Silicon Valley/Palo Alto Markey advice? Forum

[smr00]

Hi,

I was hoping to get some advice about the silicon valley/palo alto market (specifically for MA laterals)? I'm wondering how SV compares to the San Francisco market? Is there a particular reason why people choose SV vs San Fran?

From what I understand, it is a great place to work and growing. But am wondering how it compares to the big city markets? Is it seen as a second tier market? Also, when looking at rankings, do people typically go for the national and take into account regional or do they focus more on regional rankings (sometimes they don't always correspond)?

Anyway, any advice about this would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance:)

[NorCalLaw]

My friend working in Palo Alto claims it's more casual, more congenial. He's working at a top biglaw firm office.

Could just be his personal experience, though, and it probably varies just as much by firm/office as it does by region.

Very generally, the legal market in the Silicon Valley is considered to be small but growing, San Francisco is considered to be small and not growing. They're both incredibly competitive markets and attract lots of top students from top schools despite their relatively small size.

[Anonymous User]

Ah that is interesting. How would you say that working in SV or San Fran would affect long term career? If you are working for one of the top national firms, does it seem like working at one of these offices (which are inevitably smaller) like a step down from the bigger places like NYC?

Also, what do you think the best way is to assess these offices? Ultimately there are vault/national rankings but the question is how does that translate to the actual regional office. Some firms have excellent national rankings but average for SV, for example.

Anyway, really appreciate the advice!

[Anonymous User]

(fresh grad so take what I say with a grain of salt, summered in SV)

SV isn't considered a second tier market. If you want to do the kind of stuff that SV does (tech company work/emerging company work/VC/etc) then it makes sense to work there. The general dichotomy between SF and SV shouldn't be all that important to you, as the strength of a given firm in a given practice area should take precedence over whether that firm or office happens to be in SF or happens to be in SV. In general, SV is probably stronger for corporate M&A work since those firms do a lot of work servicing tech companies whereas the SF firms/offices aren't nearly as focused on that kind of work (though firms with offices in both will often cross-staff). You can also live in SF and work in SV (and vice versa), plenty of people do, though that does mean longer commute times.

It doesn't make sense to take a national ranking (e.g. V100) since those rankings are biased towards NYC. Look at what kind of firms in the Bay Area are good for what you want to do relative to each other and look for firms where you feel like you fit in after interviewing. If you want to work in SF/SV long term, then it makes sense to work there. If you want to work in NYC or wherever else long term, then it does not make sense to work in SF/SV. I'd use something more like Chambers as a guide.

[Anonymous User]

That is really good to know.

So i guess the general consensus is to assess the firm based on strength of area of interest and regional ranking rather than to look at national rankings? Then the question that naturally arises is how exactly does one truly assess the strength of lets say MA at firm X vs Y from the outside?

Also, in general how would you say MA in SV compares with NYC?

[Anonymous User]

(same anon)

The deals tend to be a lot smaller than NYC which means smaller teams. Other than that I don't know much. As for telling how good firms are at a given practice, Chambers is a decent place to start and then from there I'd see if you can find people who work in that field in the Bay Area and pick their brain.

[Anonymous User]

That is really good to know.

So i guess the general consensus is to assess the firm based on strength of area of interest and regional ranking rather than to look at national rankings? Then the question that naturally arises is how exactly does one truly assess the strength of lets say MA at firm X vs Y from the outside?

Also, in general how would you say MA in SV compares with NYC?

From talking with experienced SV lawyers, I noticed two differences between corporate practice in SV and NYC. Deals in SV tend to be much smaller and less legally complex (even if they might be more financially complex) than the mega deals in NYC. Lawyers in SV charges lower rates than lawyers with comparable experiences in NYC (though this mostly affects partners, not associates). Although deals teams tend to be smaller in SV compared to most NYC deals deals, some NYC firms staff very lean and have very small deals teams (Cravath, S&C, Wachtell, etc.).

[Anonymous User]

Interesting. Is the SF market comparable to NYC big law or are they also on the order of smaller deals?

At the end of the day, do you think that working in SV would hinder ones career as an M&A lawyer - especially down the line, lets say if you had to move for geographic reasons, would it be hard to get a job in a larger market? Or is SV respectable enough?

Also, the offices are definitely smaller and I'm wondering for practical purposes what are the advantages/disadvantages of working in a smaller M&A group?

[Anonymous User]

bump

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have any experience or know much about the SV skadden or latham offices?

[PwnLaw]

If you have some specific questions, I can answer them.

