V&E/Latham/K&E Houston vs. V5 NYC Forum

[Anonymous User]

I know there have been several of these threads in the past, but I was hoping that I could receive some advice specific to my situation. I have offers at firms in Houston and New York, and I’m trying to make a decision on where to start my career.

I’m from Houston, and it’s where most of my family/friends live. I also like it there and want to end up there long-term, so if I started in NY, I’d hope to lateral back to my home market in TX after a couple years. I’d like to do corporate work, particularly Capital Markets or M&A, and I’m interested in the energy industry (based on energy transactions work I’ve done in the past, which I’ve really liked).

Offers in Houston: V&E, Kirkland, Latham, Baker Botts.

Offers in New York: Davis Polk, Skadden, Cravath.

I’ve listed the firms in rough order of preference right now (so V&E is my top choice in Houston and DPW is my top choice in NY). A few thoughts on each Houston firm:

Vinson & Elkins: Loved the people I met, and it seemed like a great fit for me. People came across as outgoing, nice, and social, but still obviously very good lawyers. I also like that the firm is headquartered in Houston, which would presumably make partnership prospects nonzero. Finally, V&E has been great in TX for 100 years, and since I want to stay in TX, the name should carry some weight. It’s arguably the top firm in Houston for corporate work, along with Latham, and I could try out M&A/Capital Markets/ETP (Energy Transactions and Projects).

Kirkland: $20k signing bonus for SAs. Also tends to pay higher end-of-year bonuses. I liked the people, but they also seemed very intense. One partner straight up told me that if I couldn’t hack it at the firm, I’d be out the door in a year, but I could go down the road to BB and hide out for 3-4 years if that was my goal. At the same time, it’s exciting to be part of a new office at an established firm. And I do care about the money. I would make more at K&E than I could at any of my other options. Only downside is that all they do in the Houston office is private equity. I’ve never done PE, and I don’t really know what PE work is. So no idea if I’ll like it.

Latham: The other top-tier corporate firm in Houston. They’ve been killing it over the last few years and expanding like crazy. Didn’t like the people as much as those at V&E or K&E, but I also understand that they do great work. Slightly worried about the Latham business model with their aggressive expansion during boom times and their aggressive contraction during slow times. Also concerned about that whole 2009 massive layoff thing, though apparently people don’t seem to think it’s an issue anymore? The firm is more highly-leveraged than others in TX, and I’m assuming partnership prospects would be zero.

Baker Botts: The people I met were fine, if a little on the nerdy/stuffy side. I’ve heard that BB is Houston’s version of Cravath and that it can be a miserable place to work. Not sure how true those rumors are. But still a top firm in TX and one of the Big 3.


And the New York firms:

Davis Polk: The people are fantastic. I think this would be the best work environment for me of all my NY options. I liked that the attorneys I met with were professional, polite, and cool. That’s really the only way I can separate Cravath/Skadden/DPW because they all do top-notch corporate work. I also like the idea of doing Capital Markets, and DPW is obviously great for that.

Skadden: Definitely seemed to live up to its fratty reputation, which is fine for me because I tend to be on the outgoing/social side. I also like that Skadden has a Houston office, which could make returning home easier down the road. Only problem is that the Houston office has been around for 20+ years and is still tiny, so I’m not sure how much of a player it is in Texas.

Cravath: I feel like I’d be miserable working there. Seemed like one of the partners was more interested in trying to argue with me than interviewing me. Also not thrilled by the rotation system, since I have nightmares about getting stuck with a partner who is terrible to work with for 18 months. But the CSM name on my resume would be pretty amazing, and if rotation roulette works out for me, I could develop some good skills early in my career. Then try to bounce after a rotation or two.


My question is whether I’m missing out on anything by starting off in Houston instead of NY. On the one hand, I understand that NY is where the biggest and the best corporate work goes down. I might not be able to get same quality of deals/clients/training if I start off in TX. On the other hand, I’m pretty strongly against NY biglaw. I want to be in Houston, and Houston firms just seem like a better fit for me. Plus, NY COL is insane, and I know that my QOL would suffer (though, again, I’m willing to push through it for a few years if it will be best for my career prospects).

