Simpson v. Latham v. PW (NY M&A) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Apologies for another similar post.

Understand Simpson is the most prestigious, but honestly felt Latham would be the best fit for me. People from Simpson and PW also seemed incredibly nice, though. I am completely aware that the people I met during the interview stage may not be the true representation of the culture of the group/firm.

No minimum billable at Simpson is definitely a plus, but just wanted to see if there are any considerations (other than prestige/name recognition) I should take into account in making this decision. More anecdotes about those groups’ culture would be greatly appreciated.

[Anonymous User]

What if you end up not liking M&A though

[Anonymous User]

What if you end up not liking M&A though

Ah sorry for not being clear, I am a lateral M&A associate.

[Anonymous User]

don't really think PW's public M&A and PE work is much worse than Simpson at this point. Latham seems to be the top dog in cap market, banking, and PE work nationally, not sure about their NY work but last checked it's a smaller NY office (granted the largest one of the firm) than PW or Simpson.

since you are a lateral you should probs consider why you left your previous firm (culture/fit) more than prestige, bc honestly between these three firms it's hair splitting differences. I did second look at Simpson and the partner mentioned Latham as a peer firm (asked about my options), can't remember if they are m&a partner tho.

[Anonymous User]

can you also share some insight on their lateral bonus? I heard LW is offering 75k for midlevel laterals is that true?

[Anonymous User]

don't really think PW's public M&A and PE work is much worse than Simpson at this point. Latham seems to be the top dog in cap market, banking, and PE work nationally, not sure about their NY work but last checked it's a smaller NY office (granted the largest one of the firm) than PW or Simpson.

since you are a lateral you should probs consider why you left your previous firm (culture/fit) more than prestige, bc honestly between these three firms it's hair splitting differences. I did second look at Simpson and the partner mentioned Latham as a peer firm (asked about my options), can't remember if they are m&a partner tho.

V5 M&A associate. My impression is that PW is def still considered a step below Simpson wrt their M&A practices. Not sure if I quite agree that Latham is national top dog in any of the practices you listed either. Kirkland is def better for PE nationally. Skadden has a better cap markets presence nationally (not to mention DPW, even despite its NY-centricity). Latham's a fantastic firm but I don't think it really leads in anything. It's just a really good jack-of-all-trades kinda firm.

[Anonymous User]

don't really think PW's public M&A and PE work is much worse than Simpson at this point. Latham seems to be the top dog in cap market, banking, and PE work nationally, not sure about their NY work but last checked it's a smaller NY office (granted the largest one of the firm) than PW or Simpson.

since you are a lateral you should probs consider why you left your previous firm (culture/fit) more than prestige, bc honestly between these three firms it's hair splitting differences. I did second look at Simpson and the partner mentioned Latham as a peer firm (asked about my options), can't remember if they are m&a partner tho.

V5 M&A associate. My impression is that PW is def still considered a step below Simpson wrt their M&A practices. Not sure if I quite agree that Latham is national top dog in any of the practices you listed either. Kirkland is def better for PE nationally. Skadden has a better cap markets presence nationally (not to mention DPW, even despite its NY-centricity). Latham's a fantastic firm but I don't think it really leads in anything. It's just a really good jack-of-all-trades kinda firm.

oh sry, just to clarify, by top dog I meant top tier, not like it's no.1 or anything (obvs it's not). Chambers ranked them tier 1 in most of the cap market areas, equity (for both issuer and underwriter) and high-yield, the only other firm with similar ranking is (I think) DPW? DPW is stronger in debt work, but it's equity work is obvs still A-list. Skadden is not really band 1 in any of the hot CM areas (they are in fact band 3 for both equity and debt). Yes agree KE is better for PE work, but LW is also pretty up there. Banking wise my source is also Chambers, they are band 1, along with some other firms. But ofc none of those matters bc OP wants M&A. For public m&a, PW and Simpson are probs better.

[Anonymous User]

I think the rough M&A leaderboards go Wachtell / Skadden / Cravath / S&C > DPW / Simpson > Kirkland / Latham > Cleary / PW

Can't go wrong with either Simpson/Latham since I think they're roughly comparable in culture / competency. I've heard some bad things about PW's corporate group, so not sure if I'd endorse going there. In terms of sheer M&A prowess, PW still lags a little behind the go-to M&A shops. But it is up and coming, so who knows in a few years

[Anonymous User]

can you also share some insight on their lateral bonus? I heard LW is offering 75k for midlevel laterals is that true?

I (unfortunately) started this process with a recruiter so I am not sure if the signing bonus will be that high for me. Will revert once I find out.

[Anonymous User]

I think the rough M&A leaderboards go Wachtell / Skadden / Cravath / S&C > DPW / Simpson > Kirkland / Latham > Cleary / PW

Can't go wrong with either Simpson/Latham since I think they're roughly comparable in culture / competency. I've heard some bad things about PW's corporate group, so not sure if I'd endorse going there. In terms of sheer M&A prowess, PW still lags a little behind the go-to M&A shops. But it is up and coming, so who knows in a few years

Depends on which kind of M&A. For public M&A *in New York*, I think PW hits well above its weight for its size. In recent years I've probably seen PW NY on big public deals as much as STB, and ahead of Latham, but still behind Wachtell / Skadden / Cravath / S&C. (Latham has some good people in public M&A, but seems to have a fair bit of big public M&A coverage in Chicago/California rather than in NY.) Having someone like Barshay and now Veeraraghavan at PW helps a lot - plus many of the younger partners in whom they're investing seem to be doing strategic rather than PE work.

