Restructuring: DPW vs PW Forum

[Anonymous User]

I understand that DPW and PW are the top creditor-side restructuring shops, but could anyone please explain how their practices differ in terms of the nature of work? Which firm advises hedge funds making investments into distressed companies?

Also, how busy are they now? Do they make you work in a different group like m&a when restructuring slows down?

Would appreciate any input.

[Anonymous User]

I am interested too

(To get the ball rolling, the post quoted below is the most detailed DPW RX vs. PW RX breakdown I’ve seen on TLS)

DPW is historically a bank firm, not a PE shop. They don't have institutional PE clients that spin off work for the restructuring group. PW is Apollo's main outside counsel and the Rx group also works with other sponsors like Bain, TPG, Oaktree, KKR and other middle market or sector-focused shops.

Starting with DPW on general differences, Marshall Huebner is a debtor guy, Damian Schaible does ad hoc groups (usually CLOs or secured lender groups), Tim Graulich covers Citi and does a lot of LatAm, Donald Bernstein isn't really active anymore but he's the dean of the group and historically has advised banks (e.g., living wills), Brian Resnick's book is growing and looks like a mixture of Marshall's and Damian's. The rest of them are newer partners. I would say Marshall and Damian are the big rainmakers but Tim always has something going on.

At PW, most of the organic PW senior partners (Rosenberg, Hermann, Eaton) have come up doing Damian-style work: ad hoc creditor groups but more weighted towards unsecured bondholders. You have debtor practitioners in there as well (Cornish). A group of folks came over from Kirkland with Basta (and have now been promoted) that are more debtor-focused but Basta also has deep relationships with sponsors. Another senior partner does most of the Apollo work. Kornberg is probably PW's version of Donald Bernstein - groomed the existing rainmakers, can do pretty much everything but is slowly starting to hand over the reins.

For most associates, your deal experience between the two groups will be similar: mostly ad hoc creditor work plus a few debtor cases but never the majority. Main difference is that DPW will do more senior secured bank work (e.g., DIP agents) whereas PW fills that time with sponsor representations.

I’d encourage you to read the entire thread, lots of good color commentary: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=307760

[Anonymous User]

I am interested too

(To get the ball rolling, the post quoted below is the most detailed DPW RX vs. PW RX breakdown I’ve seen on TLS)

DPW is historically a bank firm, not a PE shop. They don't have institutional PE clients that spin off work for the restructuring group. PW is Apollo's main outside counsel and the Rx group also works with other sponsors like Bain, TPG, Oaktree, KKR and other middle market or sector-focused shops.

Starting with DPW on general differences, Marshall Huebner is a debtor guy, Damian Schaible does ad hoc groups (usually CLOs or secured lender groups), Tim Graulich covers Citi and does a lot of LatAm, Donald Bernstein isn't really active anymore but he's the dean of the group and historically has advised banks (e.g., living wills), Brian Resnick's book is growing and looks like a mixture of Marshall's and Damian's. The rest of them are newer partners. I would say Marshall and Damian are the big rainmakers but Tim always has something going on.

At PW, most of the organic PW senior partners (Rosenberg, Hermann, Eaton) have come up doing Damian-style work: ad hoc creditor groups but more weighted towards unsecured bondholders. You have debtor practitioners in there as well (Cornish). A group of folks came over from Kirkland with Basta (and have now been promoted) that are more debtor-focused but Basta also has deep relationships with sponsors. Another senior partner does most of the Apollo work. Kornberg is probably PW's version of Donald Bernstein - groomed the existing rainmakers, can do pretty much everything but is slowly starting to hand over the reins.

For most associates, your deal experience between the two groups will be similar: mostly ad hoc creditor work plus a few debtor cases but never the majority. Main difference is that DPW will do more senior secured bank work (e.g., DIP agents) whereas PW fills that time with sponsor representations.

I’d encourage you to read the entire thread, lots of good color commentary: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=307760

I was the anon that posted this info in the linked thread. If people have more specific questions then happy to answer.

I understand that DPW and PW are the top creditor-side restructuring shops, but could anyone please explain how their practices differ in terms of the nature of work? Which firm advises hedge funds making investments into distressed companies?

Both firms advise hedge funds but more partners do this at PW than DPW.

Also, how busy are they now? Do they make you work in a different group like m&a when restructuring slows down?

Would appreciate any input.

Both firms stayed decently busy during 2021 due to large matters that spilled over from 2020 (e.g., Purdue, Mallinckrodt, Intelsat). Both groups are scratching their heads wondering what 2022 will look like - as is every other restructuring advisor in the market. Both firms will ask their associates to help out corporate in this market - but that's everywhere and i suspect restructuring associates are okay with that since they have nothing else to do anyway.

[Anonymous User]

I am interested too

(To get the ball rolling, the post quoted below is the most detailed DPW RX vs. PW RX breakdown I’ve seen on TLS)

DPW is historically a bank firm, not a PE shop. They don't have institutional PE clients that spin off work for the restructuring group. PW is Apollo's main outside counsel and the Rx group also works with other sponsors like Bain, TPG, Oaktree, KKR and other middle market or sector-focused shops.

