DPW vs. PW vs. Kirkland vs. Weil. All NY restructuring. Forum

[Anonymous User]

Not the OP, but another 2L anon. Is it fair to say that as a general rule, someone who’s interested in restructuring (but not dead-set on it vs. other corporate groups) should not take Cravath or SullCrom over DPW or P,W?

(I only ask because someone was asking about WLRK in the same vein, earlier ITT. I have these offers but really cannot make up my mind.)

DPW / PW anon who's been posting frequently.

Yeah, go to PW / DPW. CSM / S&C are not remotely close to PW / DPW in RX but everyone's in the same neighborhood for general corporate.

How much do the DPW or PW RX groups slow down when it’s not a pandemic and there aren’t a ton of big Ch. 11s?

Is it ever slow enough that RX associates at these shops have to worry about job security? Or more realistically, would the RX associates get staffed on other corporate matters if there’s not enough restructuring work to go around?

We're not billing like we did this year (~2750) but it's never been an issue. There are always firms going bankrupt even when the economy is doing well. Firms might be overlevered, dealing with liability issues, or just in industries with secular problems (e.g. dairy, newspapers, coal).

FWIW the PW / DPW groups are small, taking very few associates per year. It's not like K&E / Weil who have a ton of RX attorneys and who (so I've heard -- K&E / Weil people?) are more proactive about headcount management during leaner times.

[Anonymous User]

How much do the DPW or PW RX groups slow down when it’s not a pandemic and there aren’t a ton of big Ch. 11s?

Is it ever slow enough that RX associates at these shops have to worry about job security? Or more realistically, would the RX associates get staffed on other corporate matters if there’s not enough restructuring work to go around?

I have heard that DPW Rx associates sometimes get staffed on credit assignments when the group is slow. That said, the group has been very busy for the past few years.

In general, you have a lot of job security in big law. I think it's pretty rare for people who are basically competent and hardworking to get fired. So I wouldn't let concern about potentially being fired one day control your choice of practice group.

[1000xEBITDA]

I'm a 1L at HYS with a background at a PE MF and BB IBD, both NYC. Currently exploring summer roles, and would love to learn more from you all about your respective careers in RX / biglaw—if anyone is up for a chat, please PM me.

I can provide some guidance (from personal recruiting experience) about best practices for moving to the buy-side generally, along with some perspective on how to ace the modeling / technical aspects of the process.

[Anonymous User]

Are debtor Rx hours really that much worse than creditor Rx? Why is that, if so? Does it ever relent, or are the partners billing just as much as the associates?

Can anyone on here who does debtor-side Rx explain how they handle the hours, how bad it really is, and whether it's worth it as opposed to more chill jobs at firms?

[the lsat failure]

Anon bc I work at Kirkland & don't want to be identified. Take all below with a grain of salt, I can't speak for everyone, nor do I claim to.

Kirkland RX is an amazing group. I know people on TLS think Kirkland is full of screamers and people who work 24-7, but it's not that bad the first few years because you're still learning the ropes. The hours are cyclical, like a lot of practices -- you'll have heavy months and slower months, sometimes the heavy months will be a marathon depending on the larger economy, like earlier this year.

The group's very conscious that people may not come in with backgrounds in RX or finance and they treat you well, reasonably & pretty kindly as you learn. People in RX are also generally funny and agreeable with good personalities and who value their time outside of work, as a result, partners/high-level associates tend to respect your time as well. During office time, people are social and the group genuinely enjoys going on retreats and hanging out with each other. But, at the same time, there's no culture at Kirkland (even before Covid-19) of being online/at the office if you're not busy & they've been really good about working from home during the pandemic. The partners aren't big on unnecessary fire drills, and even as a young associate you probably won't be asked to work in a manner that isn't commensurate with the actual urgency of the assignment (very often). They take a real interest in you, your mindset & your development.

