Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hard to stack coins until the line between oppressor and oppressed is crossed. Depending on the individual, that doesn't happen until late 40s (for those who went straight through) or 50s or later (for those who took a more circuitous route, such as spending a lot of time in government). Only senior partners, esp big rainmakers, make a lot more than they bring in. Many relationships are institutional, and only are inherited late in one's career. Biglaw is not a path to great riches. Don't get me wrong, it's plenty comfortable. But only a small handful get to one percent wealth (currently around $12m in net worth) through law.
This. It can be a good life, but not big money. Every law firm partner I know doesn’t want their kid to go into law.
Perhaps but I still think that biglaw is one of the best risk adjusted careers if financial success is the goal. We can all decide whether financial success is the right goal but let's compare biglaw to investment banking. Certainly a decade or two ago investment banking would have hands-down been the right career path to make a lot of money. These days a lot of bulge bracket Managing Directors are probably in the $1m-$3m range. However, the career risk they have is much greater than in biglaw. Biglaw firms while increasingly cut throat still doesn't compare to investment banking--most MD's careers are over by 50. If you're over 50 in investment banking you either made it to the very top (think top management of a major investment bank) or you've been pushed out working at a boutique where it's completely eat what you kill.
The chance of making MD is no better than making partner (perhaps worse), the time you get to stay MD vs stay partner is much worse, and then the market cycle driven layoffs are more intense than in law. A good typical biglaw partner can practice well into his/her 50s perhaps 60s and then collect on a pension payout for years. So the bankers might make a little more as associates, VPs, directors (% wise bigger difference but compared to making partner in biglaw or MD in investment banking the cumulative differences are probably not much more than a year or two of comp for an MD/partner), make MD in their mid 30s (perhaps a couple years earlier) and then flame out typically within 10 years or less.
Seems hard to believe. Would you rather be a senior banker at Goldman Sachs or a senior partner at Skadden, Cravath, etc? Do others really believe this?
I know, I thought that was weird too.
In terms of wealth, you're talking 10-20M (law) vs. 100 millions (GS).
How do you get to 100 millions at GS? Those were either pre-IPO partners. I don't think anyone at GS can get to 100s of millions unless you are senior management (i.e. top 10 perhaps). Your run of the mill Managing Director doesn't stand a chance.
Of course I am talking senior management. So are the people who are talking about senior management at law firms. Again it's a case of 10-20M vs. 100M.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's hard to stack coins until the line between oppressor and oppressed is crossed. Depending on the individual, that doesn't happen until late 40s (for those who went straight through) or 50s or later (for those who took a more circuitous route, such as spending a lot of time in government). Only senior partners, esp big rainmakers, make a lot more than they bring in. Many relationships are institutional, and only are inherited late in one's career. Biglaw is not a path to great riches. Don't get me wrong, it's plenty comfortable. But only a small handful get to one percent wealth (currently around $12m in net worth) through law.
This. It can be a good life, but not big money. Every law firm partner I know doesn’t want their kid to go into law.
Perhaps but I still think that biglaw is one of the best risk adjusted careers if financial success is the goal. We can all decide whether financial success is the right goal but let's compare biglaw to investment banking. Certainly a decade or two ago investment banking would have hands-down been the right career path to make a lot of money. These days a lot of bulge bracket Managing Directors are probably in the $1m-$3m range. However, the career risk they have is much greater than in biglaw. Biglaw firms while increasingly cut throat still doesn't compare to investment banking--most MD's careers are over by 50. If you're over 50 in investment banking you either made it to the very top (think top management of a major investment bank) or you've been pushed out working at a boutique where it's completely eat what you kill.
The chance of making MD is no better than making partner (perhaps worse), the time you get to stay MD vs stay partner is much worse, and then the market cycle driven layoffs are more intense than in law. A good typical biglaw partner can practice well into his/her 50s perhaps 60s and then collect on a pension payout for years. So the bankers might make a little more as associates, VPs, directors (% wise bigger difference but compared to making partner in biglaw or MD in investment banking the cumulative differences are probably not much more than a year or two of comp for an MD/partner), make MD in their mid 30s (perhaps a couple years earlier) and then flame out typically within 10 years or less.
Seems hard to believe. Would you rather be a senior banker at Goldman Sachs or a senior partner at Skadden, Cravath, etc? Do others really believe this?
I know, I thought that was weird too.
In terms of wealth, you're talking 10-20M (law) vs. 100 millions (GS).