Long-term career goal is to remain with a firm as long as possible. Partner is the pipe-dream objective, but if/when I get pushed out, I’d like to be able to go in-house or have a similar-quality exit option (an energy company in TX would be nice).

If I’m not missing out on anything by just starting out in Houston instead of trying to lateral down the road, my next question is whether I would be better served by going with a national firm like Latham/Kirkland or a firm headquartered in Houston like V&E/BB. Any insight from people who have experience with these NY/TX firms would be great.

[BigZuck]

Enjoy V&E IMO

/thread

To me it's whichever you prefer of V&E and Latham, and you clearly prefer V&E. So accept and be done with it.

Congrats on the awesome offers!

[Anonymous User]

Full disclosure, I'm a 2L. That said, I have your same New York offers, and have been deliberating between them and Texas (where I have no ties). I got V&E and Baker Botts in Houston, and Haynes & Boone in Dallas.

If you know that you want to end up in Houston, you won't lose anything by starting there. I'd recommend it, even. And it seems to mesh with all of your other preferences - you'll make more money ($14,000+ in state income tax savings alone) and stretch it much further, your quality of life will be better, and most importantly you won't be "putting up" with a New York firm to try to guarantee some sort of career benefit you can't qualify or quantify.

I'm personally going to one of your V5 New York options. That's because I'm not sure if I want Texas, which isn't a problem you have. I loved it and I loved my interviews but since I'm not from there, I don't have the same infrastructure of family + friends, and as a result am indecisive. I wasn't sure if I could leave Texas if I ended up not liking it. Again, you've sampled Houston far better than I have.

Being at Davis, Skadden, or Cravath will not hurt your options. But it won't necessarily improve them either, for what you want. A lot of the firms you like place wonderfully into Texas energy companies and I've never once heard of a Texas company like thing pining after New York firm alums.

[5ky]

.

[5ky]

Enjoy V&E IMO

/thread

[mvp99]

I smell a bit of humblebrag.. why would you include JD if its clearly out of the picture?

[SLS_AMG]

I know there have been several of these threads in the past, but I was hoping that I could receive some advice specific to my situation. I have offers at firms in Houston and New York, and I’m trying to make a decision on where to start my career.

I’m from Houston, and it’s where most of my family/friends live. I also like it there and want to end up there long-term, so if I started in NY, I’d hope to lateral back to my home market in TX after a couple years. I’d like to do corporate work, particularly Capital Markets or M&A, and I’m interested in the energy industry (based on energy transactions work I’ve done in the past, which I’ve really liked).

Offers in Houston: V&E, Kirkland, Latham, Jones Day, Baker Botts, STB, and Akin Gump. (Waiting to hear back from: Fulbright, Sidley Austin, Haynes and Boone)

Offers in New York: Davis Polk, Skadden, Cravath.

I’ve listed the firms in rough order of preference right now (so V&E is my top choice in Houston and DPW is my top choice in NY). A few thoughts on each Houston firm:

Vinson & Elkins: Loved the people I met, and it seemed like a great fit for me. People came across as outgoing, nice, and social, but still obviously very good lawyers. I also like that the firm is headquartered in Houston, which would presumably make partnership prospects nonzero. Finally, V&E has been great in TX for 100 years, and since I want to stay in TX, the name should carry some weight. It’s arguably the top firm in Houston for corporate work, along with Latham, and I could try out M&A/Capital Markets/ETP (Energy Transactions and Projects).

Kirkland: $20k signing bonus for SAs. Also tends to pay higher end-of-year bonuses. I liked the people, but they also seemed very intense. One partner straight up told me that if I couldn’t hack it at the firm, I’d be out the door in a year, but I could go down the road to BB and hide out for 3-4 years if that was my goal. At the same time, it’s exciting to be part of a new office at an established firm. And I do care about the money. I would make more at K&E than I could at any of my other options. Only downside is that all they do in the Houston office is private equity. I’ve never done PE, and I don’t really know what PE work is. So no idea if I’ll like it.

