OK, just how bad is STB M&A? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I did a stint in STB M&A.

Was horrible and I think you're stupid for considering M&A generally especially at a v10. Was the worst group of people I ever encountered at the firm and as a rule of thumb M&A groups draw in the worst people (but maybe you'll fit into the vibe, it works for some). Like there shouldn't be an illusion that its just some tough hours that people can't take, its just a horrible working environment with people who don't care if you haven't slept in days, it was never enough. I frankly won't socialize with attorneys who say they practice in an M&A group because I just assume they're kind of shitty; I know that is extreme and its not ubiquitous, but that is the level of hate I had after my time.

OK yikes. Appreciate you sharing this. Are other groups you interacted with at STB markedly better (e.g., Capital Markets, Funds, Tax)? I'm guessing M&A is an anomaly (???), since the vibe I've gotten from the firm throughout this entire OCI process has been very pleasant

You're really making me reconsider Simpson...but then again, I'd be choosing from other V10 M&A teams and you make all of them sound miserable LOL.

Why do you want to be in M&A so badly? Confirmed that M&A is the worst group IMO and other groups are better but your response kind of grosses me out but I guess I'm just that jaded. Pretty rare to get a realistic look at firms from interviews, the firm is selling you on it just as much if not more than you selling yourself to firm.

Lol, I’ve heard that, in general, exit opps are the best for M&A. I doubt I’ll survive BigLaw for more than a couple of years, so I really want to position myself for a decent in-house gig down the road.

but like...why the laser-focus on in-house?

Lol wdym? Better lifestyle. Where else would I go? No interest in government or PI and academia is impossible. I suppose I could lateral down to another firm, but that’s still the BigLaw billable hours model…which I assume I’d be trying to run away from after a few years of grinding.

Yeah, I recently went in house and don't understand the question.

Other corporate practices might have a slightly better lifestyle than M&A, with the key word being "might", but they still have for most normal people unsustainably bad lifestyles.

Haha, yeah I'm definitely going to explore Funds and some other groups like Banking. I've heard those usually don't have the fire drills that make M&A so awful lol.

[jotarokujo]

Plenty of people leave the V10, or BigLaw in general, because the hours are just unsustainable. Seems pretty simple to me. It doesn't mean they aren't interested in the law. Also, I'm not looking to minimize work per se - I'm fully aware that even in-house roles might still demand 50+ hour weeks, depending on the company. But that's manageable, compared with the 80-90+ hour weeks at a firm like STB.

yes of course biglaw has terrible hours that people reasonably want to get out of. my question is why go into biglaw at all or why allow slightly better in-house prospects to affect practice area. if this person is just willing to do the thing that optimizes for in-house opportunities regardless of their substantive interest/is indifferent between practice areas substantively, that seems like something went wrong unless they're somehow super passionate about "in-house" - which is completely unspecific. how can one be passionate about "in-house" when there are multiple types of in-house positions, to which different biglaw practice groups are more or less conducive

[tlsguy2020]

admitted that STB M&A deal teams are leaner than most peer firms (except Wachtell and maybe Cravath), resulting in a bit more work per associate.

I want to emphasize the marginal value of time. "A bit more work" when you're already spending over twelve hours a day working hurts way more than "a bit more work" when you're spending nine hours a day working.

[4LTsPointingNorth]

Plenty of people leave the V10, or BigLaw in general, because the hours are just unsustainable. Seems pretty simple to me. It doesn't mean they aren't interested in the law. Also, I'm not looking to minimize work per se - I'm fully aware that even in-house roles might still demand 50+ hour weeks, depending on the company. But that's manageable, compared with the 80-90+ hour weeks at a firm like STB.

yes of course biglaw has terrible hours that people reasonably want to get out of. my question is why go into biglaw at all or why allow slightly better in-house prospects to affect practice area. if this person is just willing to do the thing that optimizes for in-house opportunities regardless of their substantive interest/is indifferent between practice areas substantively, that seems like something went wrong unless they're somehow super passionate about "in-house" - which is completely unspecific. how can one be passionate about "in-house" when there are multiple types of in-house positions, to which different biglaw practice groups are more or less conducive

I don't understand your confusion. Just because someone knows going into it that their experience will be unpleasant or that they don't want to practice as an M&A lawyer at a big firm for their entire career doesn't mean they have made some sort of mistake by deciding to do so for a couple of years to start their career.

It's perfectly reasonable to do so for 3-5 years in order to make a lot of money while also gaining valuable substantive experience as a corporate generalist and thereby maximizing your options for your next career move.

[Wubbles]

Also, it's a bit late to tell OP the old trope (that is valuable before law school) that they shouldn't have gone to law school if they didn't want to be a lawyer (though it does seem that they do). They've already walked off that plank.

