How to break into WLRK? Forum

[FlightoftheEarls]

See above where I said "my bad." That was right above this post.

Yeah, I missed that right when I was responding since there were a couple new posts. My bad for missing the my bad.

[PKSebben]

See above where I said "my bad." That was right above this post.

Yeah, I missed that right when I was responding since there were a couple new posts. My bad for missing the my bad.

This thread has broken the my bad quota.

[FlightoftheEarls]

See above where I said "my bad." That was right above this post.

Yeah, I missed that right when I was responding since there were a couple new posts. My bad for missing the my bad.

This thread has broken the my bad quota.

Our bad, bro.

[Allure]

many people unexpectedly do find it interesting. Thanks for pointing out that some people like some things, and other people like other things.

Again, it's really my bad. You just sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

[FlightoftheEarls]

many people unexpectedly do find it interesting. Thanks for pointing out that some people like some things, and other people like other things.

Again, it's really my bad. You just sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

So far you've come in here and called my post bullshit because you confused acquirers with targets with parents, revealed the unfathomable news that not everybody likes transactional work, and pointed out that my post was lacking substance when I claimed that deals are structured in response to continuing legal developments while you simultaneously dropped an absolute gem of knowledge that DE law is still (to this day, even) unsettled. But you're right - you're the one that knows everything. So please enlighten me.

Also, (1) who the fuck are you and (2) why don't you have the stones to come in here without alting? I'm guessing you must be somebody really important since the mods are letting you alt to be a dick (why they're allowing that is beyond me), but let me put it this way: I'm not impressed.

[Allure]

The basic substance of what I was pointing out is that it seems (a) like you are deifying WLRK and (b) you are categorizing them as a niche corporate firm. The point of my posts was (a) WLRK can and does make mistakes and (b) they are the best corporate firm bar none, whether you want to do hostile takeover defenses or plain vanilla M&A.

The other point of my posts was to talk about how your stuff was really uninformative. Saying that they structure deals so as to be defensible in litigation is just saying nothing at all, for example. I'm sorry if pointing that out makes you really mad.

[FlightoftheEarls]

The basic substance of what I was pointing out is that it seems (a) like you are deifying WLRK and (b) you are categorizing them as a niche corporate firm. The point of my posts was (a) WLRK can and does make mistakes and (b) they are the best corporate firm bar none, whether you want to do hostile takeover defenses or plain vanilla M&A.

The other point of my posts was to talk about how your stuff was really uninformative. Saying that they structure deals so as to be defensible in litigation is just saying nothing at all, for example. I'm sorry if pointing that out makes you really mad.

And neither is pointing out that Delaware case law remains unclear and is rarely redefined because of settlements. Not really mad, just amused that you had to alt and come running to the thread to deride me for something I said that was entirely accurate. Your pretense in this thread is actually becoming kind of cute.

Also, I hardly deified WLRK. If anything, you're the one doing it (see your bolded above). I'm sorry I offended your sensibilities by pointing out that WLRK actually does defend it's clients in court in response to Veyron mentioning that he's interested in litigation. Obviously one probably shouldn't go to WLRK for an interest in litigation over many other firms, but I suppose I should never have even mentioned that there is litigation involved in WLRK's work. Maybe then we'd still be boys.

Pst: There are other types of corporate work than just "plain vanilla M&A" and "hostile takeover defenses." HTH!

[PKSebben]

many people unexpectedly do find it interesting. Thanks for pointing out that some people like some things, and other people like other things.

Again, it's really my bad. You just sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

So far you've come in here and called my post bullshit because you confused acquirers with targets with parents, revealed the unfathomable news that not everybody likes transactional work, and pointed out that my post was lacking substance when I claimed that deals are structured in response to continuing legal developments while you simultaneously dropped an absolute gem of knowledge that DE law is still (to this day, even) unsettled. But you're right - you're the one that knows everything. So please enlighten me.

Also, (1) who the fuck are you and (2) why don't you have the stones to come in here without alting? I'm guessing you must be somebody really important since the mods are letting you alt to be a dick (why they're allowing that is beyond me), but let me put it this way: I'm not impressed.

Good point. Banned, locked, etc.