Latham: The other top-tier corporate firm in Houston. They’ve been killing it over the last few years and expanding like crazy. Didn’t like the people as much as those at V&E or K&E, but I also understand that they do great work. Slightly worried about the Latham business model with their aggressive expansion during boom times and their aggressive contraction during slow times. Also concerned about that whole 2009 massive layoff thing, though apparently people don’t seem to think it’s an issue anymore? The firm is more highly-leveraged than others in TX, and I’m assuming partnership prospects would be zero.

Jones Day: After V&E, the people I met at JD were probably my next favorite. Very down-to-earth and friendly. Like Latham/Kirkland, Jones Day is kind of appealing to me for its national reputation and offices across the US, though I understand that probably shouldn’t be too big of a deal, given my desire to stay in Texas. Not sure what to think of the black-box compensation system.

Baker Botts: The people I met were fine, if a little on the nerdy/stuffy side. I’ve heard that BB is Houston’s version of Cravath and that it can be a miserable place to work. Not sure how true those rumors are. But still a top firm in TX and one of the Big 3.

Simpson Thacher: Satellite office. Like Kirkland, all they do is PE, but K&E poached a big-time partner from them. Unlike Kirkland, STB seems to have no plans of aggressive expansion. I was told that K&E plans to double its office size in the next year and then grow to 120 within 5 years. An STB partner told me that they are simply an extension of the NY office and have no intention of being anything else. He said I should be cool with being in a satellite office because STB is a fantastic firm with great institutional clients.

Akin Gump: Similar to Jones Day in size and work, but I liked JD more.


And the New York firms:

Davis Polk: The people are fantastic. I think this would be the best work environment for me of all my NY options. I liked that the attorneys I met with were professional, polite, and cool. That’s really the only way I can separate Cravath/Skadden/DPW because they all do top-notch corporate work. I also like the idea of doing Capital Markets, and DPW is obviously great for that.

Skadden: Definitely seemed to live up to its fratty reputation, which is fine for me because I tend to be on the outgoing/social side. I also like that Skadden has a Houston office, which could make returning home easier down the road. Only problem is that the Houston office has been around for 20+ years and is still tiny, so I’m not sure how much of a player it is in Texas.

Cravath: I feel like I’d be miserable working there. Seemed like one of the partners was more interested in trying to argue with me than interviewing me. Also not thrilled by the rotation system, since I have nightmares about getting stuck with a partner who is terrible to work with for 18 months. But the CSM name on my resume would be pretty amazing, and if rotation roulette works out for me, I could develop some good skills early in my career. Then try to bounce after a rotation or two.


My question is whether I’m missing out on anything by starting off in Houston instead of NY. On the one hand, I understand that NY is where the biggest and the best corporate work goes down. I might not be able to get same quality of deals/clients/training if I start off in TX. On the other hand, I’m pretty strongly against NY biglaw. I want to be in Houston, and Houston firms just seem like a better fit for me. Plus, NY COL is insane, and I know that my QOL would suffer (though, again, I’m willing to push through it for a few years if it will be best for my career prospects).

Long-term career goal is to remain with a firm as long as possible. Partner is the pipe-dream objective, but if/when I get pushed out, I’d like to be able to go in-house or have a similar-quality exit option (an energy company in TX would be nice).

If I’m not missing out on anything by just starting out in Houston instead of trying to lateral down the road, my next question is whether I would be better served by going with a national firm like Latham/Kirkland or a firm headquartered in Houston like V&E/BB. Any insight from people who have experience with these NY/TX firms would be great.

Not sure what you should do overall, but you should just 86 Cravath if that's the only attraction for you. Your career path will not be any different from CSM than it would be from DPW/Skadden in NY. Also, Skadden is probably better at M&A than CSM and DPW is definitely better than CSM at capital markets.

[Anonymous User]

I smell a bit of humblebrag.. why would you include JD if its clearly out of the picture?

I think you meant Akin, and you're right, I edited it out now.