How do you get to 100 millions at GS? Those were either pre-IPO partners. I don't think anyone at GS can get to 100s of millions unless you are senior management (i.e. top 10 perhaps). Your run of the mill Managing Director doesn't stand a chance.
Anonymous wrote:Most lawyers at most large firms don’t make the average PPP. In my experience, I dont believe most will ever make the average. The avg is always skewed high by the top dozen or so rainmakers. The median PPP would be a much better statistic. And I assume partners in the rope 10-20 firms Have higher bases than the next 30 or more.
Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of people have a misconception about how much money you can realistically have as an attorney in Biglaw.
Last year was my first year as a nonequity partner at a v25 firm. My total take home was around $400k. By any objective measure, that's a lot of money. But where did it all go --
45% to taxes (it is higher when you are paying both sides of the self employment tax and don't have that many legit business deductions)
20% to savings (max out 401k, Roth, and HSA; remainder in investment account)
11% to student loans (finally paid off)
So right off the top you are down to only 24% or roughly $97k. Lobb off another 22k for housing (you can run the numbers but we aren't talking about an insane mortgage), another 10k in things like cell phone (I am sitting here's using an iPhone 5 btw) , cable, car insurance and health care premiums and all of a sudden you are down to the mid 60s in terms of actually living off of money.
That all being said, nobody should feel bad for me or anyone else in this situation. I am pretty frugal and being that way in my daily life allows me to extend that 65k pretty far. Moreover, if I keep saving the same amount every year, even with no income increase, I will have a nest egg somewhere around 5-10 million by retirement age. That is plenty to live off of then. But unless you are making much more than I am or living some Mr Money Mustache existence (which few biglaw people are) banking 10 million in 10 years is simply not feasible for most people in biglaw.
As others have said, biglaw is a very safe and comfortable job if you like the work (I do). You won't hit it out of the ballpark, but you can still afford a lot of the luxuries of life and have money leftover for retirement (if you budget correctly).
Anonymous wrote:I think the PP first year partner numbers sound about right. I’m 8 years into biglaw (up for promotion this year) with a household networth of about $700K. So that include spouse’s worth (though spouse does not work in biglaw, salary about $100K). Between us we had about $160K in loans. We spent 4 years paying those off, then saved a down payment and bought a house in 2016. We also had two kids along the way and now pay $4500/month in childcare. So yeah, the money goes fast.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What was your net worth after 5 years in biglaw, after repaying $175k? Did you have any kids in those 5 years? What was your rent? Do tell how you blew everyone out of the water.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I've spent a decade in biglaw and my net worth is $700. I still have student loans left to pay, too (low interest). You know biglaw provides no 401k match, right? I swear, most people in this site are so out of touch. Not all of us had mommy and daddy pay for college and grad school.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My experience in my firm is similar to those that have been posted here. It really does vary partner to partner, substantially. We are a one-lawyer non-equity biglaw partner family, and I would say our net worth is somewhere in the 600-750 range, one year in. These days, student loans are a bear, and it is difficult to really start putting away money until you are able to buy a home, and decent homes around here are all in the 700-800 range - a big pill to swallow if you don't have parental help.
Jesus only 600k NW for a biglaw partner? Yikes, what have you been doing the last decade?
Read much? PP is a 1st year partner (typically 8-9 years in practice). I think this is about the norm in terms of NW at that stage if you exclude people with family money, people with no loans, double biglaw families, etc. Fortunately the numbers (particularly investments) start to accelerate pretty rapidly at that point.
I was in the same spot at same stage of my career. We “under-saved” during associate years—had massive loans, had kids relatively early, huge mortgage, and frankly wanted to live a nice life given the work I was putting in. Turned out more than OK financially and I wouldn’t change a thing. My kids got to grow up in the neighborhood we wanted, our lifestyle was always nice. Would I have an extra million if I lived in a studio apartment eating canned tuna for ten years, and put off having kids until I was one of these geriatrics at the Kindergarten? Sure. But that sounds miserable.
Yeah I understood he has been a partner for 1 year, and was adding in 8+ years as an associate and calling it roughly a "decade" in biglaw.
I would think a decade in biglaw would lead to greater than $600k networth. Especially with the incredible bull market we've enjoyed for the last 9 years.
Yeah, I was a biglaw associate for a little more than 5 years. I do know that there is no 401k match. I graduated in 09 with about $175k in student loans, so your presumptuous "mommy and daddy" comment is off-base. But maybe I am out of touch. I saved and invested a ton of my biglaw comp, and I guess not everyone does.