Secondly, 100% reasonable to want to do M&A if one is generallly interested in the transactional side but not deeply drawn to a niche. It's flexible and in demand. Fund work is also shit most of the time, and as someone said above, perfectly sane to not want to be doing any of this work at a firm long term and very reasonable to pick what makes it theoretically easier to get off the big law train ASAP. Also, at a big NYC shop (not STB in this scenario because of their lean staffing) if you just don't give a shit you can hide in a massive general corporate/M&A group and not kill yourself nearly as bad if you are really really good at saying no and don't care 1 bit about long term prospects (I know this is saying a lot because I find it gutwrenchingly hard to effectively say no to work many times).

[Anonymous User]

As a former V10 M&A associate, there is literally no amount of money you could pay me to do M&A at a V10 firm again. My vision of hell is being a junior associate required to do due diligence for an M&A transaction perpetually.

[Anonymous User]

Just to address the point about M&A having best exit ops, I think that myth needs to come to an end.

M&A has the most postings, but also the most attorneys who will claim experience in that area. They aren't necessary 'good', there are just a lot of them. Like is it a better choice than litigation for in house options? Sure. But compared to finance, funds or other corp groups? That isn't really what I see play out as a mid-level.

If the sole reason you're picking m&a is because you heard some people tell you it has good exit ops you're in trouble. I am the same STB anon and have known people out of M&A here and elsewhere to get pretty lackluster in house exits, its not some guarantee of a great in house job. Seriously, if that is your only reason, you're going to end up unhappy. At best you'll get a good exit op and look at your friends who did other corp groups with a better lifestyle get the same thing and feel a little sour.

[Arca9]

OK yikes. Appreciate you sharing this. Are other groups you interacted with at STB markedly better (e.g., Capital Markets, Funds, Tax)? I'm guessing M&A is an anomaly (???), since the vibe I've gotten from the firm throughout this entire OCI process has been very pleasant

You're really making me reconsider Simpson...but then again, I'd be choosing from other V10 M&A teams and you make all of them sound miserable LOL.

Why do you want to be in M&A so badly? Confirmed that M&A is the worst group IMO and other groups are better but your response kind of grosses me out but I guess I'm just that jaded. Pretty rare to get a realistic look at firms from interviews, the firm is selling you on it just as much if not more than you selling yourself to firm.

Lol, I’ve heard that, in general, exit opps are the best for M&A. I doubt I’ll survive BigLaw for more than a couple of years, so I really want to position myself for a decent in-house gig down the road.

but like...why the laser-focus on in-house?

Lol wdym? Better lifestyle. Where else would I go? No interest in government or PI and academia is impossible. I suppose I could lateral down to another firm, but that’s still the BigLaw billable hours model…which I assume I’d be trying to run away from after a few years of grinding.

Yeah, I recently went in house and don't understand the question.

Other corporate practices might have a slightly better lifestyle than M&A, with the key word being "might", but they still have for most normal people unsustainably bad lifestyles.

Haha, yeah I'm definitely going to explore Funds and some other groups like Banking. I've heard those usually don't have the fire drills that make M&A so awful lol.

FYI, banking has fire drills (e.g. commitment papers for acquisition financing) that can be fucking terrible too.

[existentialcrisis]

Why do you want to be in M&A so badly? Confirmed that M&A is the worst group IMO and other groups are better but your response kind of grosses me out but I guess I'm just that jaded. Pretty rare to get a realistic look at firms from interviews, the firm is selling you on it just as much if not more than you selling yourself to firm.

Lol, I’ve heard that, in general, exit opps are the best for M&A. I doubt I’ll survive BigLaw for more than a couple of years, so I really want to position myself for a decent in-house gig down the road.

but like...why the laser-focus on in-house?

Lol wdym? Better lifestyle. Where else would I go? No interest in government or PI and academia is impossible. I suppose I could lateral down to another firm, but that’s still the BigLaw billable hours model…which I assume I’d be trying to run away from after a few years of grinding.

Yeah, I recently went in house and don't understand the question.

Other corporate practices might have a slightly better lifestyle than M&A, with the key word being "might", but they still have for most normal people unsustainably bad lifestyles.

Haha, yeah I'm definitely going to explore Funds and some other groups like Banking. I've heard those usually don't have the fire drills that make M&A so awful lol.

FYI, banking has fire drills (e.g. commitment papers for acquisition financing) that can be fucking terrible too.

Commitment Papers are classic weekend killers and I think some of the worst fire drills big law has to offer.

