The Problem with Lawyers

Muffie Benson-PerellaMuffie Benson-Perella (muffie AT dealbreaker.com) is an Associate in the Investment Banking Division of a "Bulge Bracket" bank. She holds a B.A. in French and Art from Vassar College and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School. Her regular column "Heard in the Suite" is a probing (and, ahem, fictional) weekly look into the secret lives and behind the velvet curtains of the investment banking world.

I saw today on DealBook that first year lawyers are getting bigger and bigger salaries. Chicago firms apparently have raised first year associate salaries to $135,000. In New York it is supposed to be $145,000 or something.

First of all, this isn't a lot of money so I don't see what everyone is upset about.

Second of all, it is too much money to be paying a first year lawyer.

Every time I come across a "Wall Street Lawyer" it is in an obstructionist context. My entire experience with them has involved their stifling and oppressive vice-grip on new and creative ideas. They dampen financial innovation and put up obstacles in front of otherwise perfectly viable deals.

There really are far too many lawyers on Wall Street charging far too much money for far too little work.

Don’t think this isn't bad for the economy either. There is a direct and very strong correlation between a high level of lawyers, per capita, and high interest rates. This is because the excess of legal fees requires banks, the number one consumer of legal services, to press interest rates higher to meet the costs driven by the lawyers.

I did a quick regression using data on interest rates from the Economist in France, Britain, Japan, and the United States. I think the results speak for themselves.

lawyers.gif

As you can see, there's not just a relationship, but an exponential relationship! (Ignore the best-fit line, I couldn't get it out of linear mode).

I don't think it takes much creative thinking to see that if we pass some reforms and reduce the number of lawyers interest rates will plunge very quickly. Think of all the costs we can reduce with just a simple bit of legislation. Plus, with the reduction of lawyers, the best educated lawyers from the best schools, those most in demand, can command higher prices. We increase quality and lower costs as a result.

The future for lawyers is somewhat dim anyhow given what the inverted interest rate curve says about the market's view of the future legal market. I'm somewhat surprised the lawyers aren't already clamoring for French-Style legislation of the U.S. legal labor market.

Comments

Posted by hah, Apr 03, 2006 11:01AM

This is just silly.

Posted by Muffie Benson-Perella, Apr 03, 2006 11:39AM

I'm not sure how you can be so dismissive. This isn't a small drain on the economy, you know.

Even fractions of an interest point have billion dollar impacts. And look where Japan is with their rate. We have a long way down to go.

Posted by hah, Apr 03, 2006 1:09PM

The post lacked focus.

Now you're massaging your bizarre "yield curve signals doom for legal professionals" argument (which is absurd) into a "yield curve signals recession" argument, which is certainly more reasonable, but perhaps a bit anecdotal.

We can debate the merits of the yield curve as an indicator all we want, but that wasn't the point of your post. If the yield curve does bemoan a recession, that's bad for almost ALL professions, *of course* including lawyers. (But only in sectors, as bankruptcies skyrocket andand M&A's only increase, but that's beside the point.)

Best case scenario is that the post was banal, hence silly.

Posted by Skip, Apr 03, 2006 1:55PM

hilarious

Posted by TInlsey Whipple Garret, Apr 03, 2006 1:55PM

Muffie,

I loved your graph. You sure know your finance and excel! You've come a long way from the days when we used to cut Econ class to smoke pot.

Are we still on for brunch at Balthazar next Sunday? I hope you're not still hanging out with that Goldman VP. That MD at the Blackstone group is totally crushing on you.

Cheers,

Tinsley.

Posted by Muffie Benson-Perella, Apr 03, 2006 2:11PM

The post lacked focus.Now you're massaging your bizarre "yield curve signals doom for legal professionals" argument (which is absurd)

No, it's not absurd. Just look at the data. It's not argument, it's fact. You can't argue with numbers. I just report the numbers.

Look, why don't you do your own work and find strong correlations in areas that interest you. That's what professionals with MBAs do.

Oh, wait, I bet you have a JD, don't you? That explains a lot.

into a "yield curve signals recession" argument, which is certainly more reasonable, but perhaps a bit anecdotal.

But that's not what I said. I didn't say anything at all about recession. There's no evidence an inverted curve has anything to with recession anyhow.

As any professional can see from the graph, however, there is a clear relationship to the population of lawyers.

I admit there could be other reasons for long-term rates to be dipping. Perhaps the market is correctly pricing a dip in law school admissions. Perhaps the market sees a Democratic administration in 2008 and corporate lawyers are being "shorted" as a result. Maybe the market feels a backlash against lawyers is due. What is clear is that "lawyer futures" are down.

We can debate the merits of the yield curve as an indicator all we want, but that wasn't the point of your post.

I think I know the point of my own post, thank you.

If the yield curve does bemoan a recession, that's bad for almost ALL professions, *of course* including lawyers. (But only in sectors, as bankruptcies skyrocket andand M&A's only increase, but that's beside the point.)

You think that lawyers get used LESS in the case where there are a lot of bankruptcies? Where did you get your MBA? New Haven?

Best case scenario is that the post was banal, hence silly.

Well, I think it illustrative of your lack of connection with the markets that you think hard data on interest rate relationships are "silly."

Posted by hah, Apr 03, 2006 2:22PM

Ah, this column makes a lot more sense now.

Should've known, given Spiers and all...

Posted by Giordano, Apr 03, 2006 3:18PM

Maybe I missed the reason why those two things are directly correlated, and one is the cause of the other... because, without this detail, your graph looks awfully like this one: http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg

Posted by fairest, Apr 03, 2006 3:43PM

Oh god that pirates thing is great.

muffie you rock, too! you remind me of that The Blind Debussies tune about Connecticut.

Posted by Muffie Benson-Perella, Apr 03, 2006 4:22PM

Maybe I missed the reason why those two things are directly correlated, and one is the cause of the other... because, without this detail, your graph looks awfully like this one:http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg

That's absurd.

Posted by MBA_Overlord, Apr 03, 2006 4:34PM

Muffie, You rock my world. You dazzle us with your grace, intelligence, and incisive wit.

Posted by Christian, Apr 03, 2006 5:08PM

Where did you get your MBA? New Haven?

I was wondering when you'd get around to a dig at Yale.

Posted by John, Apr 04, 2006 2:04PM

Macroeconomics didn't go well for you, eh? There is no causal relationship here. Try this one, though - GDP to interest rates. You may find that interest rates are higher when people are prone to invest in thriving economies - like the US. You may also observe that business transactions that take place in better economic times require lawyers to draft and negotiate documents that allow business to function in a contract-oriented society. That function of lawyers is important, given that our country has few statutory constraints on business (unlike the other countries in your graph). And finally, lawyers work really hard.

Posted by Muffie Benson-Perella, Apr 04, 2006 3:55PM

Macroeconomics didn't go well for you, eh? There is no causal relationship here. Try this one, though - GDP to interest rates. You may find that interest rates are higher when people are prone to invest in thriving economies - like the US. You may also observe that business transactions that take place in better economic times require lawyers to draft and negotiate documents that allow business to function in a contract-oriented society. That function of lawyers is important, given that our country has few statutory constraints on business (unlike the other countries in your graph). And finally, lawyers work really hard.

That's absurd.

Posted by allan, Apr 04, 2006 5:34PM

"lawyers work really hard"!!! - lol

Oh wait... once I stop laughing.... I'll respond.... lol

"Lawyers work really hard".. *chuckle*

So do the lawn maintenance staff in New Haven! I know which ones I'd rather have on my team!

Post Your Comment