Credentials:
- Worked in a firm in SV (doing mostly tech/entertainment work)
- Now work as an executive at a startup.
- Good friends with a gaggle of lawyers in the area, particularly on the corporate side.

I'll check back in the morning. Rarely post beyond some occasional questions threads.

---
To answer a few things quickly:

SF and SV are very different in terms of work and approach, particularly if you're talking about core SV practices. SV oriented practices are structured around the somewhat high risk, high churn nature of startups. You'll have tremendous exposure to clients early on (often people your age or younger) and the deals will often be fairly cookie cutter (at least until you get into later stage investments). You'll be expected to hit deadlines, but the vibe is very laid back compared to other locations (I also practiced in LA).

SF biglaw is a much more typical experience. Still more relaxed than NYC, DC or LA, but it's nothing like SV. There are typical clients that have a variety of work that are handled in a traditional manner (partner facing the client, associate or two beneath working on the deal). SV is a lot more about belonging to the community (even for associates) and networking among the relatively small group of people that are funding and being funded.

[PwnLaw]

Interesting. Is the SF market comparable to NYC big law or are they also on the order of smaller deals?

At the end of the day, do you think that working in SV would hinder ones career as an M&A lawyer - especially down the line, lets say if you had to move for geographic reasons, would it be hard to get a job in a larger market? Or is SV respectable enough?

Also, the offices are definitely smaller and I'm wondering for practical purposes what are the advantages/disadvantages of working in a smaller M&A group?

It'll depend on what deals you're working on. If you're an early stage person, you won't have exposure to some of the more complicated aspects of large deals between large companies. This will have an impact on your ability to do things outside of your core expertise. The flip side is that you'll be orders of magnitude better networked than associates at a similar level elsewhere. If your goal is to be an M&A lawyer at a large firm working on large deals, then I wouldn't say this is the safest route.

[FSK]

If you have some specific questions, I can answer them.

Credentials:
- Worked in a firm in SV (doing mostly tech/entertainment work)
- Now work as an executive at a startup.
- Good friends with a gaggle of lawyers in the area, particularly on the corporate side.

I'll check back in the morning. Rarely post beyond some occasional questions threads.

---
To answer a few things quickly:

SF and SV are very different in terms of work and approach, particularly if you're talking about core SV practices. SV oriented practices are structured around the somewhat high risk, high churn nature of startups. You'll have tremendous exposure to clients early on (often people your age or younger) and the deals will often be fairly cookie cutter (at least until you get into later stage investments). You'll be expected to hit deadlines, but the vibe is very laid back compared to other locations (I also practiced in LA).

SF biglaw is a much more typical experience. Still more relaxed than NYC, DC or LA, but it's nothing like SV. There are typical clients that have a variety of work that are handled in a traditional manner (partner facing the client, associate or two beneath working on the deal). SV is a lot more about belonging to the community (even for associates) and networking among the relatively small group of people that are funding and being funded.

Do you need the C.S./EE background to do this? I'm interested in this area, but bailed on my C.S. degree after finishing about 1/3-1/2 the major.

[PwnLaw]

Do you need the C.S./EE background to do this? I'm interested in this area, but bailed on my C.S. degree after finishing about 1/3-1/2 the major.

Not sure what "this area" means. In any case, a C.S. degree is really only required for people doing patent work.

[FSK]

Do you need the C.S./EE background to do this? I'm interested in this area, but bailed on my C.S. degree after finishing about 1/3-1/2 the major.

Not sure what "this area" means. In any case, a C.S. degree is really only required for people doing patent work.

Really, I just want to do exactly what you're doing. haha

[PwnLaw]

Do you need the C.S./EE background to do this? I'm interested in this area, but bailed on my C.S. degree after finishing about 1/3-1/2 the major.

Not sure what "this area" means. In any case, a C.S. degree is really only required for people doing patent work.

Really, I just want to do exactly what you're doing. haha

Ah, I've had a super odd career. My background is standard liberal arts/econ mix. I ended up in entertainment law through no effort of my own and ended up focusing on video games. Now I help run a VC-backed mobile game company and do a mix of product and business development (also the GC, but I don't need to lawyer stuff that often).

[Nammertat]

If you have some specific questions, I can answer them.

Credentials:
- Worked in a firm in SV (doing mostly tech/entertainment work)
- Now work as an executive at a startup.
- Good friends with a gaggle of lawyers in the area, particularly on the corporate side.

I'll check back in the morning. Rarely post beyond some occasional questions threads.

