Tx firm's NYC office or MC firm's Asia office (have to decide by 2/11) Forum

[Anonymous User]

I go to CCN and have to choose between two SA options right now. I am an international student and am interested in working in Asia in the medium to long term.

Option 1
A. A Tx firm in its NYC office: pros - 1. hours are relatively reasonable (talked to several associates - those the firm has set me up with and others - and it seems most attorneys leave by 8ish on most days).
2. I have a pre-law background in project finance (PF) and I can choose to do PF at this firm. I understand Asia has a fast-growing PF practice and I think starting here can set me up for lateraling to Asia down the road.
3. I would have the NY training under my belt which is supposedly valued highly in Asia.
4. The culture at the firm seems to be pretty good - I definitely clicked with the interviewers and those who I met during the second looks.

Cons: 1. this firm doesn't have a strong Asia presence, although it has a few offices abroad. So, I would necessary have to lateral whenever I choose to move to Asia.
2. I need an h1b visa and while the firm said it would sponsor my h1b and send me to an international office if I strike out in the lottery, I (along with my SO and child) would have to move to another country (not in Asia) and I would be working in a satellite office.
3. My family doesn't like the NYC cold. Moreover, given the COL and big city feel, I don't want to raise my child here.

Option 2
B. A Magic Circle firm in its Asia office: pros - 1. The city is where I want to wind up eventually. Many favorable points - climate, QOL, COL, proximity to our parents and extended family, easy for my SO to get a work permit. I don't need to rely on h1b lottery and the related uncertainties.
2. Lower taxes and COLA means I get about 60K more in take-home salary than in NYC in the first year assuming I get market bonus at both firms. COL is also lower so I can save about 65-70K more per annum.
3. The CapM practice of the team is market-leading and the team is generally well-respected. I got insider info from a couple of acquaintances who worked in the team that the people are nice and good to work with (including flexibility to work from home and zero facetime requirements).
4. Given it's my long term target market, I see the value of starting here and building relationships, etc., which supposedly is pretty important in the Asia market.
5. I like the fact that the juniors get more substantive work right off the bat, mainly because the deals are low margin and leanly staffed.
6. It's a MC firm with a solid reputation everywhere outside the US.

Cons - 1. The biggest problem I have with this option is the fact that the team is very busy and the work is very hectic. I have been told it's very common to work late into the night and early morning (2 AM ish). Given that I have a young family and am much older than the traditional junior associate, I am not sure if I would be able to sustain this in the long term unless the team expands rapidly (Yes I know I said my long-term plan is to work here).
2. Potentially foreclosing geographic options - I fear being pigeonholed into CapM (and largely HY debt). Given the lack of NYC training and the niche, I am wondering if I am closing the doors to return to the US ever again by starting here (although the firm itself is known for being generous with intra-firm transfers). This is especially true because the Asia market is quite small and if, for some reason, I end hating the practice area/team/hours, I don't know if I can lateral to another market within or without the US in my very first year as a junior associate.

Please let me know what your suggestion would be along with the reasons. I have about 4 more days to decide (assuming my request for an extension of deadline is denied).
Should I ask the recruiting of the MC firm if starting in NYC/London is an option and if yes, should I choose that over the above options?
I can also ask the Tx firm if I can start in their HQs in Tx (PF work, better (?) weather than NYC, lower COL, fewer hours than NYC).

[The Lsat Airbender]

The city is where I want to wind up eventually.

End of story. Yes, getting back to the US will be hard but I assume that's already baked into your existing geographic preferences. Ditto for getting pigeonholed into CapM. It literally comes with the territory.

[Anonymous User]

OP here.
Would really appreciate if those who are voting can provide the rationale, even if it's a couple sentences. Thanks!

[bigchiefhoho]

OP here.
Would really appreciate if those who are voting can provide the rationale, even if it's a couple sentences. Thanks!

