STB, Wilson, or K&E? (All PA) Forum

[Anonymous User]

OP here, this is all actually pretty damn helpful, so thank you. In terms of my preferences, I don't love EC/VC work (and have actually worked on it before). I'd prefer bigger companies or banks, which doesn't exactly knock WSGR out.

I think I really like K&E, but am hung up on them not having a capital markets practice like Simpson. I don't know much about what Kirkland's practice looks like "in action" (since I mean to be fair how could I?) and that gives me a little bit of pause since there is a lot less variety out of that office and if I hated the work I'd be outright screwed, but I have to think with the SF office so near I'd be able to find something.

I would worry about getting screwed going into PE and/or KE SF. I've seen PE tangentially (as a summer associate and one deal as a junior) and I would not want to do it for any meaningful amount of time. The downside on WSGR is that you will probably have to do some EC/VC work.

What did you think were the issues/drawbacks with PE work?

PE work can be like drinking from a fire hose, and the work can be unpredictable because PE clients tend to expect docs super fast (at least this is how the work looks from the outside - admittedly, I've done very little PE work myself)

This is pretty misleading. PE work is not really different from strategic work in terms of “drinking from a fire hose.” PE clients might ask for things on shorter timelines on average, but, on average, strategic clients require more work product because they need more hand holding (e.g., looking into issues for more thorough explanations of issues that PE clients have seen a hundred times, etc.).

[Anonymous User]

OP here, this is all actually pretty damn helpful, so thank you. In terms of my preferences, I don't love EC/VC work (and have actually worked on it before). I'd prefer bigger companies or banks, which doesn't exactly knock WSGR out.

I think I really like K&E, but am hung up on them not having a capital markets practice like Simpson. I don't know much about what Kirkland's practice looks like "in action" (since I mean to be fair how could I?) and that gives me a little bit of pause since there is a lot less variety out of that office and if I hated the work I'd be outright screwed, but I have to think with the SF office so near I'd be able to find something.

If you want capital markets I actually think WSGR is easy here. The not loving EC/VC thing is a downside but STB did like Sonos this year (UW-side). That was it for equity cap markets I think. Maybe another follow on or some weird farming or industrial concern or pharma company. Meanwhile WSGR has done Dropbox, Pluralsight, Zuora, Zsacaler, MongoDB, just filed EventBrite and SurveyMonkey and have a dozen others in the pipeline, all on a mix of UW and company side. I'm sure I'm missing some. That's what we're talking about here.

Banks are increasingly turning away from STB/DPW in SV and towards Fenwick/WSGR/Cooley/Goodwin for public offerings. Even on the debt/credit side of cap markets WSGR has been busy.

I would worry about getting screwed going into PE and/or KE SF. I've seen PE tangentially (as a summer associate and one deal as a junior) and I would not want to do it for any meaningful amount of time. The downside on WSGR is that you will probably have to do some EC/VC work.

Overall though, I never understand how someone picks SV firms over non-SV firms in the Bay Area. I'm biased because I picked one but I honestly don't get it at all.

The "if you want capital markets I actually think WSGR is easy here" couldn't be more wrong. Year to date in 2018, WSGR has advised on 12 IPOS (7 issuer and 5 UW side) and STB has advised on 12 IPOs (4 issuer and 8 UW).

STB did ADT, Brightview, Gates Industrial, Goosehead - the first 3 being each bigger in offering size than anything WSGR has done this year besides Dropbox.

FYI - MongoDB was 2017

See poster above. I don't think almost any of those were out of the SV office. Also those companies suck. But I do think it's a fair point but OP has to consider the work available in SV. I don't think that list is representative of that.