Julio_El_Chavo wrote: IAFG wrote:
My point is that DPW doesn't even come to mind as the first firm that his statement would apply to. It's like claiming that appellate practice has been captured by DC offices like Kirkland's.
uh wat? DPW has done an amazing job carving out Dodd-Frank for themselves. Just because it doesn't come to YOUR mind doesn't mean they aren't obviously dominating in Dodd-Frank work.
The only big NYC partner involved in the actual framing of Dodd Frank works at SullCrom. DPW is wedded to JPMorgan which is obviously a TTT in decline. Also, sorry about your tiny pink partnership prospects, bro.
This is just flat out wrong. DPW has ALL of the DFA living wills-- and is bringing in new corporate clients based upon the living will work (something that never happens). Citi is coming more and more to DPW in the last several years. Other major banks (which I can't name) are giving more matters to DPW this year than they have in the last 100 years. Goldman's internal people have even told their BOD that DPW is handling their DF work, when in fact DPW is not. Uh....
As far as partners involved in framing DF, see Meg Tahyar, Randy Guynn, and many others. Keep in mind that DF is implicated in many IMG, M&A, Cap Markets, SEG, and other corporate practices. Which means that for, e.g., bank M&A work, banks have been coming to DPW because they know that DPW can handle both the M&A work and the DF regulatory work in one swoop.
As far as JPMorgan-- I think that their balance sheet is in a lot better shape than many of their peer institutions.
Yes, obviously I am at DPW and am drunk on kool aid, but the above is simply facts. I have simply not heard of S&C on the other side of the table in a long, long time. Yes, Rodge is a big deal, but S&C just doesn't have that much behind Rodge whereas DPW is growing a small army. Hell, this year's summer class is doing so much FIG work that they can't believe it.