STB v. Paul Weiss (NY Corporate/Real Estate) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Choosing between Simpson Thacher and Paul, Weiss for NYC Summer 2020. Looking to do Real Estate, but also maybe Corporate/M&A. I'm unsure if Real Estate is 100% the group I want to work in, so I want to hedge my bets and focus on firms that are strong in both Real Estate and Corporate work.

In terms of culture, I found that I had a really good fit with Paul, Weiss during my callback. STB seemed like a great place to work, but the lawyers I met at PW seemed to be more my speed. I could have spent all day interviewing there.

Obviously STB is stronger in Corporate while PW is a lit powerhouse. Real Estate "strength" is a bit of a black box to me - not as much info out there as there is for choosing between larger departments, but STB seems to rank a bit higher. Is it crazy to think that PW is a better choice factoring in fit/culture?

[Anonymous User]

PW is fine and obviously fabulous in lit and restructuring, but it is a real step down from STB for transactional work, especially in M&A and finance. STB gives you more options for sure, if it turns out RE isn’t where you want to land.

Given how hard it is to predict what group you will land in, that would be persuasive for me.

It would take a lot of culture to make up the difference for me, like, a LOT of culture, but people date who they fall in love with, not the objectively “best” option.

[Anonymous User]

Factors for you to consider.

1) Simpson is on the decline. They have lost many key partners and they are trying to keep up with players like Kirkland but are barely treading water. In addition, they are far less selective when it comes to choosing their class. The legal community knows this and it affects your prospects down the line. I am sure other attorneys on this thread can attest to this point - Simpson wants to know you have a pulse, full stop. True they are a "classic player" but so is Cadwalader...

2) PW is on the up. Two words - Scott Barshay. If you want to be able to actually advance your career with respect to corporate work then PW is actually the place for you. There will be more opportunities for advancement and will reward young go-getters. This is in contrast to STB where you will put in ten years to be rewarded with counsel. IMO PW would be a smarter career move at this moment.

3) Fit is key. Simpson is stiff. PW is much more friendly and collegial (please excuse the most overused word in big law recruiting). First impressions are everything. Now that you have offers they both are going to give you the hard sell. You have to go with your initial feeling because anything else is just as hallow as a diversity packet etc.

I am clearly not on the STB train when it comes to this choice and I am interested in hearing what other people think. You have great options. Good luck.

[Anonymous User]

Factors for you to consider.

1) Simpson is on the decline. They have lost many key partners and they are trying to keep up with players like Kirkland but are barely treading water. In addition, they are far less selective when it comes to choosing their class. The legal community knows this and it affects your prospects down the line. I am sure other attorneys on this thread can attest to this point - Simpson wants to know you have a pulse, full stop. True they are a "classic player" but so is Cadwalader...

2) PW is on the up. Two words - Scott Barshay. If you want to be able to actually advance your career with respect to corporate work then PW is actually the place for you. There will be more opportunities for advancement and will reward young go-getters. This is in contrast to STB where you will put in ten years to be rewarded with counsel. IMO PW would be a smarter career move at this moment.

3) Fit is key. Simpson is stiff. PW is much more friendly and collegial (please excuse the most overused word in big law recruiting). First impressions are everything. Now that you have offers they both are going to give you the hard sell. You have to go with your initial feeling because anything else is just as hallow as a diversity packet etc.

I am clearly not on the STB train when it comes to this choice and I am interested in hearing what other people think. You have great options. Good luck.

What is your evidence for your claims about STB? I have an offer there. How do you know Simpson is "barely treading water"? Also, which firm are they "far less selective" in choosing their class? Obviously their less selective than CSM or S&C, but are you referring to different firms?

[Anonymous User]

As someone also considering Simpson:
1.) The KKR, Blackstone, Carlyle, etc fund relationships are more than solid. STB lost some partners to K&E (but who hasn't?) but to suggest they're "on the decline" seems wild without more support than that. I can also confirm that (at least from Columbia), they are basically picking from the top 35%, which puts them in the same tier (in terms of corporate) as everyone but WLRK and S&C. (PW hires from the median at CLS, if you care.)