[Anonymous User]

I don't think there's a group that is better than other groups at biglaws. Thanks to the rotation system of my firm, I've been working on all kinds of deals in my first year (M&A, capital markets, funds, debt, etc.). All of them had fire drills. It totally depends on which deals/clients you are working for. I worked for some really terrible PE clients who just wanted to complete diligence in 48 hours... and a startup that was desperate to go public with an impossible timeline...and a fund client who just randomly announced closings every few days without giving heads up. Most of the time, your life-work balance depends on the client and your teams (don't work with 8th year associates who are struggling to make partners, or nonequity parters who strive to make equity partner - they are crazy), not the practice group.

[Anonymous User]

+1 to STB M&A sounding like an awful team. This is based on reports from one of my friends who worked there and had shocking stories. One of them included having to pull two all nighters in a row, and then having people screaming at him on the third day. This friend now works in-house, where he is paid well and still works long hours (up to 12 hour work days plus weekends). But it seems a breeze to him compared to his STB experience.

I work in biglaw and, like most people, have done close to all nighters (although I usually sleep for 1-2 hours). But never with a complete lack of sympathy like that.

Also, I worked with a screamer for a couple of years at a previous firm. Don't underestimate the toll it can take on you. I consider myself as having thick skin, and worked in some rough blue collar jobs before law school. But when you have burnt the midnight candle for months on end, are jacked up on caffeine (and in some cases Adderall), haven't been exercising, and are already at the point where you cannot sleep well because of stress and fear of 2am urgent emails, having somebody yelling at you (sometimes arbitrarily) on already stressful deals will absolutely do a number of your nervous system. For me, it got to the point that I would have a complete overreaction internally even when someone approached me on the street for directions. Without being melodramatic, I was told by a professional that its the same reaction that war veterans can have when experiencing PTSD.

Any biglaw job is going to be rough, but absolutely do your due diligence (which frankly is not going off your experience in interviews, or listening to summer associates / first years) as the firm you choose can very much dictate your experience and longevity in the profession.

[Anonymous User]

I am in STB M&A and honestly I feel like this thread is full of exaggerations. It is obviously bad (for being a M&A group with demanding clients), but not as bad as people who claim it to be.

[Anonymous User]

I am in STB M&A and honestly I feel like this thread is full of exaggerations. It is obviously bad (for being a M&A group with demanding clients), but not as bad as people who claim it to be.

I am also in STB M&A, and have previously worked at another biglaw firm. I actually find my colleagues at STB to be easier to deal with than my previous firm. The lifestyle is still bad, but not bad for biglaw M&A. It's not clear to me why this thread exists.

[Anonymous User]

It's not clear to me why this thread exists.

Glad your time there has been sustainable. To be honest, this reaction could be seen to come across as dismissive. That in itself may be an insight into firm culture (and how concerns are addressed), given we all subconsciously tend to adopt certain behaviors. STB does have a reputation, and there are lawyers in my circle who’ve had these experiences.

[12YrsAnAssociate]

on a scale from ice cream tester to portable toilet cleaner, i'd say that STB is no worse than, say, working in a telemarketing call center.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Appreciate all the input! I ended up choosing Simpson a few weeks ago. Talked with some associates and they echoed what the two people above said - i.e., STB M&A is on par with the other V10 M&A shops with regards to workload - so basically, pretty bad, but not noticeably worse than CSM/S&C/DPW/etc. FWIW, one of them told me about a friend at CSM and how they have just been bleeding corporate associates this past year, especially in M&A after what was apparently a crazy deal timeline with Amazon-MGM and utter lack of empathy from partners. It’s gotten so bad that CSM is rumored to be looking for hiring laterals now?? I think that anecdote was supposed to give me comfort that churn at STB M&A hasn’t been the worst lately lol. I’ve committed now so I guess I’ll just have to wait for next summer to find out

[mardash]

god speed lol anon OP

[Anonymous User]

god speed lol anon OP

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Appreciate all the input! I ended up choosing Simpson a few weeks ago. Talked with some associates and they echoed what the two people above said - i.e., STB M&A is on par with the other V10 M&A shops with regards to workload - so basically, pretty bad, but not noticeably worse than CSM/S&C/DPW/etc. FWIW, one of them told me about a friend at CSM and how they have just been bleeding corporate associates this past year, especially in M&A after what was apparently a crazy deal timeline with Amazon-MGM and utter lack of empathy from partners. It’s gotten so bad that CSM is rumored to be looking for hiring laterals now?? I think that anecdote was supposed to give me comfort that churn at STB M&A hasn’t been the worst lately lol. I’ve committed now so I guess I’ll just have to wait for next summer to find out

lol.

It's a good thing the STB M&A partners are all super empathetic. And for what it's worth, everyone at CSM who worked on the Amazon-MGM deal (which isn't a lot of people to begin with) is still there... not saying CSM's a great place to work but this whole thread comes off as you trying to justify the preconceptions you already had.

