The equity lockstep model is very progressive. Obviously, someone with a book the size of Aswath or Chudasama would see no point to it, and thus prefer the old school firm model. But the Trilegal model is best suited to building a professional law firm (like what we see with Cravath, Wachtell, Linklaters, Dudley et al).
mods can you mark down this troll, Cravath is one of the most prestigious US Biglaw firms which sets the pay scales around the biglaw world (paying higher than investment bankers and doctors)
1. It is meritocratic but that doesn't mean the other firms aren't.
2. After the initial few years the other firms match trilegal pay if not more.
3. It is not the firm but the partner, if I have found a good partner great work and he shifts his team to azb, I'm going to azb. The firm in the end doesn't matter, the person who you ultimately work for matters
Trilegal is the first firm (non family full merit)
How does the organization work?
How does partnership work?
Why is Trilegal not failing. Why is it successful so far?
Any insider spill the beans.
How was Trilegal able to stand up to traditional firms and expand this much?
Is this expansion sustainable?
Also if Trilegal is so much meritocratic
Why is SAM CAM AZB (all family firms) still doing well?
I guess, only the promoter's bank account matters.
2. After the initial few years the other firms match trilegal pay if not more.
3. It is not the firm but the partner, if I have found a good partner great work and he shifts his team to azb, I'm going to azb. The firm in the end doesn't matter, the person who you ultimately work for matters
In India majority of law firms are family owned (amarchand, Trilegal etc)...........
Trilegal is the first firm (non family full merit),....