How long do we get to answer for the Simmons VI part of the assessment? trying to practice and it would be nice to know what time limits to set for myself!
How confident are you in your knowledge of the core LLB/PGDL subjects, including Contract, Tort, Trusts, Land, Criminal, and Public Law?
TCLA is teaming up with BPP for a free interactive event designed to refresh your fundamentals, especially for those interested in or planning to take the SQE. We'll practise multiple choice SQE questions, with prizes for the highest scoring participants!
Register HereThank you so much @Ram SabaratnamHi @AS24
It's completely alright that you're not able to attend open days - during my own applications, I think I only managed to attend one, as I was working full-time. You're also absolutely right that many firms work on similar deals, particularly in M&A. That said, there are still ways to differentiate between them, and below I've shared a few ideas to help you make more granular comparisons.
One thing to consider is the industries or sectors a firm's M&A work focuses on. For example, firms like Cooley and Goodwin are especially known for advising on M&A deals in the tech and life sciences sectors. Other firms, like Willkie, are more "sectorally agnostic," meaning they handle M&A work across a wide variety of industries. Which type of firm might suit you best depends on your own interests. Personally, I was drawn to firms that specialised in sectors I had a genuine passion for, but I’ve met others who preferred variety and, as a result, were more interested in firms that had strengths in a wider range of industries. A firm’s sectoral strengths can give you a good sense of how their M&A practice differs from others.
You could also focus on the different elements of M&A transactions. Some firms are particularly well-regarded for their expertise in areas like financing, advising on regulatory issues, or cross-border deals. For instance, Freshfields is known for its strength in advisory work, particularly on antitrust and tax aspects of M&A, in addition to its corporate M&A work. Other firms stand out for their relationships and skills in structuring the financing side of deals. It really depends on what you’re most interested in, but thinking about these distinctions can help you see how a firm's M&A capabilities varies from those of another.
Finally, you could also consider the types of clients the firm is known for advising in M&A transactions. Taking Cooley again as an example, they have a strong reputation for advising high-growth startups and venture capital clients, which sets them apart from firms that focus more on later-stage companies or multinational corporations. Some firms, meanwhile, work with clients throughout their business lifecycle. Understanding the firm's client base can give you a clearer picture of how their M&A practice stands out. You can often get a sense of this by researching recent deals and looking at Chambers and Legal 500 rankings.
I hope this helps and definitely let us know if you have any other questions!
Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.Hi @Andrei Radu and @Ram Sabaratnam
I trust you are well.
I work full-time, I cannot possibly attend open days and I am struggling to understand the firm's competitive edge.
Firms seem to be very similar when it comes to their practice areas, specifically their transactional expertise.
How do you distinguish the M&A practice of one firm from another? A lot of firms seem to work on similar deals and with similar clients and I am struggling. Is there a specific element that I need to focus on?
Thank you in advance.
Wow @Andrei Radu thank you, I never considered these elements.Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.
- I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
- To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.
@Andrei Radu this is fantastic, thanks for sharing this!Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.
- I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
- To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.
Hi Andrei, this is very helpful. Regarding your further research on Davis Polk, what resources did you use?Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.
- I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
- To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.
2 mins for each questionHow long do we get to answer for the Simmons VI part of the assessment? trying to practice and it would be nice to know what time limits to set for myself!
I think so man lol; same here btwShould I assume a PFO for sidley as I still haven't heard back lol
LinkedIn is your friend - DM trainees.Hi @Andrei Radu and @Ram Sabaratnam
I trust you are well.
I work full-time, I cannot possibly attend open days and I am struggling to understand the firm's competitive edge.
Firms seem to be very similar when it comes to their practice areas, specifically their transactional expertise.
How do you distinguish the M&A practice of one firm from another? A lot of firms seem to work on similar deals and with similar clients and I am struggling. Is there a specific element that I need to focus on?
Thank you in advance.
I tried! I only sent around 12 messages this week but received no response. Trainees and associates are busy, so I understand!LinkedIn is your friend - DM trainees.
Usually I like to draw on the skills I’ve gained under the experience especially if they’re similar to what’s required for a trainee solicitorare you meant to also mention relevant skills under experience, or just what you did at various roles?
Hi @BonanzaBih_! So beyond the usual general google browse, firm websites and firm LinkedIn pages, Chambers (UK, US, and Global) and Legal 500 research, I mainly used legal press resources. Essentially, I would go through each available legal press resource and type in the name of the relevant firm in the search bar. I would then go browse and skim through articles written in the last few years about it. The Lawyer was particularly useful as it very UK-centric, but Law.com, Bloomberg law and Vault can also be very good, especially for US firms. Unfortunately, these are only available on a subscription basis, but this may be available to you through university details. Beyond that, The Global Legal Post and Legal Business are also sometimes useful, especially since they have more freely accessible content.Hi Andrei, this is very helpful. Regarding your further research on Davis Polk, what resources did you use?