S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
Corporate/NYC
I worked at a bank previously, so I like the idea of doing FIG work/going somewhere with strong banking ties (S&C/DPW). Though I think I liked the people at Simpson the best, and wouldn't hate my life if I focused more on private equity work (assuming I just followed their strong suit). I'm actually not really sure what PE entails, though maybe PE guys are better to work with than bankers anyway.
Overall I think S&C looks best on paper for me (generalist program, ties to my former employer) while Simpson felt marginally better in person (but no strong FIG work). DPW I think could be a nice compromise between the two (FIG work and pretty nice people).
And while I'm planning to just do my 5 years and go in-house, I'd like to avoid an absolutely dreadful experience (so people matter).
Any thoughts?
I worked at a bank previously, so I like the idea of doing FIG work/going somewhere with strong banking ties (S&C/DPW). Though I think I liked the people at Simpson the best, and wouldn't hate my life if I focused more on private equity work (assuming I just followed their strong suit). I'm actually not really sure what PE entails, though maybe PE guys are better to work with than bankers anyway.
Overall I think S&C looks best on paper for me (generalist program, ties to my former employer) while Simpson felt marginally better in person (but no strong FIG work). DPW I think could be a nice compromise between the two (FIG work and pretty nice people).
And while I'm planning to just do my 5 years and go in-house, I'd like to avoid an absolutely dreadful experience (so people matter).
Any thoughts?
-
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:18 pm
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
You're choosing between 3 of the 4 most prestigious firms in New York (Wachtell aside). You can't go wrong. Do second visits and follow your gut, considering rotations v. generalist approach, location, and where you like the people the best. S&C does seem to be among the absolute worst in associate satisfaction based on many, many anecdotes aggregated over the years -- if that means anything to you.
Again, you can't make a wrong choice.
Again, you can't make a wrong choice.
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
Go to Simpson. It's probably out-voted b/c of its vault ranking, which is pretty stupid.
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
SLS_AMG wrote:You're choosing between 3 of the 4 most prestigious firms in New York (Wachtell aside). You can't go wrong. Do second visits and follow your gut, considering rotations v. generalist approach, location, and where you like the people the best. S&C does seem to be among the absolute worst in associate satisfaction based on many, many anecdotes aggregated over the years -- if that means anything to you.
Again, you can't make a wrong choice.
Yes, the OP should definitely choose his firm based on amorphous reputation among 2Ls and stay away from the firm with the preeminent practice in his area of interest.
-
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:18 pm
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
Two of these firms are among the best at FIG work, moron. And OP obviously isn't opposed to doing PE at Simpson, as he said in the OP.Anonymous User wrote:SLS_AMG wrote:You're choosing between 3 of the 4 most prestigious firms in New York (Wachtell aside). You can't go wrong. Do second visits and follow your gut, considering rotations v. generalist approach, location, and where you like the people the best. S&C does seem to be among the absolute worst in associate satisfaction based on many, many anecdotes aggregated over the years -- if that means anything to you.
Again, you can't make a wrong choice.
Yes, the OP should definitely choose his firm based on amorphous reputation among 2Ls and stay away from the firm with the preeminent practice in his area of interest.
How about you stop abusing the anon feature the next time you decide to be a sassy little bitch?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
Making the exact same choice right now, but with more openness to lit. I'm leaning Davis Polk for the best balance of people/work. All are great though.
Re: convo above, The S&C associate satisfaction surveys are not the impressions of "2Ls on TLS". They reflect a markedly different reaction to quality of life at the firm than these alternatives. Still, those surveys should be taken with healthy grain of salt IMO.
Re: convo above, The S&C associate satisfaction surveys are not the impressions of "2Ls on TLS". They reflect a markedly different reaction to quality of life at the firm than these alternatives. Still, those surveys should be taken with healthy grain of salt IMO.
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
OP here, I definitely agree. What people at S&C stress is the quality of work and the level of responsibility, whereas DPW and STB were more quick to talk about the people. Not sure how relevant that is, but it stood out in my mind. That's why I'm thinking DPW might be a good/safe choice. Unfortunately I did second looks with all of them and none of them really pulled ahead from the rest of the pack. =/Anonymous User wrote:Making the exact same choice right now, but with more openness to lit. I'm leaning Davis Polk for the best balance of people/work. All are great though.
Re: convo above, The S&C associate satisfaction surveys are not the impressions of "2Ls on TLS". They reflect a markedly different reaction to quality of life at the firm than these alternatives. Still, those surveys should be taken with healthy grain of salt IMO.
Also, lawls at the interwebs assuming this OP is a guy.
-
- Posts: 428123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: S&C v Simpson v Davis Polk
S&C so you don't have to work in midtown.