V5 or v50 help me choose? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Same location and all but different work.
Am senior associate.

V5 securitization work
V50 corporate securities work

I am inclined to choose V50 because of the type of work and its prospect. But still bit reluctant to give up the firm brand value (V5!)

What would you choose?

[Anonymous User]

I am in law school, so I am unsure how helpful or useful this comment will be. I turned down simspon, sidley, some others in general lit to go to a firm in the v50-v75 in a niche regulatory practice. Too early to tell if I have regrets, but my reasoning was that being able to enjoy and get experience in my desired practice area would be career defining, versus vault rankings not so much. I would look to Chambers anyways.

[Anonymous User]

Is this V5 Skadden

[Sackboy]

As a senior associate, you need to consider a few things.

Will you like one type of work more or less than the other?

Are you better at one type of work than the other?

What does the future path look like for you at each firm? Permanent income partner? Realistic shot at equity? Something else?

[Anonymous User]

Same location and all but different work.
Am senior associate.

V5 securitization work
V50 corporate securities work

I am inclined to choose V50 because of the type of work and its prospect. But still bit reluctant to give up the firm brand value (V5!)

What would you choose?

Coming from someone who worked at a V30 and lateraled to a V5 last year because he wanted the "brand name" on his resume: you should go to the firm that offers the work that you actually want to do. The brand value means nothing if you're not happy with what you're actually doing at the V5. You're going to spend thousands of hours and late nights doing this work - do what you enjoy! Don't worry about what other people think in terms of the prestige of your workplace.

[Anonymous User]

Is this V5 Skadden

If it were Skadden, it would be listed as V3. I assume it's Latham.

[existentialcrisis]

You don't want to do securitization.

[DukeMountain]

You don't want to do securitization.

There are worse things, but not many

[Anonymous User]

You don't want to do securitization.

Objectively why not?
(Work sucks - is subjective)

[existentialcrisis]

You don't want to do securitization.

Objectively why not?
(Work sucks - is subjective)

It is generally pretty commoditized and has quite narrow exits, almost exclusively at banks.

ETA: Capital Markets generally has much broader exits and if you’re decent you could probably lateral to a fancier firm, although query if that’s actually worthwhile.

[Anonymous User]

Same location and all but different work.
Am senior associate.

V5 securitization work
V50 corporate securities work

I am inclined to choose V50 because of the type of work and its prospect. But still bit reluctant to give up the firm brand value (V5!)

What would you choose?

Coming from someone who worked at a V30 and lateraled to a V5 last year because he wanted the "brand name" on his resume: you should go to the firm that offers the work that you actually want to do. The brand value means nothing if you're not happy with what you're actually doing at the V5. You're going to spend thousands of hours and late nights doing this work - do what you enjoy! Don't worry about what other people think in terms of the prestige of your workplace.

I know this is the right answer deep down but it's so, so hard to not care about "prestige". Like... it goes against every instinct I've had since high school. I think I need to go to therapy.

[existentialcrisis]

[quote="Anonymous User" post_id=10531972 time=1662865418 user_id=45852]
[quote="Anonymous User" post_id=10531780 time=1662691884 user_id=45852]
[quote="Anonymous User" post_id=10531648 time=1662628084 user_id=45852]
Same location and all but different work.
Am senior associate.

V5 securitization work
V50 corporate securities work

I am inclined to choose V50 because of the type of work and its prospect. But still bit reluctant to give up the firm brand value (V5!)

What would you choose?
[/quote]

Coming from someone who worked at a V30 and lateraled to a V5 last year because he wanted the "brand name" on his resume: you should go to the firm that offers the work that you actually want to do. The brand value means nothing if you're not happy with what you're actually doing at the V5. You're going to spend thousands of hours and late nights doing this work - do what you enjoy! Don't worry about what other people think in terms of the prestige of your workplace.
[/quote]

I know this is the right answer deep down but it's so, so hard to not care about "prestige". Like... it goes against every instinct I've had since high school. I think I need to go to therapy.
[/quote]

1. You’re right and this is a terrible way to go through life.

2. I hesitate to even say this both because of #1 above and also because it usually leads to just the lowest level of TLS discourse. But solely within the context of this question, I sort of balk at the idea that doing Securitization at Latham or Skadden or whatever is more “prestigious” then doing Cap Markets at Fried Frank or Shearman. I promise you, people, even practicing lawyers who know the market, aren’t more impressed by one over the other.

[Anonymous User]

Maybe this is a patent litigation specific mentality, but I've been practicing for a decade now and I think the last time I checked what the vault rankings said was... 2015?

Once you actually start working, you may find you care a lot less about the "prestige" of a firm name, and a lot more about who you are working with and what you are working on. I know the rankings matter for recruiting, but they have very little impact on my daily life, so I don't follow them. In the same way that, weird as it might sound, you will likely have no clue what the law school rankings are in four years.

Which is to say, it sounds like you would prefer to do corporate securities. In which case, go to the firm that is letting you do corporate securities. Give yourself permission to build the practice that will make you happy, not the one that will look best on an obituary summary.

[Anonymous User]

Um whats securitization? Sorry to be dumbass

[existentialcrisis]

Um whats securitization? Sorry to be dumbass

Google will explain better than me.

But basically packaging together a bunch of loans or other financial assets and selling them to an SPV, who then issues notes to investors collateralized by those loans.

[Anonymous User]

Um whats securitization? Sorry to be dumbass

Google will explain better than me.

But basically packaging together a bunch of loans or other financial assets and selling them to an SPV, who then issues notes to investors collateralized by those loans.

Ah, the people who caused the GFC. Cool! (Unless we changed the theory? idk)

Is it typically called securitization at firms or is there a term of art?

[existentialcrisis]

Um whats securitization? Sorry to be dumbass

Google will explain better than me.

But basically packaging together a bunch of loans or other financial assets and selling them to an SPV, who then issues notes to investors collateralized by those loans.

Ah, the people who caused the GFC. Cool! (Unless we changed the theory? idk)

Is it typically called securitization at firms or is there a term of art?

I'm by no means an expert, but I think it's often a subset of "Structured Finance" groups. I do know that Cadwalader's "Capital Markets" group really does almost entirely securitization though.

What I also know is that it's very form based and that there's generally a ton of paper to push, even compared to other corporate practice areas, and it's not a very desirable skill set in terms of in house opportunities.