Sidley (Chi) v. Kirkland (Chi) for transactional 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.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432428
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Sidley (Chi) v. Kirkland (Chi) for transactional
Checked some earlier threads and seems there was nothing really compelling/conclusive about the decision. A lot of people said that hours at Sidley for example are not much better and the decision is mostly based on fit? Thanks for any insights!
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432428
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432428
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sidley (Chi) v. Kirkland (Chi) for transactional
2L going to KE. but had callback with Sidley and went back and forth on this decision.
It really depends on what type transactional work you're looking at.. I don't think you can pick a clear winner comparing all transactional work. My sense from meeting both firms is that you might do more public company work and maybe some more cross border stuff at Sidley. Their securities team is always top of the corporate scorecard. They also have very good insurance practice. Kirkland and stb are kings of the hill for private equity. If u wanted to do restructuring then Kirkland is probably better as well
But it's not like u won't have the chance to work with strategics at KE or PE at Sidley or something. I do think you should pick based on fit unless u have a clear practice preference that makes the choice easier
It really depends on what type transactional work you're looking at.. I don't think you can pick a clear winner comparing all transactional work. My sense from meeting both firms is that you might do more public company work and maybe some more cross border stuff at Sidley. Their securities team is always top of the corporate scorecard. They also have very good insurance practice. Kirkland and stb are kings of the hill for private equity. If u wanted to do restructuring then Kirkland is probably better as well
But it's not like u won't have the chance to work with strategics at KE or PE at Sidley or something. I do think you should pick based on fit unless u have a clear practice preference that makes the choice easier
