Biglaw Investment Management Practice Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hey all, I'm going to be a summer associate at a V5 firm this summer and we have to start narrowing down practice groups were going to be working with. I know this is super general, but can anyone speak to what Investment Management work is at these type of firms? I've gotten good vibes the few times I've met with people from the group, but hoping people might be able to share some good/bad anecdotes.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in a similar situation and would also be interested in hearing about this.

[Anonymous User]

It's a regulatory practice. Like any practice in biglaw, you will be working long hours. But one big advantage of IM is that your deadlines will be known in advance so you will know when you will be putting in those long nights. Doesn't really have the fire drills that most transactional practices have.

The work itself can be kind of monotonous. Not a lot of room for creativity and such as you are mostly just putting together different filings pursuant to SEC regs (primarily the '40 Act). Once you really get a hang of what goes into those filings, you can kind of go on auto pilot.

[Kochel]

Investment management in-house counsel here. I echo previous remarks--the work isn't the most exciting (particularly for 1940 Act funds), but the deadlines are typically known in advance and most clients have an annual rhythm to their work. It's not too hard to master the basics of SEC requirements. I'd say that the "excitement," such as it is, comes mainly through Board representation and through work on product development. Perhaps the best thing the practice has in its favor, though, are the exit opportunities. In-house work is no more difficult in this field than the Biglaw work, and can be far more remunerative (on a per-hour basis, at least).

[Anonymous User]

I'll echo most of what's been said so far. Deadlines are generally better known so less in the way of unexpected late night or weekend work than general corporate. Exit options can pay pretty well if you're willing to tie yourself to the NYC metro. However, it's difficult to overstate how excruciatingly boring the work is. Even at the highest levels it's still just clerical work. You're helping someone else do interesting work by navigating red tape created by other lawyers or making filings that add no real value. I can't imagine spending more than a few years doing this, not to mention an entire career, but you could say the same thing about corporate law in general. My biggest piece of advice for anyone going into IM or any other corporate group is to pay off your loans and avoid the golden handcuffs so you can get the fuck out of law as soon as possible.

[Anonymous User]

I'll echo most of what's been said so far. Deadlines are generally better known so less in the way of unexpected late night or weekend work than general corporate. Exit options can pay pretty well if you're willing to tie yourself to the NYC metro. However, it's difficult to overstate how excruciatingly boring the work is. Even at the highest levels it's still just clerical work. You're helping someone else do interesting work by navigating red tape created by other lawyers or making filings that add no real value. I can't imagine spending more than a few years doing this, not to mention an entire career, but you could say the same thing about corporate law in general. My biggest piece of advice for anyone going into IM or any other corporate group is to pay off your loans and avoid the golden handcuffs so you can get the fuck out of law as soon as possible.

I am an incoming first year who will be in IM. What do you mean by getting out of law asap? i know a large proportion of the associates here end up lateraling to client funds, but they are doing so in a legal capacity. Is it common for IM associates to land non-compliance/legal gigs at funds? What other sorts of non-law exits have you seen in your experience?

And if you could do it over, would you choose IM or M&A if given the choice? Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

I'll echo most of what's been said so far. Deadlines are generally better known so less in the way of unexpected late night or weekend work than general corporate. Exit options can pay pretty well if you're willing to tie yourself to the NYC metro. However, it's difficult to overstate how excruciatingly boring the work is. Even at the highest levels it's still just clerical work. You're helping someone else do interesting work by navigating red tape created by other lawyers or making filings that add no real value. I can't imagine spending more than a few years doing this, not to mention an entire career, but you could say the same thing about corporate law in general. My biggest piece of advice for anyone going into IM or any other corporate group is to pay off your loans and avoid the golden handcuffs so you can get the fuck out of law as soon as possible.

I am an incoming first year who will be in IM. What do you mean by getting out of law asap? i know a large proportion of the associates here end up lateraling to client funds, but they are doing so in a legal capacity. Is it common for IM associates to land non-compliance/legal gigs at funds? What other sorts of non-law exits have you seen in your experience?

And if you could do it over, would you choose IM or M&A if given the choice? Thanks.

I mean literally leaving the law behind. I've been surprised by the number of people that think law school was a huge mistake and want out. Most never make it because they burden themselves with debt and responsibilities. The happiest law grads I know of left law entirely after some time in big law for business, but it's not easy. Most of the exit opps I know of were associate gc at larger funds or maybe gc at a smaller fund for a senior associate. It's still a back office paper pushing job, but the hours are better. Pay can be great if you're willing to stay in the New York metro.

I think I'd take M&A if I had to do it again, but I'd be pushing for a banking lateral from day one. At the end of the day everyone has to decide on their own individual priorities, but in retrospect I find the business side so much more interesting than law and can't see myself ever being happy in a second tier back office legal career.

[Anonymous User]

You're probably going to need to talk to people in the group at your firm to really get a sense of what the work is like because it varies from firm to firm (and to an extent from client to client).

I did a rotation through investment management as a first year before ultimately settling back in M&A. The registered side was not so bad and it was predictable (you had a good sense of what was coming when). It was basically the same as capital markets and corporate governance work in many respects (e.g., putting together registration statements, the opinions that get filed with them, drafting proxy statements and board minutes) but with the 40 Act twist or for BDCs, etc. I liked it. However, there are some firms at which this practice would really just involve the regulatory matters rather than the corporate finance stuff (at my firm we were their general corporate counsel and were expected to know 40 Act matters, but some clients hired people like Sutherland to do some of the regulatory portion).

On the unregistered side, however, it was not so predictable and some of the clients were fairly demanding. Like, you would get emails saying "oh by the way the new fund is launching tomorrow and you need to set it up ASAP", etc. That, paradoxically, was fast paced but also very boring (think basically just duping a bunch of documents that are identical but change "VII" to "VIII" in the name of the fund, the name of the GP, other entities; then imagine being up regularly until four in the morning doing that).

People tended to have good exit options but I didn't really want to go in-house to a fund manager (I also figured if I changed my mind, I'd be able to do it from M&A anyway).

Bottom line: it's gonna be different depending on where you are.