I imagine everyone that's voting for the Asian office has the same rationale as me: It's going to be really hard to get to that Asian city if you start anywhere else. Lateraling to somewhere less hectic once you're already in the city will probably be easier than starting at a more pleasant place elsewhere and then trying to get into the city. Getting pigeonholed into CapM also doesn't seem like much of a problem if there's a lot of it in that city. Frankly, I'd think you'd be nuts to turn them down - seems to me like you've landed one of the few positions that really furthers your long-term goal.

[2013]

You said you don’t want to raise a kid in NY. The other job is in the city you want to live in. It’s pretty clear cut that you should take the job in Asia. Yes, the work will suck, but its not guaranteed the firm you’re considering in NY will have great hours/lifestyle. If you hate your job on top of hating NY, you will always regret turning down the job in Asia.

[Anonymous User]

I'm also an international student. I would get the experience in NYC first. I suppose that is something we might never be able to get once we are back. Unless you really hate living and working in NYC for about 2-3 years, or you have special reason (family, etc), I would chose to have that experience under my belt.

[Anonymous User]

I'm also an international student. I would get the experience in NYC first. I suppose that is something we might never be able to get once we are back. Unless you really hate living and working in NYC for about 2-3 years, or you have special reason (family, etc), I would chose to have that experience under my belt.

I understand why international students/those who have offers in a non US office feel this way. Everyone pretty much tells you nyc biglaw gives you the best experience, training etc. that could be a launching pad and you can always lateral to different region later. For sure, this is somewhat true and I am not arguing against it but you really need to figure out how this "better experience" fits into your long term goals. If your goal is to stay in the US long term and/or gun for partnership, perhaps that "better experience" should outweigh any benefits of starting in Asia. But if your goal is to end up in Asia anyways, and just thinking about having some biglaw experience under your belt so you can exit to something else in Asia, I dont think "better experience" really matters. I dont get how the fact that NYC experience is valued in Asia matters here since you already have an offer to start in Asia.

You would be dumb to forgo $$$ (hundreds of thousands of dollars based on your post) and go through another round of lateral process just go back to Asia, and end up at a worse position/firm than your current offer in Asia. Sure starting in Asia may mean you cant go back to US (which actually isn't impossible - see below) but who cares? You shouldn't be afraid to close doors.

I'd actually worry more about whether you would be able to withstand the hours. I've heard (and sounds like you are aware) that hours can be brutal in cap markets in Asia. And I dont think its impossible to go back to US - Ive seen people who started in Asia lateral to the US. You can always lateral to another Asian market too, Ive seen people move among SG, HK and cities in China and of course to different firms in the same city. I am not sure why you get the impression that it is difficult to lateral within the region. There are plenty of people in Asia w/o US experience.

[nealric]

I think going to NYC would only make sense if you are after U.S. permanent residency and eventual citizenship. If you have no significant interest in that, and the long-term time commitment that would be necessary, it makes sense to take the job where you really want to be.

I understand the appeal of NYC training, but it's not like Hong Kong or Singapore (I presume it's one of those from the description) are sleepy backwaters. Having lived in NYC and done biglaw there without children, I can't imagine trying to do it now that I have children. Simple things like getting kids into schools are herculean tasks, and spaces just aren't designed for them. Unless you are bringing other money to the table, you are going to be looking at a very cramped living space, a long stressful commute, or way over extending yourself financially as a jr. associate with kids.

[gontid]

I think going to NYC would only make sense if you are after U.S. permanent residency and eventual citizenship. If you have no significant interest in that, and the long-term time commitment that would be necessary, it makes sense to take the job where you really want to be.

I understand the appeal of NYC training, but it's not like Hong Kong or Singapore (I presume it's one of those from the description) are sleepy backwaters. Having lived in NYC and done biglaw there without children, I can't imagine trying to do it now that I have children. Simple things like getting kids into schools are herculean tasks, and spaces just aren't designed for them. Unless you are bringing other money to the table, you are going to be looking at a very cramped living space, a long stressful commute, or way over extending yourself financially as a jr. associate with kids.

The concerns you had about NYC apply at least equally to HK. Apartments are ridiculously expensive. The housing situation might not be as bad given COLA and 15% tax rate, but you cannot raise a kid in HK if you have to consistently work till 2 am.