I included JD because the people I met there were among the best and because I wasn't sure what to make of the national firm vs. predominantly TX firm distinction.

[BigZuck]

I smell a bit of humblebrag.. why would you include JD if its clearly out of the picture?

One of the better uses of anon I've seen today

There are definite issues with not following NALP guidelines and keeping a billion offers open (although I guess we aren't supposed to care about that?) and it is a bit strange to do all this over analysis when the choice is pretty obvious (or, at least, could be narrowed down to a small handful). But I think it's just typical law student neurotic stuff, probably no malicious intent behind it.

[Anonymous User]

I smell a bit of humblebrag.. why would you include JD if its clearly out of the picture?

One of the better uses of anon I've seen today

There are definite issues with not following NALP guidelines and keeping a billion offers open (although I guess we aren't supposed to care about that?) and it is a bit strange to do all this over analysis when the choice is pretty obvious (or, at least, could be narrowed down to a small handful). But I think it's just typical law student neurotic stuff, probably no malicious intent behind it.

Not malicious, I promise. V&E/BB are always in the equation when people are debating TX. Latham is good for corporate and has been doing very well. K&E might follow in Latham's footsteps, except with PE, and pays more than the others with the signing bonuses. And I thought the rule was you can't keep all the offers open for longer than a week. Most of the TX ones are very recent. I think there's also an exception for multiple markets.

It's really just TX firm vs. NY firm, and where it's better to start out, but I wanted to put all my cards on the table in case I was missing anything. I figured more info was better than less.

Also deleted some of the others now.

[Anonymous User]

OP, I'm in a similar situation. V5 in NY vs. V&E in Houston. I think my quality of life would be better in Houston and am very torn.

The difference between us: I'm not sure if I want to live in Houston my whole life (I'm not from there). If I was from Houston, I would be at V&E. My main concern is that I want to return to a home city without an energy practice and I don't know if I'd get as much transferable experience at V&E as I would at a V5 in NY.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out if the "bump" I'll get from a v5 in terms of exit opportunities and experience is worth living in a city I probably won't like as much vs. living in Houston, which seems to be cool and cheaper. However, I've only been to Houston twice in my life so it's tough to make the jump.

[BigZuck]

OP, I'm in a similar situation. V5 in NY vs. V&E in Houston. I think my quality of life would be better in Houston and am very torn.

The difference between us: I'm not sure if I want to live in Houston my whole life (I'm not from there). If I was from Houston, I would be at V&E. My main concern is that I want to return to a home city without an energy practice and I don't know if I'd get as much transferable experience at V&E as I would at a V5 in NY.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out if the "bump" I'll get from a v5 in terms of exit opportunities and experience is worth living in a city I probably won't like as much vs. living in Houston, which seems to be cool and cheaper. However, I've only been to Houston twice in my life so it's tough to make the jump.

Maybe I'm too flippant or not a very good deep thinker or whatever but the V5 seems like a no brainer to me if you want to eventually end up in your home market.

[Anonymous User]

OP, I'm in a similar situation. V5 in NY vs. V&E in Houston. I think my quality of life would be better in Houston and am very torn.

The difference between us: I'm not sure if I want to live in Houston my whole life (I'm not from there). If I was from Houston, I would be at V&E. My main concern is that I want to return to a home city without an energy practice and I don't know if I'd get as much transferable experience at V&E as I would at a V5 in NY.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out if the "bump" I'll get from a v5 in terms of exit opportunities and experience is worth living in a city I probably won't like as much vs. living in Houston, which seems to be cool and cheaper. However, I've only been to Houston twice in my life so it's tough to make the jump.

Maybe I'm too flippant or not a very good deep thinker or whatever but the V5 seems like a no brainer to me if you want to eventually end up in your home market.

Nah that's not flippant, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on that. My home market is pretty small- wouldn't the V&E name be just about as good as a SullCrom/Cravath/DPW/Skadden type when transitioning to a small market without national firms in town?

[BigZuck]

OP, I'm in a similar situation. V5 in NY vs. V&E in Houston. I think my quality of life would be better in Houston and am very torn.