It can be really stressful because of the amount of work KE RX churns out, but it's also really cool to be a part of a group of people that are literally the best in their fields. KE RX comes up with some insanely innovative ways to use the Bankruptcy Code and the group is full of really strategic and smart attorneys. The pre-packs, for example, that get done are field-leading. Some other points that are influential: the group doesn't often take laterals from other firms so they really place an emphasis on pulling seniors associates/ partners/ management from the firm's / group's own ranks. KE also owns the midmarket in RX debtor-side work so you will be able to practice your skills earlier in your career on smaller to mid-sized restructurings.

In short, I love my job & feel honestly blessed to have chosen KE RX when I was going through OCI and in your shoes.

Hey there, I'm a current 3L preparing to start with KE in the Fall, albeit in a different office. I've always wavered between staying in vanilla M&A/DF and asking to be switched into BK (requiring an office relocation), but I'm really loving my BK class and could see myself most engaged in the practice. Could the KE anon possibly PM me? Understandable if you'd rather not.

[empknight]

T14. Worked in finance/restructuring before so interested in bankruptcy/restructuring especially in the creditor side as I want to work with hedge funds and other financial institutions. But open to derivatives/structured products as well. Got summer offers from DPW, PW, Kirkland, Weil. Below is my takeaways from interactions with them so far but would love to hear out what others think as well.

People/Culture: Weil > DPW > Kirkland > PW
Practice: DPW > PW > Kirkland > Weil (considering both restructuring and derivatives)

What do you guys think?

Weil and Kirkland are the best at Rx but they primarily do debtor side work (which is viewed on the whole as being more "prestigious" than creditor side at least among bankruptcy practitioners). Fwiw, the lazard RX group is full of ex-weil people. So if IB or an exit into finance is a longer term goal for you I would pick Weil. I also agree with your culture/people ranking.

[Anonymous User]

T14. Worked in finance/restructuring before so interested in bankruptcy/restructuring especially in the creditor side as I want to work with hedge funds and other financial institutions. But open to derivatives/structured products as well. Got summer offers from DPW, PW, Kirkland, Weil. Below is my takeaways from interactions with them so far but would love to hear out what others think as well.

People/Culture: Weil > DPW > Kirkland > PW
Practice: DPW > PW > Kirkland > Weil (considering both restructuring and derivatives)

What do you guys think?

Weil and Kirkland are the best at Rx but they primarily do debtor side work (which is viewed on the whole as being more "prestigious" than creditor side at least among bankruptcy practitioners). Fwiw, the lazard RX group is full of ex-weil people. So if IB or an exit into finance is a longer term goal for you I would pick Weil. I also agree with your culture/people ranking.

This is only half right at best. Finance people do care about prestige but all V10 law firms look the same to them, except for Wachtell. They are aware of its selectivity and prestige. So if you target to move into RX banking, you can easily do that with any V10 law firm under your belt. Of course, working in the restructuring practice would give you a better narrative to move into RX banking. There are only ~3 ex-Weil people at Lazard RX. 3~4 people from Kirkland I assume. The argument that debtor side reps is more prestigious than creditor side reps is just false at least to finance guys. To them, you're all just lawyers. And without legit finance background (e.g. BB IBD gig or JD/MBA at the very least), your chance of going into RX banking from v10 law firm is just so slim that it's not worth to compare. (chance of directly going to PE/HF from law firm without the experience is practically zero).

But I don't think that OP would want to go back to banking. You could've easily landed an RX banking associate job from M&A IBD gig, which would save you from 3 years of LS and the lost salary + tuition that would easily sum up to $1M. If you target to go back to finance at distressed HFs, DPW/PW is a clearly better choice than debtor heavy shop (Kirkland/Weil). Debtor practice just does not give you the right perspective that is useful at distressed HFs and HF managers know this because they work with RX lawyers at DPW/PW all the time. While Kirkland/Weil guys say they do both debtor and creditor deals, it's just not their main practice and you won't get proper experience there. But some HF managers said if you can get a job at Wachtell, it'd give you better options since they value prestige. But the big caveat here is you need to have at least 2 years of IBD + some investing experience under your belt before even thinking about all these.