[nealric]

I think going to NYC would only make sense if you are after U.S. permanent residency and eventual citizenship. If you have no significant interest in that, and the long-term time commitment that would be necessary, it makes sense to take the job where you really want to be.

I understand the appeal of NYC training, but it's not like Hong Kong or Singapore (I presume it's one of those from the description) are sleepy backwaters. Having lived in NYC and done biglaw there without children, I can't imagine trying to do it now that I have children. Simple things like getting kids into schools are herculean tasks, and spaces just aren't designed for them. Unless you are bringing other money to the table, you are going to be looking at a very cramped living space, a long stressful commute, or way over extending yourself financially as a jr. associate with kids.

The concerns you had about NYC apply at least equally to HK. Apartments are ridiculously expensive. The housing situation might not be as bad given COLA and 15% tax rate, but you cannot raise a kid in HK if you have to consistently work till 2 am.

Fair point, although I presume if OP is looking to end up in Asia long-term, they have a network and family support. That makes a huge difference with things like childcare.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in a similar boat and will weigh in with my own thoughts. I've been told by a partner in an Asian firm that experience from a US firm is highly preferred. Simply put, they just don't have the means to provide great training and I know this because I interned at an Asian firm. Maybe Asian offices of US firms are different, but you'll likely be working with very busy midlevels and partners who have never had to train anyone. And it was also my perception that US-trained associates had more leverage than those without. In the long-run, I do think a US experience will help you.

However, I agree with you on the uncertainty of the visa situation. It is a greater stress point than law school or the employment process, and I sometimes wonder if it's worth it. I think having a family adds greater considerations. Personally, I would try NY for a bit then lateral back home.

[Anonymous User]

If training is an issue, OP might as well ask the MC firm to place him/her at their NY or DC office for a year or two

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone for your responses. I've got the TX firm to allow me to split the summer between NYC and Houston. The latter resolves some of the issues I had with starting in NYC. I requested the MC firm to let me split between the Asia and NY/DC office as well but no dice there. I also got an extension of deadline and will need to decide by 2/17. I will update the thread with my decision.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone for your responses. I've got the TX firm to allow me to split the summer between NYC and Houston. The latter resolves some of the issues I had with starting in NYC. I requested the MC firm to let me split between the Asia and NY/DC office as well but no dice there. I also got an extension of deadline and will need to decide by 2/17. I will update the thread with my decision.

It sounds as though the primary value of the Texas firm for your career is that it's a U.S. firm, not that your training is specifically in the NYC office?

If so, I'd rank the choices: (1) Houston office of U.S. firm *OR* Asia office of MC firm (tie), and (2) NYC office of U.S. firm. As context, I'm a litigator at a V5 NYC firm so I'm not as familiar with your practice areas, but I did work in the Hong Kong office of another U.S. firm before law school. The MC firms in HK were quite well-regarded, so I imagine you have a good option. At the same time, I did notice that, in the legal community in HK, experience at a U.S. firm (or in London at a MC firm, for corporate) was a valuable credential. Many of the lawyers I encountered in HK had spent time in U.S. firms. But does the value depend on which U.S. firm? Does the firm you're considering have the cachet to get you the job you'd want in Asia?

Finally, I think the NY office of the U.S. firm does not sound like a good choice. It doesn't fit your life or career goals, and it seems like you can get similar value out of the U.S. credential by working in Houston. So I'd just cross out this option. Good luck!

[Anonymous User]

What was your decision OP? And which MC firm was it, if it's ok?

[CanadianWolf]

Since you have a child/children, the Texas firm--in either NYC or in Houston--may be the better option since HK is too crowded and the office hours in Asia are not family friendly; furthermore, the training in the US appears to be valued highly in Asia.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks, all. Ended up choosing the Tx firm. Will be splitting between the NYC and Houston offices. MC firm was in SG, not HK.

[Anonymous User]

seemed like MC firm was the clear winner...