The difference between us: I'm not sure if I want to live in Houston my whole life (I'm not from there). If I was from Houston, I would be at V&E. My main concern is that I want to return to a home city without an energy practice and I don't know if I'd get as much transferable experience at V&E as I would at a V5 in NY.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out if the "bump" I'll get from a v5 in terms of exit opportunities and experience is worth living in a city I probably won't like as much vs. living in Houston, which seems to be cool and cheaper. However, I've only been to Houston twice in my life so it's tough to make the jump.

Maybe I'm too flippant or not a very good deep thinker or whatever but the V5 seems like a no brainer to me if you want to eventually end up in your home market.

Nah that's not flippant, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on that. My home market is pretty small- wouldn't the V&E name be just about as good as a SullCrom/Cravath/DPW/Skadden type when transitioning to a small market without national firms in town?

When I hear V&E I think "Texas firm, energy transactional." When I think of the others I think, well, more than that. Again, I know that's overly simplistic but that's just the way I look at it. I would much rather have Skadden NYC than V&E Houston on my resume if I was trying to transition back to, say, Miami or Seattle down the line.

But if you think you might be happy in TX long term then I might lean differently. I just didn't get that sense, it seemed like you were planning to put in a few years either in NYC or Houston and then try to move back and you just preferred Houston in that interim.

But of course I'm not an employer and I'm just a clueless 2L so grain of salt.

[Anonymous User]

OP, I'm in a similar situation. V5 in NY vs. V&E in Houston. I think my quality of life would be better in Houston and am very torn.

The difference between us: I'm not sure if I want to live in Houston my whole life (I'm not from there). If I was from Houston, I would be at V&E. My main concern is that I want to return to a home city without an energy practice and I don't know if I'd get as much transferable experience at V&E as I would at a V5 in NY.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out if the "bump" I'll get from a v5 in terms of exit opportunities and experience is worth living in a city I probably won't like as much vs. living in Houston, which seems to be cool and cheaper. However, I've only been to Houston twice in my life so it's tough to make the jump.

Maybe I'm too flippant or not a very good deep thinker or whatever but the V5 seems like a no brainer to me if you want to eventually end up in your home market.

Nah that's not flippant, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on that. My home market is pretty small- wouldn't the V&E name be just about as good as a SullCrom/Cravath/DPW/Skadden type when transitioning to a small market without national firms in town?

When I hear V&E I think "Texas firm, energy transactional." When I think of the others I think, well, more than that. Again, I know that's overly simplistic but that's just the way I look at it. I would much rather have Skadden NYC than V&E Houston on my resume if I was trying to transition back to, say, Miami or Seattle down the line.

But if you think you might be happy in TX long term then I might lean differently. I just didn't get that sense, it seemed like you were planning to put in a few years either in NYC or Houston and then try to move back and you just preferred Houston in that interim.

But of course I'm not an employer and I'm just a clueless 2L so grain of salt.

OP again. That's the impression I get of V&E, too, which is why I was wondering if it would be better to do my time at DPW to get it on my resume. Or if not NY, then the Houston office of Kirkland/Latham since they are legit national firms, while V&E seems to be very regional.

I like V&E a lot and do hope to remain in TX long-term, but I'm also single and don't know if I'll randomly change my mind 10 years from now.

[5ky]

Zuck was responding to the other person who was weighing V&E vs NY V5, but weren't sure where they wanted to live.

Honestly, if you want to live in TX, I think it would be extraordinarily silly to go do a NYC v5 when you have great TX offers.

[Lwoods]

Don't make yourself miserable because you feel you must do so simply to keep doors open on the off chance you'll someday want to walk through them. You want to be in Texas; start your career in Texas. If later on you change your mind, or you get married and have a spouse who wants or needs to relocate for whatever reason, you'll be able to figure out a way to get there from any of those Texas firms.

You liked the people at V&E the best. Considering the number of hours you have to work, it's important that you like your coworkers and bosses. While people can be different at work than they are in interviews, it's the best information you have to go on. Go to V&E.