v10 satellite v. v30 HQ in CA Forum

[Anonymous User]

STB LA v. MOFO SF corporate. Any thoughts? Has anyone been at either, and if so, can you share your experience?
- prestige associated with STB, PE work is top-notch, STB may help with lateral opportunities/other exits, BUT small office, not sure of the office's culture
- HQ for Mofo, more flexibility in terms of breadth of corporate work (although exploration is short-lived and Mofo isn't known for a particular type of corp work) BUT don't plan to stay in the bay area long term, v10 offer may be a rarer opportunity
- single so don't mind working harder hours (majority seem to be moving from v10 to nonv10)
- considering which firm might help with potential lateral moves or exits to in-house positions
- pretty much open to both locations although plans to settle down in socal

[mardash]

It seems from this and other posts that you want to go to LA. Enjoy. But if you’re looking for people to tell you its the objectively “better” choice that won’t happen.

[hangtime813]

MoFo is top notch in SF but if your end goal market is socal i would go with STB

[The Lsat Airbender]

MoFo is top notch in SF but if your end goal market is socal i would go with STB

This. Both firms are perfectly adequate (MoFo is more prestigious on the West Coast, FYI, not that that should matter), will work you hard, will lead to decent in-house positions because they have strong client books, etc.

The dispositive difference is that there's not much reason to sojourn to the Bay if you want to live in SoCal long-term. If this were a choice between MoFo and LA midlaw, that would be different, because there would be substantive "career" implications.

Try your best to purge Vault rankings from your consciousness. They're garbage in general, they're especially garbage in California, and MoFo being so underrated is exemplary of that.

[Anonymous User]

HQ.

V10 satellites (and basically any satellite, by definition) is going to be a subordinate experience, both in terms of any prestige and reputation and usually in terms of work, too, although usually less so for WFH V10. And if you're set on CA and want to climb the ranks, lateraling early to Latham/Gibson/etc HQ in CA probably won't be a problem.

[Anonymous User]

MoFo is top notch in SF but if your end goal market is socal i would go with STB

This. Both firms are perfectly adequate (MoFo is more prestigious on the West Coast, FYI, not that that should matter), will work you hard, will lead to decent in-house positions because they have strong client books, etc.

The dispositive difference is that there's not much reason to sojourn to the Bay if you want to live in SoCal long-term. If this were a choice between MoFo and LA midlaw, that would be different, because there would be substantive "career" implications.

Try your best to purge Vault rankings from your consciousness. They're garbage in general, they're especially garbage in California, and MoFo being so underrated is exemplary of that.

In this case, Vault CA tracks -- CA hq firms like Cooley and MoFo are ranked well above STB, etc. for SF. I don't think STB LA is even ranked.

[Anonymous User]

MoFo is top notch in SF but if your end goal market is socal i would go with STB

This. Both firms are perfectly adequate (MoFo is more prestigious on the West Coast, FYI, not that that should matter), will work you hard, will lead to decent in-house positions because they have strong client books, etc.

The dispositive difference is that there's not much reason to sojourn to the Bay if you want to live in SoCal long-term. If this were a choice between MoFo and LA midlaw, that would be different, because there would be substantive "career" implications.

Try your best to purge Vault rankings from your consciousness. They're garbage in general, they're especially garbage in California, and MoFo being so underrated is exemplary of that.

In this case, Vault CA tracks -- CA hq firms like Cooley and MoFo are ranked well above STB, etc. for SF. I don't think STB LA is even ranked.

Don’t tell the other V20 satellite drones

[Anonymous User]

STB

[DiligentSage]

I mean, do you want to do PE M&A? That seems to be a fairly fundamental underlying question here. MoFo will give you the flexibility to sample a lot of different flavors of corporate work since you're at the mothership but STB LA has only five partners (three PE M&A, one funds, one debt finance), all of whom appear to be singularly focused on PE work. The question of wanting to be in SoCal long-term is salient but so is not grinding at STB for 2-3 years only to realize that you want to do a different practice group and having to retool on the fly.

If the above sounds good on your end, then go for it since MoFo doesn't really focus on PE M&A but if you had thoughts of doing basically anything else, then MoFo will likely set you up better moving forward.

[trmckenz]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

[Anonymous User]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

[Anonymous User]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

MoFo SF is band 3 for M&A/Corporate on Chambers. STB is band 4. At this point it's suspicious whether any of these posters actually know the SF/Palo Alto market, or if they just think "oooooh V10..."

[trmckenz]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

MoFo SF is band 3 for M&A/Corporate on Chambers. STB is band 4. At this point it's suspicious whether any of these posters actually know the SF/Palo Alto market, or if they just think "oooooh V10..."

Well, I work in SV at a traditional Bay Area transactional firm. And I still recommend STB to OP.

