never really worked.

I'm in house now. From what I've seen of AI so far, I'm very skeptical it can be very useful for anything other than pretty menial tasks. It produces professional-looking products, but the products are wrong more often than they are right. It's actually a big problem in my view because the documents look very convincing even though they have huge errors in them, But if it turns out that AI can do the work of the associates, then there is no need to hire these firms in the first place. I will just buy the software myself. Why would I pay a biglaw partner $1500 an hour to run software?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Early retired Biglaw partner here. I remember sitting in partner meetings in my old firm over a decade ago and thinking to myself “how surreal is it that every person in this room with me right now is making $1 million a year or more?”

They definitely were. No lying involved.

As for the posters who scoff at these lawyers as merely “servicing the rich” or having to work around the clock to make their money, that’s only true to an extent. After a few years as an equity partner most Biglaw partners have made enough money that they could walk away rich if they wanted to and just let the money that they’ve already earned work for them. They just choose not to because it’s not in their nature.

My own personal situation is a good illustration. When I left my law firm around a decade ago, in my early 50s, I had been an equity partner for about ten years. I was counsel for about 10 years before that. As counsel, I made in the low six figures. As an equity partner, I started in the mid six figures and finished at just under $1 million. I was one of the lowest paid equity partners in my firm - a very well known one in DC.

My current net worth is about $8 million. I haven’t worked at all since leaving Biglaw. My net worth is about double what it was since leaving my firm thanks to the market, etc.

So, no, personally I’m not rich but I have to figure that my former partners - who all made more money than me and who all keep working - have net worths well into 8 figures. It’s impossible for them not to have that much money at this point. That they are continuing to work is a personality thing. They just can’t stop themselves.

I wonder if your partners who continue to work really do have those net worth figures. A number of partners in my firm, who have been here for a while, have surprisingly little saved. At least the ones who will admit it. Notwithstanding the fact that they’ve been working as partners for 10+ years making easily more than $2 million a year, a handful of them said they don’t even have $2 million saved. One of them told me that he was hoping that he could save at least $300,000 this year, which will be the first time he’s ever been able to do that. It’s breathtaking.

But they each have multiple homes, they fly first class or private, kids are in private schools, they vacation overseas, at least once a year, so at deer valley and vail with private lessons and private chefs, etc. etc. etc. There’s no shortage of ways to spend your money, and these guys seemed to have found many of them.

Golden handcuffs at its finest.

Early Retired Biglaw partner here. I doubt you’re right. For one thing, most Biglaw firm force equity partners to contribute ungodly amounts to tax-deferred retirement plans. You wouldn’t believe the amount of forced savings. So, yea, there are without a doubt many Biglaw partners who don’t save a lot of their take home earnings, but those same lawyers are getting richer and richer just the same.

PP here. I am right. They told me. Why would anybody lie about not having any money saved? Plus the firm has an unfunded pension, which is why these guys aren’t saving anything in addition to the Measley tax advantage accounts that are available to them like a 401(k) and a Keogh plan. Yes, there is some forced savings, but these guys do the minimum and save nothing on top of it, and wait till they’re 60 and hope to God. The firm continues to fund the pension. Not me, I’m getting out early like you did.

Fair enough, but in my firm at least the forced savings wasn’t “measly” - it was well into six figures. When I left my firm I rolled over nearly a million dollars from the firm’s defined benefit plan that I had been forced to contribute to into my IRA. My IRA also had a couple million dollars in it. And, again, I was among the lowest paid partners and my firm didn’t have a reputation for being among the highest in terms of PPP.

These partners who tell you that they don’t have any money saved, generally speaking how long have they been at their firms as partners?