Which Boston BigLaw for PE? Forum

[Anonymous User]

If you had callback opportunities with Goodwin, Ropes, Kirkland, and Choate in Boston and got offers from each, which would you choose and why?

FWIW: I'm hoping to be at the firm I choose long-term, and want to make my roots in the Boston area. I hope to go into PE/or IP licensing and want to combine genuinely good people at the firm, with a high level of prestige, and a real opportunity to make partner. I have gotten this sense most out of Goodwin, Choate, and Kirkland, and am leaning towards Goodwin out of those.

All thoughts appreciated.

[Anonymous User]

If PE (especially UMM / MF), Kirkland and Ropes are the only real options. Others represent LMM PE (not very prestigious) or VC mostly.

[Anonymous User]

Ropes

[2013]

You will realistically not have a long career at any of those firms. If you care about “prestige,” just go to Ropes or Kirkland. They’re the flashiest.

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

[Sackboy]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

[Sackboy]

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

"Very common path" seems like a bit of an overreach, but, yes, it does happen.

[Anonymous User]

Ropes, unless you're really into IP licensing, in which case there would be a case for Goodwin. But for PE I'd go to Ropes.

[Anonymous User]

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

"Very common path" seems like a bit of an overreach, but, yes, it does happen.

It happens a lot - everybody knows Ropes hands out equity like candy.

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

? no it's not this is pure flame. ropes is a pure equity partnership, the last 4 nsps who went there all did so as counsel (there is one who might be an exception but if they were an nsp they were an nsp for like 20 years). if you have equity at an existing shop, you can do it, but if you're just a 3rd year nsp, ropes is not picking you up just because you can run a $500m deal for [pick boston-based mm fund]. people who don't know shit about the lateral partner market need to stfu.

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

? no it's not this is pure flame. ropes is a pure equity partnership, the last 4 nsps who went there all did so as counsel (there is one who might be an exception but if they were an nsp they were an nsp for like 20 years). if you have equity at an existing shop, you can do it, but if you're just a 3rd year nsp, ropes is not picking you up just because you can run a $500m deal for [pick boston-based mm fund]. people who don't know shit about the lateral partner market need to stfu.

Lmao. the poster doth protest too much.

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

? no it's not this is pure flame. ropes is a pure equity partnership, the last 4 nsps who went there all did so as counsel (there is one who might be an exception but if they were an nsp they were an nsp for like 20 years). if you have equity at an existing shop, you can do it, but if you're just a 3rd year nsp, ropes is not picking you up just because you can run a $500m deal for [pick boston-based mm fund]. people who don't know shit about the lateral partner market need to stfu.

Lmao. the poster doth protest too much.

"I'm a 5th year at a V30 and have no clue what I'm talking about so instead of trying to argue my flimsy point I'm just going pretend I'm not a corncob."

[Anonymous User]

Go to Kirkland because if you don't make partner there you can always lateral as a partner to Goodwin or Ropes.

Pretty sure Ropes only has equity partners, so that seems unlikely.

Lateralling to Ropes for equity as an NSP who fails to make shares is a very common path.

? no it's not this is pure flame. ropes is a pure equity partnership, the last 4 nsps who went there all did so as counsel (there is one who might be an exception but if they were an nsp they were an nsp for like 20 years). if you have equity at an existing shop, you can do it, but if you're just a 3rd year nsp, ropes is not picking you up just because you can run a $500m deal for [pick boston-based mm fund]. people who don't know shit about the lateral partner market need to stfu.

Lmao. the poster doth protest too much.

"I'm a 5th year at a V30 and have no clue what I'm talking about so instead of trying to argue my flimsy point I'm just going pretend I'm not a corncob."

I'm just noticing you're taking this exchange way too personally and throwing around insults for good measure. Relax bro, Ropes is a fine firm!

[Anonymous User]

Just pick Kirkland and don't look back.

[goforgold101]

Just pick Kirkland and don't look back.

But is Kirkland going to be a sweatshop? Generally, all I ever hear about is how the billable req is insane just to keep your job…?

Also, between Goodwin and Ropes, which firm has lower associate turnover/better chance of long-term career/partnership prospects?

[Anonymous User]

At one of these firms in M&A and interviewed and/or worked at some of the others in this thread. Ropes, Goodwin and Kirkland are all sweatshops with 2500+ hours on the table for the top performing associates - pie eating contest where reward is more pie. Goodwin has been hiring anyone with a pulse and throwing money at them, so caliber of associates in each group is very up and down but can be decent if you get in with the right crowd. Ropes is more picky in hiring and has less turnover, but not very dynamic group outside of 1-2 key guys. Not a bad place, but not like family friendly or "nice" by any means. Kirkland Boston seems a mini version of the Kirkland NY/Chicago offices and associates there seem shell shocked, plus they just hired one of the more intense partners from Weil so can't imagine it gets better hours-wise if that's a concern.

Choate is in the "lower middle market" range for PE M&A and doesn't have a ton of associates in their group so if you like old white men and microaggressions that could be your place. Like other poster said above, the smaller offices (Boston ones like Mintz, Foley and smaller offices of national names like MoFo, DLA, Latham, Sidley, Cooley, etc.) might be the way to go if you're looking to be an allstar somewhere.

YMMV, so take with a grain of salt. Good luck!