[empknight]

T14. Worked in finance/restructuring before so interested in bankruptcy/restructuring especially in the creditor side as I want to work with hedge funds and other financial institutions. But open to derivatives/structured products as well. Got summer offers from DPW, PW, Kirkland, Weil. Below is my takeaways from interactions with them so far but would love to hear out what others think as well.

People/Culture: Weil > DPW > Kirkland > PW
Practice: DPW > PW > Kirkland > Weil (considering both restructuring and derivatives)

What do you guys think?

Weil and Kirkland are the best at Rx but they primarily do debtor side work (which is viewed on the whole as being more "prestigious" than creditor side at least among bankruptcy practitioners). Fwiw, the lazard RX group is full of ex-weil people. So if IB or an exit into finance is a longer term goal for you I would pick Weil. I also agree with your culture/people ranking.

This is only half right at best. Finance people do care about prestige but all V10 law firms look the same to them, except for Wachtell. They are aware of its selectivity and prestige. So if you target to move into RX banking, you can easily do that with any V10 law firm under your belt. Of course, working in the restructuring practice would give you a better narrative to move into RX banking. There are only ~3 ex-Weil people at Lazard RX. 3~4 people from Kirkland I assume. The argument that debtor side reps is more prestigious than creditor side reps is just false at least to finance guys. To them, you're all just lawyers. And without legit finance background (e.g. BB IBD gig or JD/MBA at the very least), your chance of going into RX banking from v10 law firm is just so slim that it's not worth to compare. (chance of directly going to PE/HF from law firm without the experience is practically zero).

But I don't think that OP would want to go back to banking. You could've easily landed an RX banking associate job from M&A IBD gig, which would save you from 3 years of LS and the lost salary + tuition that would easily sum up to $1M. If you target to go back to finance at distressed HFs, DPW/PW is a clearly better choice than debtor heavy shop (Kirkland/Weil). Debtor practice just does not give you the right perspective that is useful at distressed HFs and HF managers know this because they work with RX lawyers at DPW/PW all the time. While Kirkland/Weil guys say they do both debtor and creditor deals, it's just not their main practice and you won't get proper experience there. But some HF managers said if you can get a job at Wachtell, it'd give you better options since they value prestige. But the big caveat here is you need to have at least 2 years of IBD + some investing experience under your belt before even thinking about all these.

To be clear the two statements I made were separate about the IB options and doing debtor work.

Doing debtor work alone is not going to help you break into finance, but it certainly does say something that an rx group like lazards has 6-8 bankers from the top two debtor side shops in NYC. I also would not call it "easy" to move into finance from a V10. It is still difficult and full of frictions to make the swap. Hence the fwiw label.

You may be right about the distressed HFs. No idea, but useful to know thanks!

My other point was that there is something to be said about working in the best debtor side practice in bankruptcy (that doesn't come with the Kirkland culture anyways). I was suggesting that OP look into the split between creditor and debtor side bankruptcy practice more carefully, rather than just focusing on the institutions you would work with or what you are used to doing from the past. Especially since OP likes the culture at Weil the most.

[Anonymous User]

Weil and Kirkland are the best at Rx but they primarily do debtor side work (which is viewed on the whole as being more "prestigious" than creditor side at least among bankruptcy practitioners).

At PW.

Debtor work is far more profitable for the firm so this partly true. Partners are always on the hunt for debtor mandates and debtor rainmakers and, to the extent they succeed in building out the debtor practice, laterals with debtor experience are highly valued. This is certainly true at PW. The partners that can land debtor engagements are wielding increasing influence and the partnership places a premium on laterals that can support our growing debtor practice (either partners with books or senior associates that can run the deals). Ropes and Latham are pursuing a similar path. If you love pure bankruptcy work on the company side and your goal is to make partner somewhere, then no better place to cut your teeth than Kirkland or Weil. But if your goals lie elsewhere, then more of an open question.

