Choosing a practice group; asset management v. Securities/m&a Forum

[persia1921]

All,

I am a first year at a firm doing a mix of asset management (1940 act) work and general corporate (securities/m&a).

In my reviews I have already been getting pressured to give an opinion on which group I am leaning toward. The trouble is that I am still unsure.

I find the asset management work pretty boring, but the practice offers a much better lifestyle (at least from a big law perspective). Hours are generally predictable and the schedule is consistent. I imagine I could last longer at the firm in this area.

In contrast, I find the general corporate work much more interesting, but the hours are brutal. As a result, I imagine I would be looking for an exit sooner.

Don’t get me wrong the work in both areas sucks, but I do find the corporate work more interesting on the whole.

Long term my goals are to move in house, ideally in a role that is a mix of business and law.

From what I have heard asset management exits are generally considered “good” in terms of hours/salary, but the work stays the same. General corporate on the other hand offers broader exits and is harder to predict.

Would be greatful for any input anyone can give who has faced a similar decision, and stories on how the decision worked out.

[jarofsoup]

I am a fan of the 40 Act work. It is my dream practice but I cannot get in. You could easily go in house doing 40 Act work or maybe fed.