I'm a midlevel M&A associate at a V10 firm in New York looking to make the switch to an emerging companies practice here. Goal is to stay in biglaw for another 2-3 years and then move in-house to either a promising start-up or big tech company. I have an offer from the NY office of a CA band 2 VC practice (Goodwin/Latham/Orrick) but haven't heard back from Cooley/WSGR/Gunderson/Fenwick yet. Two questions as I think about the next move to make:
- Cooley and Gunderson seem to be considered the best practices for New York start-up work, though many threads discussing this are at least a few years old. Are the other practices still that far behind?
- Let's assume I don't hear back from the top VC shops. Given my goals, do you think it would be better to accept one of the offers I have or pass, stick with M&A a bit longer, and then try to make a move in-house directly? Put another way, will the experience of doing biglaw start-up work at Goodwin/Latham/Orrick better position me for a move in-house than continuing my practice at a top M&A shop?
FWIW I'm not feeling burnt out from M&A yet (but getting there), so could stick it out a bit longer if that's the best option. Would appreciate any insight from someone in one of these practices or who has made a similar move.