2.) The Barshay acquisition doesn't mean that their corporate practice, in the aggregate, is that good. (I wish it was; I'm also looking at PW and if I felt the corporate practices were in the same conversation I'd be at PW.)

[Anonymous User]

Purely from an RE perspective, the sense I get is that the two groups do slightly different types of work. PW’s group is very good but a bit smaller. It might make sense to figure out what type of RE work you’re interested in and take it from there, if that’s where you’re leaning. Not fully up to date on this but the sense I get is that PW does more work for developers/entities like the MTA and STN does more finance, etc work for Carlyle and the like, though I think both are fairly diverse practices. For RE, it would not be crazy to pick PW. I’m not as familiar with general corporate.

Also (this could be out of date too) I believe STB has people do rotations and PW does not - just another thing to consider.

[NYCAssociate]

Factors for you to consider.

1) Simpson is on the decline. They have lost many key partners and they are trying to keep up with players like Kirkland but are barely treading water. In addition, they are far less selective when it comes to choosing their class. The legal community knows this and it affects your prospects down the line. I am sure other attorneys on this thread can attest to this point - Simpson wants to know you have a pulse, full stop. True they are a "classic player" but so is Cadwalader...

2) PW is on the up. Two words - Scott Barshay. If you want to be able to actually advance your career with respect to corporate work then PW is actually the place for you. There will be more opportunities for advancement and will reward young go-getters. This is in contrast to STB where you will put in ten years to be rewarded with counsel. IMO PW would be a smarter career move at this moment.

3) Fit is key. Simpson is stiff. PW is much more friendly and collegial (please excuse the most overused word in big law recruiting). First impressions are everything. Now that you have offers they both are going to give you the hard sell. You have to go with your initial feeling because anything else is just as hallow as a diversity packet etc.

I am clearly not on the STB train when it comes to this choice and I am interested in hearing what other people think. You have great options. Good luck.

Also not sure what info this person is looking at. Simpson lost a couple young partners in NY to K&E, but if that is a firm in "decline", then what's Cravath (which lost Barshay, Schiele, Goldstein, etc.)? TTT? Pinning your hopes of partnership on Barshay is a mixed bag. Paul Weiss's corporate practice is now a major player in public M&A thanks to Barshay, but I have yet to hear of one positive story from an associate who actually works for him.

If OP is deciding on real estate, it depend on the type of real estate he/she wants. STB has a top real estate practice in terms of M&A of RE portfolios and public REITs, but it doesn't have development work. PW has the development work and also a very good M&A real estate practice. Chambers reflects this:

https://chambers.com/guide/usa?publicat ... onId=12806
https://chambers.com/guide/usa?publicat ... onId=12806

At PW, if OP ends up not wanting to do real estate but still wants a "top" corporate practice, he/she is left with public M&A. At STB, all of the other corporate practices are "top" practices. If OP wants real estate and is OK with public M&A as the other option, sounds like PW is the right choice. If OP is more risk-averse, then STB may be a better choice.

[icansortofmath]

STB for now but honestly this sort of thing will vary year by year.

A big group, Goldman/KKRs for recent/current examples, doing some internal restructuring with its PE group could shift lots of the steady RE work overnight.

[Anonymous User]

NYC M&A 3rd year chiming in. For M&A, STB is clearly the more prestigious firm and will give you a bit more exit options.

Both firms have decent firm cultures, but some of the friendliest folks I know are in STB. On the other hand, when I was doing my callbacks years ago, I didn't get a good impression of PW at all, even though the associates and partners I met may not have been representative of the firm.

Although I agree that PW has been on the upswing since some years ago, STB has not been declining. There are few NYC firms that have been declining clearly (one in midtown east comes to mind), but STB is not one of them.

[Anonymous User]

NYC M&A 3rd year chiming in. For M&A, STB is clearly the more prestigious firm and will give you a bit more exit options.

Both firms have decent firm cultures, but some of the friendliest folks I know are in STB. On the other hand, when I was doing my callbacks years ago, I didn't get a good impression of PW at all, even though the associates and partners I met may not have been representative of the firm.

Although I agree that PW has been on the upswing since some years ago, STB has not been declining. There are few NYC firms that have been declining clearly (one in midtown east comes to mind), but STB is not one of them.

Is this a shot at Davis Polk??!