Simmer down, I'm sure you're doing fine. I graduated in 09 and had a shade under $400k when I left in 2015. Nothing to write home about. Net worth is about $850k now (about 9 years out of law school). We had a kid roughly contemporaneously with when I left biglaw, and we bought a condo back in 2012.
Anonymous wrote:What was your net worth after 5 years in biglaw, after repaying $175k? Did you have any kids in those 5 years? What was your rent? Do tell how you blew everyone out of the water.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I've spent a decade in biglaw and my net worth is $700. I still have student loans left to pay, too (low interest). You know biglaw provides no 401k match, right? I swear, most people in this site are so out of touch. Not all of us had mommy and daddy pay for college and grad school.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My experience in my firm is similar to those that have been posted here. It really does vary partner to partner, substantially. We are a one-lawyer non-equity biglaw partner family, and I would say our net worth is somewhere in the 600-750 range, one year in. These days, student loans are a bear, and it is difficult to really start putting away money until you are able to buy a home, and decent homes around here are all in the 700-800 range - a big pill to swallow if you don't have parental help.
Jesus only 600k NW for a biglaw partner? Yikes, what have you been doing the last decade?
Read much? PP is a 1st year partner (typically 8-9 years in practice). I think this is about the norm in terms of NW at that stage if you exclude people with family money, people with no loans, double biglaw families, etc. Fortunately the numbers (particularly investments) start to accelerate pretty rapidly at that point.
I was in the same spot at same stage of my career. We “under-saved” during associate years—had massive loans, had kids relatively early, huge mortgage, and frankly wanted to live a nice life given the work I was putting in. Turned out more than OK financially and I wouldn’t change a thing. My kids got to grow up in the neighborhood we wanted, our lifestyle was always nice. Would I have an extra million if I lived in a studio apartment eating canned tuna for ten years, and put off having kids until I was one of these geriatrics at the Kindergarten? Sure. But that sounds miserable.
Yeah I understood he has been a partner for 1 year, and was adding in 8+ years as an associate and calling it roughly a "decade" in biglaw.
I would think a decade in biglaw would lead to greater than $600k networth. Especially with the incredible bull market we've enjoyed for the last 9 years.
Yeah, I was a biglaw associate for a little more than 5 years. I do know that there is no 401k match. I graduated in 09 with about $175k in student loans, so your presumptuous "mommy and daddy" comment is off-base. But maybe I am out of touch. I saved and invested a ton of my biglaw comp, and I guess not everyone does.
What was your net worth after 5 years in biglaw, after repaying $175k? Did you have any kids in those 5 years? What was your rent? Do tell how you blew everyone out of the water.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. I've spent a decade in biglaw and my net worth is $700. I still have student loans left to pay, too (low interest). You know biglaw provides no 401k match, right? I swear, most people in this site are so out of touch. Not all of us had mommy and daddy pay for college and grad school.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My experience in my firm is similar to those that have been posted here. It really does vary partner to partner, substantially. We are a one-lawyer non-equity biglaw partner family, and I would say our net worth is somewhere in the 600-750 range, one year in. These days, student loans are a bear, and it is difficult to really start putting away money until you are able to buy a home, and decent homes around here are all in the 700-800 range - a big pill to swallow if you don't have parental help.
Jesus only 600k NW for a biglaw partner? Yikes, what have you been doing the last decade?
Read much? PP is a 1st year partner (typically 8-9 years in practice). I think this is about the norm in terms of NW at that stage if you exclude people with family money, people with no loans, double biglaw families, etc. Fortunately the numbers (particularly investments) start to accelerate pretty rapidly at that point.
I was in the same spot at same stage of my career. We “under-saved” during associate years—had massive loans, had kids relatively early, huge mortgage, and frankly wanted to live a nice life given the work I was putting in. Turned out more than OK financially and I wouldn’t change a thing. My kids got to grow up in the neighborhood we wanted, our lifestyle was always nice. Would I have an extra million if I lived in a studio apartment eating canned tuna for ten years, and put off having kids until I was one of these geriatrics at the Kindergarten? Sure. But that sounds miserable.
Yeah I understood he has been a partner for 1 year, and was adding in 8+ years as an associate and calling it roughly a "decade" in biglaw.
I would think a decade in biglaw would lead to greater than $600k networth. Especially with the incredible bull market we've enjoyed for the last 9 years.
Yeah, I was a biglaw associate for a little more than 5 years. I do know that there is no 401k match. I graduated in 09 with about $175k in student loans, so your presumptuous "mommy and daddy" comment is off-base. But maybe I am out of touch. I saved and invested a ton of my biglaw comp, and I guess not everyone does.