Anonymous User wrote:Thanks for doing this, OP!Anonymous User wrote:would love to hear any general thoughts you have on the FIG group
Would also be interested in this question. They seemed like a very strong group both internally and across peer firms, but curious to know about:
(1) your sense of the people,
(2) how the group differs in terms of practice from peer FIG groups (e.g. heard S&C does more bank M&A, while DPW is more regulatory? true? and if so, what does that mean?),
(3) how the lifestyle differs if at all from the big corp groups,
(4) what kinds of exits have you seen,
(5) and whether FIG is a "safe" practice area in terms of the consistent workflow and political winds.
1. Seem fine to me. I've worked with FIG a few times and am friends with some of the juniors, all nice/pleasant to work for even if the stuff they ask us to do kinda sucks lol
2. I honestly don't think there are peer FIG groups other than S&C...maybe Cleary? They do more international work. The rest of our traditional peers don't really swim in this pool. The firm has basically monopolized the living wills scene. In addition to living wills, you have your standard broker-dealer work, advising commercial banks etc...it's not deal work. Largely ongoing advisory work.
3. I've heard it used to be more lifestyle because it involved more long-term/predictable advisory work. But the sheer volume of living wills work has kinda ruined that. The work flow is still more predictable....But being on flat terrain only helps so much if you're still at a super high altitude anyway.
4. Don't know enough to comment.
5. Some would say too safe in terms of workflow and there was a training session on living wills a few weeks after the election and the partners seem to think that politically we're fine