[Anonymous User]

The problem with working at STB is you're working the same hours as people at CSM/S&C/DPW but people know you were median at a T6 instead of top 1/3. Not a good look at all

[Anonymous User]

The problem with working at STB is you're working the same hours as people at CSM/S&C/DPW but people know you were median at a T6 instead of top 1/3. Not a good look at all

lol, this is funny.

[Sackboy]

The problem with working at STB is you're working the same hours as people at CSM/S&C/DPW but people know you were median at a T6 instead of top 1/3. Not a good look at all

lol, this is funny.

It'd be funnier if there weren't people who actually thought like this.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Appreciate all the input! I ended up choosing Simpson a few weeks ago. Talked with some associates and they echoed what the two people above said - i.e., STB M&A is on par with the other V10 M&A shops with regards to workload - so basically, pretty bad, but not noticeably worse than CSM/S&C/DPW/etc. FWIW, one of them told me about a friend at CSM and how they have just been bleeding corporate associates this past year, especially in M&A after what was apparently a crazy deal timeline with Amazon-MGM and utter lack of empathy from partners. It’s gotten so bad that CSM is rumored to be looking for hiring laterals now?? I think that anecdote was supposed to give me comfort that churn at STB M&A hasn’t been the worst lately lol. I’ve committed now so I guess I’ll just have to wait for next summer to find out

lol.

It's a good thing the STB M&A partners are all super empathetic. And for what it's worth, everyone at CSM who worked on the Amazon-MGM deal (which isn't a lot of people to begin with) is still there... not saying CSM's a great place to work but this whole thread comes off as you trying to justify the preconceptions you already had.

This is demonstrably false. Pull up the Amazon-MGM Cravath webpage announcement and look for the FIRST ASSOCIATE LISTED. He’s gone.

Edit: here’s the link - https://www.cravath.com/news/amazons-do ... f-mgm.html

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Appreciate all the input! I ended up choosing Simpson a few weeks ago. Talked with some associates and they echoed what the two people above said - i.e., STB M&A is on par with the other V10 M&A shops with regards to workload - so basically, pretty bad, but not noticeably worse than CSM/S&C/DPW/etc. FWIW, one of them told me about a friend at CSM and how they have just been bleeding corporate associates this past year, especially in M&A after what was apparently a crazy deal timeline with Amazon-MGM and utter lack of empathy from partners. It’s gotten so bad that CSM is rumored to be looking for hiring laterals now?? I think that anecdote was supposed to give me comfort that churn at STB M&A hasn’t been the worst lately lol. I’ve committed now so I guess I’ll just have to wait for next summer to find out

lol.

It's a good thing the STB M&A partners are all super empathetic. And for what it's worth, everyone at CSM who worked on the Amazon-MGM deal (which isn't a lot of people to begin with) is still there... not saying CSM's a great place to work but this whole thread comes off as you trying to justify the preconceptions you already had.

Tbf, OP just used the Amazon-MGM as an example - of course it didn't cause all the lateralling out of Cravath. I agree it's a small team, like you pointed out...and yet the lead associate (out of a team of 3 associates) has left the firm already (didn't even stick around for it to close lol). I have friends at Cravath who told me there was at least one email going out every week with someone leaving. Granted, this was back in the summer, so the bleeding might have stopped by now.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Appreciate all the input! I ended up choosing Simpson a few weeks ago. Talked with some associates and they echoed what the two people above said - i.e., STB M&A is on par with the other V10 M&A shops with regards to workload - so basically, pretty bad, but not noticeably worse than CSM/S&C/DPW/etc. FWIW, one of them told me about a friend at CSM and how they have just been bleeding corporate associates this past year, especially in M&A after what was apparently a crazy deal timeline with Amazon-MGM and utter lack of empathy from partners. It’s gotten so bad that CSM is rumored to be looking for hiring laterals now?? I think that anecdote was supposed to give me comfort that churn at STB M&A hasn’t been the worst lately lol. I’ve committed now so I guess I’ll just have to wait for next summer to find out

lol.

It's a good thing the STB M&A partners are all super empathetic. And for what it's worth, everyone at CSM who worked on the Amazon-MGM deal (which isn't a lot of people to begin with) is still there... not saying CSM's a great place to work but this whole thread comes off as you trying to justify the preconceptions you already had.

I never said STB partners are super empathetic lol. Just that M&A partners at any top firm in NYC are going to be pretty demanding. And yes, I suppose I am trying to "justify the preconceptions"...of a lot of TLSers who seem to hate on STB M&A. Just doing my due diligence dude (well, I guess it's done now).