Are debtor Rx hours really that much worse than creditor Rx? Why is that, if so? Does it ever relent, or are the partners billing just as much as the associates?

Can anyone on here who does debtor-side Rx explain how they handle the hours, how bad it really is, and whether it's worth it as opposed to more chill jobs at firms?

1 debtor matter will almost always spin off more hours than 1 creditor matter. As company counsel, you are responsible for the whole thing. Every issue and document is your problem and the judge and other stakeholders are all looking to you to build consensus and keep the momentum going. In addition to the main restructuring deal, you're also advising management/board on actually operating the company while it's in bankruptcy. All this requires an absurd amount of paper. Both of these buckets require coordination with an investment bank (e.g., Lazard), a restructuring advisor (e.g., A&M) and your internal specialist teams (tax, finance, cap markets, exec comp, IP, real estate, M&A, litigation). You're responsible for managing all of them. Also, as the "master of the facts", you're also responsible for shepherding the litigators - witnesses need to be prepped, legal research and discovery needs to be guided, briefs need to be written, etc..

Your actual experience on the ground will vary. At PW, our debtor teams on the bk side are 2 partners plus 3-4 associates. It's an insane amount of work. But it's a tight partnership so they will re-jigger staffing on your other deals so you can focus your energy on the case. The department as a whole probably only has 1-4 live debtor cases. At Kirkland/Weil, it looks like they staff much larger associate teams but you're on many debtor matters at once. For me personally, the mental burden of juggling 3-5 busy cases is way worse than billing the same number of hours on 1.

Having worked across Weil/Kirkland many times, I have to imagine that being the point man midlevel or senior is abject misery from an hours perspective. He or she is managing a much larger team and, if they're good enough to be managing the team in one case, they are likely playing meaningful roles on several other cases. Have no idea how they handle it, I couldn't. But the associates that can come out the other side of that are absolute machines and could probably jump somewhere else with a direct path to partnership - it's happened here at PW.

ETA: You could definitely be billing equal or more hours as a Milbank/Akin associate representing the UCC on a mega case. Have never done that myself though

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Is going to a fund after (say) 4 years from PW/DPW actually realistic? I am considering Rx at one of those firms but don't want to bank on what seems like a really unlikely exit option. And even if you do go over, are you then basically just an in-house lawyer who's never really going to be accepted as an equal of the finance guys, never really have a role in making investment decisions, never make nearly as much money, etc.? My understanding is that in-house legal positions are often cushy but kind of boring and with very limited upside (much less than you'd make as a partner), but don't know if it's like that at a fund. If it is, it seems like it might just be better to go for partner at a firm than accept second-class status at a fund.

Someone also mentioned that PW has more sponsor work. Can you explain how that's different from what DPW does? Can anyone here just elaborate on the differences between those practices more generally? Is the character of the work actually different?

Prior anon who sits in an investment seat.

Really depends on how your fund classifies you. Personally I am in a position where I'm equal to other investment team my level (post MBA and direct promotes) but quite a bit ahead of my level on legal negotiations.

An interesting data point for me is that out of the people I know in similar seats, the ones that are lawyers and went to law school, only one of them was at DPW or PW. There's a smattering of firms, including a ton of finance lawyers (Wilkie, Proskauer, STB, SullCrom) and ofc people who did IBD. I think for these seats the ability to do the business finance side really overweighs whether you were at DPW or say Milbank.

Are you saying that Milbank associates are in a particularly advantageous, or disadvantageous position, compared to DPW?

[RX_distressed]

Is going to a fund after (say) 4 years from PW/DPW actually realistic? I am considering Rx at one of those firms but don't want to bank on what seems like a really unlikely exit option. And even if you do go over, are you then basically just an in-house lawyer who's never really going to be accepted as an equal of the finance guys, never really have a role in making investment decisions, never make nearly as much money, etc.? My understanding is that in-house legal positions are often cushy but kind of boring and with very limited upside (much less than you'd make as a partner), but don't know if it's like that at a fund. If it is, it seems like it might just be better to go for partner at a firm than accept second-class status at a fund.

