Restructuring a good idea?

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273599
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Restructuring a good idea?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:55 am

Hey folks,

I feel like for obvious reasons restructuring has been a busy practice area over the past couple years and that has me very intrigued. I am pretty interested in the relevant law and have heard there can be good exit opportunities to banks or funds, though it seems you have to work your *ss off for at least several years in BigLaw first. My situation is I am a JD/MBA with a summer offer out at a top debtor-side firm in NYC (think Weil / Kirkland) and two offers out at V5 NYC firms. I wanted to ask a couple questions:

1. Given the counter-cyclical nature of this practice, is now a bad time to be jumping in? My gut is no, but just wanted to throw this question out there as I'm afraid some of these firms may have built up mammoth restructuring departments over the last couple years and now have too many mouths to feed.

2. One of these V5 firms has a very large bankruptcy practice that is "Tier 1" on Chambers but it seems to be creditor-focused and not at the prestige level of Weil / Kirkland. However, this firm is very strong in a lot of other practice areas I would love to try over the summer. I feel like going there could be a great hedge if it turns out I don't like restructuring work, but if it turns out I do will the exit opportunities be significantly less robust because it's not mainly debtor-side? Weil / Kirkland seem to be the big boys in this area but maybe that's an oversimplification.

Thanks a million to anyone who has any thoughts or experience to share.

User avatar
math101
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Restructuring a good idea?

Postby math101 » Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:55 pm

I have the same questions for anyone out there who might be able to answer.

Also, more generally, what are the exit options out of a V10/V15 from the bankruptcy practice?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273599
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Restructuring a good idea?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:02 pm

math101 wrote:I have the same questions for anyone out there who might be able to answer.

Also, more generally, what are the exit options out of a V10/V15 from the bankruptcy practice?


I have the same question but substitute V10/15 with Skadden DE.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273599
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Restructuring a good idea?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
math101 wrote:I have the same questions for anyone out there who might be able to answer.

Also, more generally, what are the exit options out of a V10/V15 from the bankruptcy practice?


I have the same question but substitute V10/15 with Skadden DE.


I think restructuring is a great idea. I worked at a major debtor-side firm this summer (Weil/Kirkland) and will be joining the restructuring group again next year. It's a great practice area because it blends a federal statutory practice (comparable to, say, tax law or employment law), a litigation practice, and a transactional practice. For the most part, at least at my firm, people seem to move from a more litigation-type practice in the early years toward a more deal-type practice in the later years.

In terms of the cyclical nature of the practice, I don't think it's wise to try to make choices on macroeconomic factors. It was maybe a bit "quite" this summer in restructuring, but some in the group believed there was a major restructuring wave coming (based on structural factors, not apocalyptic notions). In any event, the main concern for biglaw attorneys is not so much that their practice group has a quite period--which is no big deal--but that shit re-hits the fan, in which case firms start to experience financial distress. In that case, the restructuring group might be the most secure.

In terms of debtor versus creditor work, debtor work tends to be regarded as a more robust and dynamic practice, although I have a feeling that there's a lot to recommend in working at a major creditor firm as well. Both Kirkland and Weil are overall strong firms with top practices in a number of areas. I wouldn't go to a creditor firm with the idea that you'll have better "internal exit options," so to speak. I would go to Weil/Kirkland if you have those offers and want to do restructuring.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.