Average skill-set of a V50 c/o 2015 corporate/M&A associate
Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:03 pm
I'm in a smaller but Cravath/Milbank-paying market (think Portland, Seattle, Austin, etc). My fourth anniversary of starting biglaw is in September. Curious as to whether my skill-set is below or on par with the typical M&A associate at my level in a V50. I lateraled from a larger market (but still not NYC) but had an extremely slow first year in which I learned next to nothing, so I am somewhat insecure as to my level of experience.
I do 90% M&A (primarily PE and VC) and 10% SEC/capital markets. On the M&A side, I know my way around every type of purchase agreement (i.e. I have read and understand every PLC precedent out there) but have never led a call with the other side about substantive issues in the purchase agreement itself. I've only drafted purchase agreements from scratch a couple times. I can draft every other type of ancillary document, plus of course the usual junior stuff like closing checklists, due diligence, disclosure schedules. Because there has always been a partner or senior associate above me making executive decisions, I have never "run my own deal". I hear that phrase all the time but am unclear what it means -- does a fourth year associate really run their own deals with no (or very minimal) partner input?
On the VC side is where I am more often "running" the deals in the sense that once the very top level issues are resolved early on (again with partner input), I can revise all the docs to match the agreed terms and close the deal by myself -- but again that often feels more like grunt work than anything else.
I am also finding that as a fourth-year, I am repeatedly coming into contact with tax and EB issues that's literally like a foreign language to me (especially on the PE side). This is problematic because the senior associates and partners in my group seem very knowledgeable in these issues and can engage the specialists with great fluency. To me, "running a deal" requires at least superficial knowledge of a wide array of tax and other specialist matters, and I feel that I am simply not there yet.
I do minimal capital markets work (by virtue of the client base) -- basically I've done form checks and one or two capital markets deals my whole life.
Needless to say I ain't exactly a Wachtell or Cravath-level associate. Making partner is not my goal and I plan to quit the law completely once I hit my fifth anniversary and have enough cash to pay off my house (yes, I save like an absolute mofo) because I find zero transcendental meaning in what I do. Which I realize makes this question kind of moot, but just curious still as to where I stand.
I do 90% M&A (primarily PE and VC) and 10% SEC/capital markets. On the M&A side, I know my way around every type of purchase agreement (i.e. I have read and understand every PLC precedent out there) but have never led a call with the other side about substantive issues in the purchase agreement itself. I've only drafted purchase agreements from scratch a couple times. I can draft every other type of ancillary document, plus of course the usual junior stuff like closing checklists, due diligence, disclosure schedules. Because there has always been a partner or senior associate above me making executive decisions, I have never "run my own deal". I hear that phrase all the time but am unclear what it means -- does a fourth year associate really run their own deals with no (or very minimal) partner input?
On the VC side is where I am more often "running" the deals in the sense that once the very top level issues are resolved early on (again with partner input), I can revise all the docs to match the agreed terms and close the deal by myself -- but again that often feels more like grunt work than anything else.
I am also finding that as a fourth-year, I am repeatedly coming into contact with tax and EB issues that's literally like a foreign language to me (especially on the PE side). This is problematic because the senior associates and partners in my group seem very knowledgeable in these issues and can engage the specialists with great fluency. To me, "running a deal" requires at least superficial knowledge of a wide array of tax and other specialist matters, and I feel that I am simply not there yet.
I do minimal capital markets work (by virtue of the client base) -- basically I've done form checks and one or two capital markets deals my whole life.
Needless to say I ain't exactly a Wachtell or Cravath-level associate. Making partner is not my goal and I plan to quit the law completely once I hit my fifth anniversary and have enough cash to pay off my house (yes, I save like an absolute mofo) because I find zero transcendental meaning in what I do. Which I realize makes this question kind of moot, but just curious still as to where I stand.