Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=312612
I don't have as much intel on Blackrock, but a VP-Legal at Blackstone brings in between 200-300k, base with 300k representing truly the highest band for a 3-5 year associate. There are also target bonuses - they aren't as tied to performance as the banker bonuses from what I've heard, but are probably smaller than Biglaw bonuses (I have no figures, to be clear). You don't get any carry as a VP - you'll have to make Managing Director for that. Of course if you're able to do that, that would represent a significant increase in comp - but making MD is not something anyone should bank on - it's similar to making shares at a firm.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:34 pmSo when you say good comp, what are we talking? Is it the same as biglaw? What are the hours like for a VP there? It’s so big, I imagine there are just people sitting around there doing nothing.
"(whose daughter is an equity partner in KE Rx)"Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:25 pmBankruptcy has garbage exit ops. A place like Blackrock is a way to make a nice in-house salary with less-than-Biglaw hours (but way more hours than inhouse).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:19 pmI hear about a lot of attorneys, especially restructuring joining Blackrock. What does Blackrock offer compensation wise and hours wise? Is it a good place to be? How does comp compare to biglaw? Can anyone give numbers?
Blackrock is not a common exit for bankruptcy attorneys. It is considered a rare but excellent outcome. Far more common is another firm. Blackrock/Blackstone/PE fund exits are more common for debt finance lawyers. Generally they're considered less than ideal for work-life balance but they're great companies and offer good comp and a nice resume bump.
Blackrock is also very different in how it's run than blackstone. It's an asset management firm with its hands in far more pies than just PE, so the scope of duties is potentially wider. I've heard it's actually one of the nicer firms to work for culture wise. Blackstone, by contrast, is much stuffier and old school. Makes sense, given that its CEO, Schwarzman (whose daughter is an equity partner in KE Rx) is a staunch old school conservative, while Larry Fink is an old-school starbucks-drinking liberal (and they're both friends - Schwarzman bankrolled Fink when he started Blackrock).
To answer the question though, working for an asset management firm or big PE fund is a good outcome for a Restructuring attorney. It is such a specialized practice (especially if you're Debtor-side) that exit options just aren't very good, so if you can land it it's a great outcome. That said, junior restructuring lawyers should seriously consider whether working in bankruptcy/restructuring law is what they want to do for their careers. No matter where you go, you will be the distressed debt/investing/bankruptcy specialist - generalist positions as an exit are uncommon to the point of nonexistent/unicorn.
Source: Worked at K&E, lots of friends who discuss these exact exit ops. Former Rx lawyer as well - switched out to secure better exits.
She's also not an equity partner at KE -- she doesn't even work at KE anymore. Super weird stuff from that anon.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 11:35 am"(whose daughter is an equity partner in KE Rx)"Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:25 pmBankruptcy has garbage exit ops. A place like Blackrock is a way to make a nice in-house salary with less-than-Biglaw hours (but way more hours than inhouse).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:19 pmI hear about a lot of attorneys, especially restructuring joining Blackrock. What does Blackrock offer compensation wise and hours wise? Is it a good place to be? How does comp compare to biglaw? Can anyone give numbers?
Blackrock is not a common exit for bankruptcy attorneys. It is considered a rare but excellent outcome. Far more common is another firm. Blackrock/Blackstone/PE fund exits are more common for debt finance lawyers. Generally they're considered less than ideal for work-life balance but they're great companies and offer good comp and a nice resume bump.
Blackrock is also very different in how it's run than blackstone. It's an asset management firm with its hands in far more pies than just PE, so the scope of duties is potentially wider. I've heard it's actually one of the nicer firms to work for culture wise. Blackstone, by contrast, is much stuffier and old school. Makes sense, given that its CEO, Schwarzman (whose daughter is an equity partner in KE Rx) is a staunch old school conservative, while Larry Fink is an old-school starbucks-drinking liberal (and they're both friends - Schwarzman bankrolled Fink when he started Blackrock).
To answer the question though, working for an asset management firm or big PE fund is a good outcome for a Restructuring attorney. It is such a specialized practice (especially if you're Debtor-side) that exit options just aren't very good, so if you can land it it's a great outcome. That said, junior restructuring lawyers should seriously consider whether working in bankruptcy/restructuring law is what they want to do for their careers. No matter where you go, you will be the distressed debt/investing/bankruptcy specialist - generalist positions as an exit are uncommon to the point of nonexistent/unicorn.
Source: Worked at K&E, lots of friends who discuss these exact exit ops. Former Rx lawyer as well - switched out to secure better exits.
This is not true - she's not his daughter. Why do people just make stuff up?
I think they are separate characteristics -- i.e., the Starbucks drinking is not a type of liberal but instead something to describe Fink himself, as a bunch of fluff pieces have mentioned that he is addicted to Starbucks.
Have you never heard the term “latte-sipping liberal”? It used to be a common (and dumb) term to use to “own the libs” before “owning the libs” was something people said. Assuming it’s just a variation on that.
Funnily enough I associate Starbucks with suburban drive-throughs. I feel like the snooty liberal stereotype looks down on Starbucksbecodalapa wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 8:25 pmHave you never heard the term “latte-sipping liberal”? It used to be a common (and dumb) term to use to “own the libs” before “owning the libs” was something people said. Assuming it’s just a variation on that.
Oh sounds vaguely familiar. And extremely outdated, Starbucks isn't considered fancy any more. Is it? Maybe I'm that out of touch (I hate Starbucks lol)becodalapa wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 8:25 pmHave you never heard the term “latte-sipping liberal”? It used to be a common (and dumb) term to use to “own the libs” before “owning the libs” was something people said. Assuming it’s just a variation on that.