For PE/private M&A, the ranking (in NY, again) would probably be STB-LW-PW across the board. Latham is ahead of both the other firms for mid-market (deals up to $1 bn) work in New York. STB has more large-cap work (aided by real estate) while PW has the Apollo relationship pretty sewn up, other than for pockets at Sidley and Kirkland. (Note that Carlyle has historically been handled by partners at Latham DC, not NY.)

None of the three firms has really gained a strong foothold in SPAC-work (at least at this stage). PW would probably have the most ex-bankruptcy deals, if that's of interest.

I completely agree on the culture in PW's corporate group maybe being a little more difficult. Another decision factor may be to try to get a sense for how laterals do at all three firms going in at your level: do they succeed, stick around, or make quick exits without keeping in touch? (It's a risk being a lateral - and indeed an associate - at any firm, but some are more ruthless than others - and maybe a particular risk if moving in a "hot" market, if things do cool down at some point over the next couple of years.) Historically it was rare for STB to take laterals at all (other than from Cravath/Wachtell). Some laterals seem to go to Latham "with" partners from other firms, and so have a bit of a leg up (a bit like at Kirkland for chances of making share partner). I don't know how PW operates now.

[Anonymous User]

I think the rough M&A leaderboards go Wachtell / Skadden / Cravath / S&C > DPW / Simpson > Kirkland / Latham > Cleary / PW

Can't go wrong with either Simpson/Latham since I think they're roughly comparable in culture / competency. I've heard some bad things about PW's corporate group, so not sure if I'd endorse going there. In terms of sheer M&A prowess, PW still lags a little behind the go-to M&A shops. But it is up and coming, so who knows in a few years

Depends on which kind of M&A. For public M&A *in New York*, I think PW hits well above its weight for its size. In recent years I've probably seen PW NY on big public deals as much as STB, and ahead of Latham, but still behind Wachtell / Skadden / Cravath / S&C. (Latham has some good people in public M&A, but seems to have a fair bit of big public M&A coverage in Chicago/California rather than in NY.) Having someone like Barshay and now Veeraraghavan at PW helps a lot - plus many of the younger partners in whom they're investing seem to be doing strategic rather than PE work.

For PE/private M&A, the ranking (in NY, again) would probably be STB-LW-PW across the board. Latham is ahead of both the other firms for mid-market (deals up to $1 bn) work in New York. STB has more large-cap work (aided by real estate) while PW has the Apollo relationship pretty sewn up, other than for pockets at Sidley and Kirkland. (Note that Carlyle has historically been handled by partners at Latham DC, not NY.)

None of the three firms has really gained a strong foothold in SPAC-work (at least at this stage). PW would probably have the most ex-bankruptcy deals, if that's of interest.

I completely agree on the culture in PW's corporate group maybe being a little more difficult. Another decision factor may be to try to get a sense for how laterals do at all three firms going in at your level: do they succeed, stick around, or make quick exits without keeping in touch? (It's a risk being a lateral - and indeed an associate - at any firm, but some are more ruthless than others - and maybe a particular risk if moving in a "hot" market, if things do cool down at some point over the next couple of years.) Historically it was rare for STB to take laterals at all (other than from Cravath/Wachtell). Some laterals seem to go to Latham "with" partners from other firms, and so have a bit of a leg up (a bit like at Kirkland for chances of making share partner). I don't know how PW operates now.

STB laterals are NOT rare at all, saw many info about them hiring. Check NALP, and you can see they hired 42 lateral associates in the year 2018; and 35 in the year 2019. That's for New York office alone. It's also not true that they take from Wachtell or Cravath (tbh I can't see the point of jumping from those two firms to STB, it's a great firm but it doesn't really bring much additional value to the table, not as prestigious, also brutal hours, same pay - less pay than wachtell, and maybe even worse partnership prospect. KE does offer additional bonus so I would understand why cravath ppl lateral to KE). Use LinkedIn and you will see larger number of people lateraled to STB from slightly less "prestigious" firms (but still great firms), Ropes/Shearman/White Case/etc.

Also PW's corporate team or Public m&a team size is not small - at least their number of lawyers is larger than LW NY. PW has 800ish lawyers in NYC and 350ish are corporate lawyers, that's not a small size at all (LW NY is 450ish total for both corp and lit and other niche areas)

[Anonymous User]

White and Case is more prestigious than Simpson

[Anonymous User]

don't really think PW's public M&A and PE work is much worse than Simpson at this point. Latham seems to be the top dog in cap market, banking, and PE work nationally, not sure about their NY work but last checked it's a smaller NY office (granted the largest one of the firm) than PW or Simpson.

since you are a lateral you should probs consider why you left your previous firm (culture/fit) more than prestige, bc honestly between these three firms it's hair splitting differences. I did second look at Simpson and the partner mentioned Latham as a peer firm (asked about my options), can't remember if they are m&a partner tho.

Huh?