Someone also mentioned that PW has more sponsor work. Can you explain how that's different from what DPW does? Can anyone here just elaborate on the differences between those practices more generally? Is the character of the work actually different?

Prior anon who sits in an investment seat.

Really depends on how your fund classifies you. Personally I am in a position where I'm equal to other investment team my level (post MBA and direct promotes) but quite a bit ahead of my level on legal negotiations.

An interesting data point for me is that out of the people I know in similar seats, the ones that are lawyers and went to law school, only one of them was at DPW or PW. There's a smattering of firms, including a ton of finance lawyers (Wilkie, Proskauer, STB, SullCrom) and ofc people who did IBD. I think for these seats the ability to do the business finance side really overweighs whether you were at DPW or say Milbank.

Are you saying that Milbank associates are in a particularly advantageous, or disadvantageous position, compared to DPW?

I think OP is saying DPW vs. Milbank would not really matter that much at the end of the day. What matters is how much finance experience you have under your belt.

I'd say there is no meaningful difference between DPW/PW/Kirkland/Weil level but Milbank/AkinGump to finance people is a notch below. But it's not going to make you hired.

[Anonymous User]

2L here, interested in RX, considering offers from several of these firms. This thread has been great, thanks all.

Re: DPW, does anybody know if Restructuring is under their general Corporate umbrella for staffing purposes? i.e., can a new DPW associate rotate in and out of RX and other corporate areas (which I understand is the typical DPW model on the corporate side), or are you silo'ed as a DPW RX associate from day one?

Also, curious about this tidbit from a few pages back in the thread:

DPW / PW midlevel anon chiming in again. [...] the cultures are different (DPW RX is ... very DPW whereas PW RX is pretty typical of NYC BigLaw specialist groups).

Can anyone expand on this a bit more? Just working backwards from the typical stereotypes, does this mean that DPW RX is a bit more of a tightly wound, but still very "nice," working environment? Just feels super important to get fit right when you're joining a smaller 40-50 person group with a handful of partners vs. a sprawling 100+ person M&A group.

[Anonymous User]

2L here, interested in RX, considering offers from several of these firms. This thread has been great, thanks all.

Re: DPW, does anybody know if Restructuring is under their general Corporate umbrella for staffing purposes? i.e., can a new DPW associate rotate in and out of RX and other corporate areas (which I understand is the typical DPW model on the corporate side), or are you silo'ed as a DPW RX associate from day one?

Also, curious about this tidbit from a few pages back in the thread:

DPW / PW midlevel anon chiming in again. [...] the cultures are different (DPW RX is ... very DPW whereas PW RX is pretty typical of NYC BigLaw specialist groups).

Can anyone expand on this a bit more? Just working backwards from the typical stereotypes, does this mean that DPW RX is a bit more of a tightly wound, but still very "nice," working environment? Just feels super important to get fit right when you're joining a smaller 40-50 person group with a handful of partners vs. a sprawling 100+ person M&A group.

Restructuring is under general Corporate umbrella, so yes you can rotate in and out. With regards to the second point, I'm assuming that refers to the fact that the partners are home grown and thus "very DPW". The group has taken on some lateral associates recently and is probably a 60ish person group these days.

[Anonymous User]

Is there any argument for Weil over Kirkland or vice versa?

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on DPW restructuring vs. PW restructuring for someone considering both?

I think the conventional wisdom is that DPW has more bank clients / secured creditor work, whereas PW is more on the ad hoc side — is that still true? And assuming that's true, is one type better for juniors vs. the other? It also seems that PW is making a semi-serious push into debtor work (spate of lateral partner hires), whereas that doesn't seem to be a focus for DPW. How seriously should I factor that in?