Rankings are often misleading because firms focus on different things. But if you actually look at Chambers, STB has a much stronger profile for corporate work than MoFo.

STB is Chambers band 1 across the board in New York (obviously) and band 1 in USA - Nationwide. It is Chambers band 2 in California. There are some band 3 and band 4 rankings if you keep zooming in on specific markets in California, but that is not STB's game. STB has a V10 ranking, which IMO means deep ties to Wall Street banks. STB might not have deep local California ties, but those Wall Street banks have offices in California (which is why STB is there).

MoFo, even on its home turf, is only Chambers band 3 for corporate in San Francisco. It is Chambers band 4 for corporate on USA - Nationwide. That's a pretty specific zoom lens, and it still isn't particularly impressive (no offense). Most of the true corporate practices in NorCal are based in SV, not SF.

MoFo is a great firm and strong in plenty of areas. Really one of the tops in SF, especially for litigation. But a corporate-leaning firm it is not.

[Anonymous User]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

MoFo SF is band 3 for M&A/Corporate on Chambers. STB is band 4. At this point it's suspicious whether any of these posters actually know the SF/Palo Alto market, or if they just think "oooooh V10..."

Well, I work in SV at a traditional Bay Area transactional firm. And I still recommend STB to OP.

Rankings are often misleading because firms focus on different things. But if you actually look at Chambers, STB has a much stronger profile for corporate work than MoFo.

STB is Chambers band 1 across the board in New York (obviously) and band 1 in USA - Nationwide. It is Chambers band 2 in California. There are some band 3 and band 4 rankings if you keep zooming in on specific markets in California, but that is not STB's game. STB has a V10 ranking, which IMO means deep ties to Wall Street banks. STB might not have deep local California ties, but those Wall Street banks have offices in California (which is why STB is there).

MoFo, even on its home turf, is only Chambers band 3 for corporate in San Francisco. It is Chambers band 4 for corporate on USA - Nationwide. That's a pretty specific zoom lens, and it still isn't particularly impressive (no offense). Most of the true corporate practices in NorCal are based in SV, not SF.

MoFo is a great firm and strong in plenty of areas. Really one of the tops in SF, especially for litigation. But a corporate-leaning firm it is not.

This is the best advice on here. STB's deep institutional ties to PE and the street are why it's a v10. That provides a different level of transactional work.

I'd add that non-primary market chambers rankings are also far from perfect wrt STB. It really isn't the type of firm that goes around pounding it's chest to pad those types of rankings bc it's in markets like CA to service institutional clients. If you've ever seen who actually reports for Chambers you know what I'm talking about. The deals you'll get will be sophisticated v10 quality deals, much like the rest of the firms in this league/model.

[Anonymous User]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

MoFo SF is band 3 for M&A/Corporate on Chambers. STB is band 4. At this point it's suspicious whether any of these posters actually know the SF/Palo Alto market, or if they just think "oooooh V10..."

Well, I work in SV at a traditional Bay Area transactional firm. And I still recommend STB to OP.

Rankings are often misleading because firms focus on different things. But if you actually look at Chambers, STB has a much stronger profile for corporate work than MoFo.

STB is Chambers band 1 across the board in New York (obviously) and band 1 in USA - Nationwide. It is Chambers band 2 in California. There are some band 3 and band 4 rankings if you keep zooming in on specific markets in California, but that is not STB's game. STB has a V10 ranking, which IMO means deep ties to Wall Street banks. STB might not have deep local California ties, but those Wall Street banks have offices in California (which is why STB is there).

MoFo, even on its home turf, is only Chambers band 3 for corporate in San Francisco. It is Chambers band 4 for corporate on USA - Nationwide. That's a pretty specific zoom lens, and it still isn't particularly impressive (no offense). Most of the true corporate practices in NorCal are based in SV, not SF.

MoFo is a great firm and strong in plenty of areas. Really one of the tops in SF, especially for litigation. But a corporate-leaning firm it is not.

I think this is a fairly coherent reply (props) so I'll just say reasonable minds can disagree. I agree that STB as an aggregated entity is much stronger than MoFo in corporate. But I disagree with your argument that we shouldn't be looking at the granular rankings. Sure, a satellite STB office probably does satellite work for its Wall Street clients' satellite offices. But I think that's the issue. And unless you're (1) staying in SF on a very short time horizon (although I'm very skeptical that lateralling from MoFo HQ wouldn't also get you to where you would otherwise) or (2) gunning to work in-house specifically at a Wall Street satellite office (which seems kind of unintuitive (maybe even dumb?) in this case given *a lot of reasons*), I don't think choosing MoFo over STB for SF makes a lot of sense. But agree to disagree.

