this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
245 points (99.2% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
8414 readers
394 users here now
Rules:
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
- Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
- If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
- Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
- Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
- This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out:
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Then why did they do it? Must have been crazy lucrative for them.
That the question.
Who wants that for such a law firm? Who wants to work for such a firm?
They didn't think ahead or the consequences of their action. Wildly lucrative institutions don't sell themselves off to competitors.
Any assumption that it was crazy lucrative is based on a need for things to make sense.
No, no - the sale wasn't crazy lucrative for the firm, it was crazy lucrative for the partners who sold it off.
That's not how law firms work and not how this merger is structured. This at best a lateral move, with increased earning potential in comparison to what was possible in a firm bleeding lawyers and client.
There is nothing "crazy lucrative" about this. I don't understand how you are coming to that beside mistaking this for something like a corporation selling itself for cash or stock.
Regardless of how it's structured, the partners at Cadwalader have to be walking away with a lot of money from the deal.
A year ago that firm would have been worth hundreds of millions of dollars, at the moment it's a fire sale. They're almost surely losing millions on the deal.
They're leaving basically with whatever they were already paid as a partner for the years they were there. Law firms don't operate like or pay like traditional businesses. Partners at firms like this almost always have to be offered a partnership, and buy their way in. Some partnerships at prestigious firms can have buy-in fees upwards of a million dollars.
The partners then are paid a percentage of the business, depending on seniority and managing status. If there is no business, there is no pay. If the firm goes under, or is bought out, there is little pay because the firm isn't worth much, if anything.
They're basically leaving with what they've already squirreled away and not spent with potentially lavish lifestyles over the years.
Two options really...