[Anonymous User]

Factors for you to consider.

1) Simpson is on the decline. They have lost many key partners and they are trying to keep up with players like Kirkland but are barely treading water. In addition, they are far less selective when it comes to choosing their class. The legal community knows this and it affects your prospects down the line. I am sure other attorneys on this thread can attest to this point - Simpson wants to know you have a pulse, full stop. True they are a "classic player" but so is Cadwalader...

2) PW is on the up. Two words - Scott Barshay. If you want to be able to actually advance your career with respect to corporate work then PW is actually the place for you. There will be more opportunities for advancement and will reward young go-getters. This is in contrast to STB where you will put in ten years to be rewarded with counsel. IMO PW would be a smarter career move at this moment.

3) Fit is key. Simpson is stiff. PW is much more friendly and collegial (please excuse the most overused word in big law recruiting). First impressions are everything. Now that you have offers they both are going to give you the hard sell. You have to go with your initial feeling because anything else is just as hallow as a diversity packet etc.

I am clearly not on the STB train when it comes to this choice and I am interested in hearing what other people think. You have great options. Good luck.

Simpson on the decline is fake news. Both are good firms. Simpson is more prestigious for corporate work in NYC than PW.

[Anonymous User]

NYC M&A 3rd year chiming in. For M&A, STB is clearly the more prestigious firm and will give you a bit more exit options.

Both firms have decent firm cultures, but some of the friendliest folks I know are in STB. On the other hand, when I was doing my callbacks years ago, I didn't get a good impression of PW at all, even though the associates and partners I met may not have been representative of the firm.

Although I agree that PW has been on the upswing since some years ago, STB has not been declining. There are few NYC firms that have been declining clearly (one in midtown east comes to mind), but STB is not one of them.

Is this a shot at Davis Polk??!

Nope nope. There is a firm that used to be in the same league as Cravath, DPW, STB two decades ago and but is now in the same league as Clifford Chance, Ropes & Gray, Cadwalader.

[Yea All Right]

NYC M&A 3rd year chiming in. For M&A, STB is clearly the more prestigious firm and will give you a bit more exit options.

Both firms have decent firm cultures, but some of the friendliest folks I know are in STB. On the other hand, when I was doing my callbacks years ago, I didn't get a good impression of PW at all, even though the associates and partners I met may not have been representative of the firm.

Although I agree that PW has been on the upswing since some years ago, STB has not been declining. There are few NYC firms that have been declining clearly (one in midtown east comes to mind), but STB is not one of them.

Is this a shot at Davis Polk??!

Nope nope. There is a firm that used to be in the same league as Cravath, DPW, STB two decades ago and but is now in the same league as Clifford Chance, Ropes & Gray, Cadwalader.

Ah, Shearman. Their new logo really is... not good.

[Anonymous User]

Factors for you to consider.

1) Simpson is on the decline. They have lost many key partners and they are trying to keep up with players like Kirkland but are barely treading water. In addition, they are far less selective when it comes to choosing their class. The legal community knows this and it affects your prospects down the line. I am sure other attorneys on this thread can attest to this point - Simpson wants to know you have a pulse, full stop. True they are a "classic player" but so is Cadwalader...

2) PW is on the up. Two words - Scott Barshay. If you want to be able to actually advance your career with respect to corporate work then PW is actually the place for you. There will be more opportunities for advancement and will reward young go-getters. This is in contrast to STB where you will put in ten years to be rewarded with counsel. IMO PW would be a smarter career move at this moment.

3) Fit is key. Simpson is stiff. PW is much more friendly and collegial (please excuse the most overused word in big law recruiting). First impressions are everything. Now that you have offers they both are going to give you the hard sell. You have to go with your initial feeling because anything else is just as hallow as a diversity packet etc.

I am clearly not on the STB train when it comes to this choice and I am interested in hearing what other people think. You have great options. Good luck.

Anecdote: to the extent its relevant, I've heard from many people who worked with Barshay (he was before my time) at CSM thought he was an absolute nightmare partner. Really, really good at what he does but miserable to work under. Of course, there may be some motivated reasoning at play here but I would personally worry about the culture at PW corporate since, at least from the outside, it seems very defined by Barshay.