Simpson Thacher and Skadden Houston vs TX Big 3 (V&E and BB) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Any insight on these firms in regards to dealflow, work quality, culture etc?

[Anonymous User]

Any insight on these firms in regards to dealflow, work quality, culture etc?

The Simpson Houston office is really small (less than 20 people I think), but supposedly growing.

[Anonymous User]

My 2 cents: the only out of state firm worth considering over Big 3 in Houston is Latham, and that's just because Latham managed to poach some major relationships when they put together the office from BB/VE's corp departments. You're constantly hearing about Latham deals, but I've never heard of a Skadden/STB deal out of Houston. Others might know more though.

[Anonymous User]

The other responses are right on the money re: STB and Skadden. Skadden has been around a while and doesn't seem to have any traction. STB is more interesting because it's growing and newer but they don't seem to have any major traction yet. On the other hand, having the STB name on your resume if you ever wanted to work on either coast couldn't hurt. I'd say Latham and (to a lesser extent) Sidley are the only out of towners worth considering.

You should take either VE or BB depending on what you want in terms of culture (VE has an edge in terms of numbers/deals) but they have starkly different cultures and you're more likely to succeed if the firm you choose a better fit for you.

[Anonymous User]

STB Houston is doing very well right now.

[Anonymous User]

bump - - - Any changes here for anyone's point of view?

Same question, really - a year later

[Anonymous User]

STB Houston is still growing aggressively. Skadden Houston has had much less success. But I think if your long-term goal is to stay in Houston, the big three are *probably* a better bet (while STB Houston may be the best option if you want to build relationships for moving elsewhere eventually--also probably has the best partnership odds, for what it's worth).

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious: Anon above, what makes you think STB has the best partnership odds?

Also, I'll throw Kirkland into this mix. Anyone have thoughts about Kirkland vs. Big 3?

[20141023]

.

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious: Anon above, what makes you think STB has the best partnership odds?

Also, I'll throw Kirkland into this mix. Anyone have thoughts about Kirkland vs. Big 3?

This has been talked about quite a bit in the Texas thread. Consensus seems to be that there's no reason to go to K&E at the moment if you can go to the Big 3- it's the same prestige and quantity of work (perhaps more so) without any of the risk of a new office. You can always lateral later out of a Big 3 office if you wanted.

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious: Anon above, what makes you think STB has the best partnership odds?

Also, I'll throw Kirkland into this mix. Anyone have thoughts about Kirkland vs. Big 3?

This has been talked about quite a bit in the Texas thread. Consensus seems to be that there's no reason to go to K&E at the moment if you can go to the Big 3- it's the same prestige and quantity of work (perhaps more so) without any of the risk of a new office. You can always lateral later out of a Big 3 office if you wanted.

Bumping this for thoughts on K&E. Is it really that much of a no-brainer to take a Big 3 (e.g., V&E) over Kirkland in this situation, when K&E is an aggressively-expanding V10?

Latham/Sidley/STB all seem to be proving that NY/Chicago firms can crack the Houston market and thrive.

[justinp]

Latham/Sidley/STB all seem to be proving that NY/Chicago firms can crack the Houston market and thrive.

I mean... kinda sorta, right? They're proving the proposition that you can have a thriving single-practice office over a very short time-horizon that happens to coincide with the biggest boom that that practice's clients have seen in years and years. Which is certainly impressive in and of itself (Latham in particular has been pulling off some crazy numbers in the last few years' tables). But it doesn't really prove anything regarding the capacity of non-native firms to "crack the Houston market and thrive." These certainly aren't the first out-of-state firms to open energy deals practices in Houston during a boom. You just don't know about the others because they've since closed those offices.

[Anonymous User]

Latham/Sidley/STB all seem to be proving that NY/Chicago firms can crack the Houston market and thrive.

I mean... kinda sorta, right? They're proving the proposition that you can have a thriving single-practice office over a very short time-horizon that happens to coincide with the biggest boom that that practice's clients have seen in years and years. Which is certainly impressive in and of itself (Latham in particular has been pulling off some crazy numbers in the last few years' tables). But it doesn't really prove anything regarding the capacity of non-native firms to "crack the Houston market and thrive." These certainly aren't the first out-of-state firms to open energy deals practices in Houston during a boom. You just don't know about the others because they've since closed those offices.

You don't think a Latham offer is better than a BB/NRF offer and on par with a V&E offer at this point for corporate? Most people on this site seem to think Latham and V&E are in a tier of their own for transactional work in Houston, so there are definitely non-native firms that are killing it right now. The whole Big 3 thing seems outdated to me since it's no longer clear that V&E, BB, and Fulbright are the top 3 firms in Texas.

Latham is doing amazing in Houston, and K&E could also be headed in that direction. Sidley/STB are also doing well. In Dallas, GDC is killing it.