Any thoughts comparing the junior experience (staffing considerations, autonomy/discretion given to juniors, level of client exposure, etc.) at both would be much appreciated. (E.g., I hear that PW teams are staffed a bit more leanly, leading to earlier exposure for juniors, but I recognize this might just be part of the sales pitch.) "Culture" and personality is of lesser concern to me since it seems completely impossible to get a feel for that over Zoom...

ETA: I understand that PW juniors join as restructuring associates from day 1, which is not the case at DPW. Am I correct this is potentially a downside for somebody in my shoes who isn't 100% all-in on restructuring, and may take longer than SA program to make up his/her mind?

[Anonymous User]

bump

[Anonymous User]

I'm a bit late, but hopefully someone from this thread sees this:

Would it make sense for someone who is lit-focused to take Wilmer over Milbank or Weil? I detailed my circumstances in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308729, but bottom line is that Wilmer seems to fit my preferences perfectly. I just want to make sure I'm not making any incorrect assumptions or shooting myself in the foot by going with a smaller group instead of one of the marquee RX practices.

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on DPW restructuring vs. PW restructuring for someone considering both?

I think the conventional wisdom is that DPW has more bank clients / secured creditor work, whereas PW is more on the ad hoc side — is that still true? And assuming that's true, is one type better for juniors vs. the other? It also seems that PW is making a semi-serious push into debtor work (spate of lateral partner hires), whereas that doesn't seem to be a focus for DPW. How seriously should I factor that in?

Any thoughts comparing the junior experience (staffing considerations, autonomy/discretion given to juniors, level of client exposure, etc.) at both would be much appreciated. (E.g., I hear that PW teams are staffed a bit more leanly, leading to earlier exposure for juniors, but I recognize this might just be part of the sales pitch.) "Culture" and personality is of lesser concern to me since it seems completely impossible to get a feel for that over Zoom...

ETA: I understand that PW juniors join as restructuring associates from day 1, which is not the case at DPW. Am I correct this is potentially a downside for somebody in my shoes who isn't 100% all-in on restructuring, and may take longer than SA program to make up his/her mind?

DPW/PW mid who has posted in the thread. As far as practices go, 75% the same (primarily secured creditor ad hoc groups with some debtor reps). PW isn't at the size to compete with K&E/Weil regularly in debtor mandates; neither is DPW. (But PW is catching up to DPW here -- before Basta, there was no Huebener equivalent at PW.) 25% difference is banks for DPW and sponsors for PW.

As I keep saying in the thread, if choosing between DPW/PW, choose based on fit. Both great shops that are imo very similar outside culture. (esp. re "autonomy/discretion" I think PW and DPW are different.) I think if you talk to enough RX mids/seniors you'll get a sense of how the two shops vary.

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious - OP, if you're still checking this thread, which of these 4 firms did you end up choosing? After all the good info posted here, what was the decisive factor for you?

(I'll also open it up to other RX-focused 2Ls who recently picked a firm ... feel free to share your thought process)

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious - OP, if you're still checking this thread, which of these 4 firms did you end up choosing? After all the good info posted here, what was the decisive factor for you?

(I'll also open it up to other RX-focused 2Ls who recently picked a firm ... feel free to share your thought process)

OP here. I'm heading to one of the creditor-focused firms mentioned here. Between the two, I took into account the firm's practice focus and whether it gives you a chance to look around other corporate practice areas, plus personal/cultural fit while those two were pretty similar (similarly good)

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on banking / funds exit post-QE rx?

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on banking / funds exit post-QE rx?

I interviewed there and people said it was possible, but I'm somewhat skeptical. QE is lit-only, so it seems like it wouldn't offer the best background/skill set to do IB or distressed investing. You could probably do litigation finance after QE, but Rx seems less likely. Could be wrong though -- like I said, people there seem to think it's possible.

[Anonymous User]

I heard that RX has slowed a bit and is no longer red hot like in early COVID. If work is drying up, will it be harder (more competitive) for 2L SAs to get their hands on RX work this summer?