Starting with DPW on general differences, Marshall Huebner is a debtor guy, Damian Schaible does ad hoc groups (usually CLOs or secured lender groups), Tim Graulich covers Citi and does a lot of LatAm, Donald Bernstein isn't really active anymore but he's the dean of the group and historically has advised banks (e.g., living wills), Brian Resnick's book is growing and looks like a mixture of Marshall's and Damian's. The rest of them are newer partners. I would say Marshall and Damian are the big rainmakers but Tim always has something going on.

At PW, most of the organic PW senior partners (Rosenberg, Hermann, Eaton) have come up doing Damian-style work: ad hoc creditor groups but more weighted towards unsecured bondholders. You have debtor practitioners in there as well (Cornish). A group of folks came over from Kirkland with Basta (and have now been promoted) that are more debtor-focused but Basta also has deep relationships with sponsors. Another senior partner does most of the Apollo work. Kornberg is probably PW's version of Donald Bernstein - groomed the existing rainmakers, can do pretty much everything but is slowly starting to hand over the reins.

For most associates, your deal experience between the two groups will be similar: mostly ad hoc creditor work plus a few debtor cases but never the majority. Main difference is that DPW will do more senior secured bank work (e.g., DIP agents) whereas PW fills that time with sponsor representations.

I’d encourage you to read the entire thread, lots of good color commentary: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=307760

I was the anon that posted this info in the linked thread. If people have more specific questions then happy to answer.

I understand that DPW and PW are the top creditor-side restructuring shops, but could anyone please explain how their practices differ in terms of the nature of work? Which firm advises hedge funds making investments into distressed companies?

Both firms advise hedge funds but more partners do this at PW than DPW.

Also, how busy are they now? Do they make you work in a different group like m&a when restructuring slows down?

Would appreciate any input.

Both firms stayed decently busy during 2021 due to large matters that spilled over from 2020 (e.g., Purdue, Mallinckrodt, Intelsat). Both groups are scratching their heads wondering what 2022 will look like - as is every other restructuring advisor in the market. Both firms will ask their associates to help out corporate in this market - but that's everywhere and i suspect restructuring associates are okay with that since they have nothing else to do anyway.

Thanks. Just how likely is it to make an exit to distressed debt investing role (either in PE credit arm or hedge fund) from one of these firms (assuming decent accounting/finance background)?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks. Just how likely is it to make an exit to distressed debt investing role (either in PE credit arm or hedge fund) from one of these firms (assuming decent accounting/finance background)?

PW has placed more people in the past but the roles are rare, so it's hard to predict which shop gives you better odds going forward. If i had to guess, better to start at DPW if you're coming up the ranks as a first-year. DPW is more likely to equip you with the necessary finance skills starting as a junior. If you're a mid-level/senior lateral who already has those chops then probably better to go to PW because more partners have more in roads with the clients that have these roles.

ETA: Realized i answered the wrong question. I wouldn't say it's likely enough from any of these shops that you should pick the practice group to aim for the exit. But if you enjoy restructuring, you can put yourself in a competitive position pretty easily by not shying away from finance work and making it known at the right stage (i.e., when you're a midlevel/senior with credibility, not as a junior) that you're interested in the path. Partners will do what they can to find you a position or secondment.

[Anonymous User]

I was the anon that posted this info in the linked thread. If people have more specific questions then happy to answer.

Not OP, but how does culture compare at these two groups? Meaning stuff like: facetime expectations, approaches to mentorship & the extent of training, amount of scut work for stubs/1st years, respect for PTO, how close/tight-knit the teams are overall, etc.

Also, less of a compare/contrast question, but what are hours generally like in top creditor-side groups? Is it more like lots of fire drills strung together (closer to a transactional practice), or more like a steady/predictable burn of constant work (more similar to lit)?

Final q: for those who want to end up in DPW RX, any particular recommendation on other practice area to rotate through? (Finance/credit seems to be the obvious choice but...)

[Anonymous User]

Thanks. Just how likely is it to make an exit to distressed debt investing role (either in PE credit arm or hedge fund) from one of these firms (assuming decent accounting/finance background)?

PW has placed more people in the past but the roles are rare, so it's hard to predict which shop gives you better odds going forward. If i had to guess, better to start at DPW if you're coming up the ranks as a first-year. DPW is more likely to equip you with the necessary finance skills starting as a junior. If you're a mid-level/senior lateral who already has those chops then probably better to go to PW because more partners have more in roads with the clients that have these roles.

ETA: Realized i answered the wrong question. I wouldn't say it's likely enough from any of these shops that you should pick the practice group to aim for the exit. But if you enjoy restructuring, you can put yourself in a competitive position pretty easily by not shying away from finance work and making it known at the right stage (i.e., when you're a midlevel/senior with credibility, not as a junior) that you're interested in the path. Partners will do what they can to find you a position or secondment.

I am assuming when you say “finance work” here, you are not referring to credit/leveraged finance. Do you mind elaborating what you meant?