[DiligentSage]

Since you're leaning corporate and want to be in LA long term, STB is an obvious choice to me. It's not the best corporate group in the city by any measure, but it's a much stronger transactional brand than MoFo.

Big picture, STB has a great reputation for corporate work, especially in PE M&A. It'll be the same top-tier corporate work in any STB office. You'll be able to move into pretty much any corporate group after two years there.

MoFo has a great reputation for litigation, especially in IP. I am sure MoFo has a solid corporate practice too, but it is not the firm's leading practice and does not compete at the same level as WSGR/Cooley or the V10. There is some benefit to being in a California firm in California, but that doesn't move the needle for me here.

Second this take. Only real reason to consider MoFo is if you want lit. STB on the resume will open up doors re corporate.

MoFo SF is band 3 for M&A/Corporate on Chambers. STB is band 4. At this point it's suspicious whether any of these posters actually know the SF/Palo Alto market, or if they just think "oooooh V10..."

Well, I work in SV at a traditional Bay Area transactional firm. And I still recommend STB to OP.

Rankings are often misleading because firms focus on different things. But if you actually look at Chambers, STB has a much stronger profile for corporate work than MoFo.

STB is Chambers band 1 across the board in New York (obviously) and band 1 in USA - Nationwide. It is Chambers band 2 in California. There are some band 3 and band 4 rankings if you keep zooming in on specific markets in California, but that is not STB's game. STB has a V10 ranking, which IMO means deep ties to Wall Street banks. STB might not have deep local California ties, but those Wall Street banks have offices in California (which is why STB is there).

MoFo, even on its home turf, is only Chambers band 3 for corporate in San Francisco. It is Chambers band 4 for corporate on USA - Nationwide. That's a pretty specific zoom lens, and it still isn't particularly impressive (no offense). Most of the true corporate practices in NorCal are based in SV, not SF.

MoFo is a great firm and strong in plenty of areas. Really one of the tops in SF, especially for litigation. But a corporate-leaning firm it is not.

This is right and if OP is truly agnostic as to which corporate practice, then STB makes sense. But they should also go in knowing that they're going to be doing PE M&A and be okay with that. Certainly not a big ask to retool from that to something else down the road since STB has heft nationwide to the point above, but if OP has some inkling that they, say, want to do EC/VC, tech trans, life sciences, etc. or something that STB doesn't really do, then it'd be better to spend 2-3 years at MoFo actually doing those things and then lateral back down to LA than to spend time spinning their wheels at STB and retooling later.

[Anonymous User]

I mean, do you want to do PE M&A? That seems to be a fairly fundamental underlying question here. MoFo will give you the flexibility to sample a lot of different flavors of corporate work since you're at the mothership but STB LA has only five partners (three PE M&A, one funds, one debt finance), all of whom appear to be singularly focused on PE work. The question of wanting to be in SoCal long-term is salient but so is not grinding at STB for 2-3 years only to realize that you want to do a different practice group and having to retool on the fly.

If the above sounds good on your end, then go for it since MoFo doesn't really focus on PE M&A but if you had thoughts of doing basically anything else, then MoFo will likely set you up better moving forward.

Actually, not even three PE M&A, but two. Others are a litigator, fund formation, and debt finance (mainly doing fund finance work). The two M&A partners are ex-Irell and Manella, not the world's best-known M&A powerhouse (but perfectly adequate) and have been at STB about 18 months (since after the firm substantially altered its profit and pension structure). Until those two came on board there'd been a vacuum in STB LA's M&A capabilities since a biggish defection to Sidley in 2015. LA for STB has been a bit of a problem child for the last twenty years or so. There was a time in the 90s when the office had some studio and music clients. Since then the fees from LA clients haven't matched what NY PE and Bay Area clients pay, which lowers it in the estimation of some of the big hitters in NY. (If you want to do funds that's a different story - STB funds is much more monolithic than M&A. You'll get top end funds work in any office.)

It's true that MoFo probably doesn't have a lot of PE in SF, but it is likely to be representing a lot of PE targets, meaning you'll still see those sorts of deals. In general, PE isn't the main work in SF (or even California), if that's where you see your career staying. Instead you'll be doing deals for big tech companies, film studios, and SoftBank (which owns a lot of the tech world now).

There's something else I wouldn't discount. Beyond the firm brand, the experience of starting at a firm with a bunch of other people and going through the same things - like being freshmen in college together - can create some of the most lasting bonds you'll have in practice. These are people who may became close friends. Working with them might open up opportunities you can't imagine right now in years to come. You'll get that at MoFo SF in a way you won't at STB LA.

As others have said, MoFo's a great brand from which to move to LA in a couple of years. If you *have* to be in LA right now, then STB will be fine and there will be reasonable exit ops. Just don't expect to be doing much work for Blackstone or Silver Lake, or the office to be a large or happening place.