---
To answer a few things quickly:

SF and SV are very different in terms of work and approach, particularly if you're talking about core SV practices. SV oriented practices are structured around the somewhat high risk, high churn nature of startups. You'll have tremendous exposure to clients early on (often people your age or younger) and the deals will often be fairly cookie cutter (at least until you get into later stage investments). You'll be expected to hit deadlines, but the vibe is very laid back compared to other locations (I also practiced in LA).

SF biglaw is a much more typical experience. Still more relaxed than NYC, DC or LA, but it's nothing like SV. There are typical clients that have a variety of work that are handled in a traditional manner (partner facing the client, associate or two beneath working on the deal). SV is a lot more about belonging to the community (even for associates) and networking among the relatively small group of people that are funding and being funded.

Do you need the C.S./EE background to do this? I'm interested in this area, but bailed on my C.S. degree after finishing about 1/3-1/2 the major.

You don't necessarily NEED a C.S./EE background to do SV work... Even patent lit is open to people without the degree if they have a particular interest / reason for wanting to do it. (for patent prosecution, you obviously have to be PB-eligible)

I'm an SA in a SV big-law shop doing patent work, and am not PB-eligible.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the response!

So it definitely seems like SV really doesn't fall under the biglaw category. If one practices in SV and wants to go back to one of the "big cities", will they be held back? Also, since the practice areas are so different, what is the ultimate goal or advantage of working as an associate in SV? You would think you would want to be on the most complex M&A deals with the larger deals - is there a certain path in mind that SV would allow you to achieve that is different than in a larger city?

Also, any of the larger firms in SV have a particular reputation?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the response!

So it definitely seems like SV really doesn't fall under the biglaw category. If one practices in SV and wants to go back to one of the "big cities", will they be held back? Also, since the practice areas are so different, what is the ultimate goal or advantage of working as an associate in SV? You would think you would want to be on the most complex M&A deals with the larger deals - is there a certain path in mind that SV would allow you to achieve that is different than in a larger city?

Also, any of the larger firms in SV have a particular reputation?

I am at a SV firm, doing IP M&A deals in the billions.... whoever said that SV gets smaller #'s is out of the loop. Look for firms that have offices nationally if you're looking for portability. It's usually pretty easy to transfer within a firm, and then lateral out if you really want to in that market.

Look at MoFo, Wilmer, Ropes, Cooley, Kirkland, Skadden, Covington, Jones Day, Fish, Latham, Hogan, McDermott, K&L, etc.... the usual suspects.

[Old Gregg]

I am at a SV firm, doing IP M&A deals in the billions.... whoever said that SV gets smaller #'s is out of the loop.

What? The dude didn't say that SV always gets smaller deals. But on average, yes the deals tend to be smaller. This isn't disproven by you doing M&A deals in the billions. NYC offices do M&A deals by the billions far more frequently.

[Anonymous User]

Very helpful posts. It seems though when one looks at the "usual suspects" there is still a variation in M&A practice size and variability in terms of regional prestige. Some of the firms that you listed that are excellent nationally dont even make it on the regional lists - is that a problem? While some of them definitely have both great national and regional.

I guess the fear is going somewhere with a unique practice, not getting staffed on a lot of deals, having less experience, etc than in a larger city. I don't know if this is a legitimate fear. Is there any particular advantage professionally that attracts people to SV?

[Yukos]

What is lit like in SV offices? Same stuff as SF? Just pure patent lit? Or is it such an afterthought in SV that you should really target SF if you're not into corporate work?

[Old Gregg]

Very helpful posts. It seems though when one looks at the "usual suspects" there is still a variation in M&A practice size and variability in terms of regional prestige. Some of the firms that you listed that are excellent nationally dont even make it on the regional lists - is that a problem? While some of them definitely have both great national and regional.

I guess the fear is going somewhere with a unique practice, not getting staffed on a lot of deals, having less experience, etc than in a larger city. I don't know if this is a legitimate fear. Is there any particular advantage professionally that attracts people to SV?

You're already thinking too hard about this. Apply to these firms (NYC firms and SV firms), see what offers you get (if any) and then deliberate from there.

[Anonymous User]

My situation is a little different. I can't apply to NYC firms now because of family situation. Its really between SF and SV but SV is much more convenient for me. I just want to understand what the career implications are for going to SV vs staying in a big city like SF?

[Old Gregg]

My situation is a little different. I can't apply to NYC firms now because of family situation. Its really between SF and SV but SV is much more convenient for me. I just want to understand what the career implications are for going to SV vs staying in a big city like SF?

OK, then you're overthinking this even more. Apply to SF and SV and see where the cookie crumbles.

And "career trajectory" wise, there's no difference. It's basically treated as the same market for all intents and purposes.