When I saw the envelope from Vanderbilt Law School in my mailbox this morning, I assumed that the Vanderbilt Law Review was rejecting my article the old-fashioned way. Instead, I was surprised to receive a letter from my friend and co-author, Bob Thompson, informing me that my article The Exit Structure of Venture Capital was selected as one of the Best Corporate and Securities Articles of 2006. (Bob's letter tells me that the complete list is here, but it appears not to be posted, yet.)
Bob is one of my favorite people anywhere, and I know from my conversations with him that this survey an act of service on his part. But I never quite know what to make of the results. I have read some of the articles, and the ones I have read are good, but I have no idea whether they are the "best corporate and securities law" articles of the year.
This ranking reminds me of the reputational rankings in U.S. News. Last week, I criticized law school deans for "claim[ing] to be oppressed by the rankings and simultaneously celebrat[ing] them." While I have never claimed that Bob's survey was oppressive, I did once suggest that the results were "likely to be somewhat derivative of the law school rankings." So I will refrain from promoting this latest result too heavily, though I confess that I was pleased to get the letter.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Links to weblogs that reference Best Corporate and Securities Articles:
1. Posted by Darian Ibrahim on April 10, 2007 @ 14:38 | Permalink
2. Posted by Jeff Lipshaw on April 10, 2007 @ 15:11 | Permalink
Yes, congratulations! If nothing else, it means somebody read it. Which puts you on the benign side of that long tail of legal scholarship.
3. Posted by Justin on April 10, 2007 @ 15:23 | Permalink
Congratulations Gordon. I hope you refered to them as 'stockholders' and not 'shareholders' to bring back the good ol' days. Shareholders don't share anything.