TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[ashwright]

So long as you follow the news you'll be fine.
Pick topics that affect the key practice areas of the firm you're applying to

Easy common topics:
- Interest rates and their effect on M&A/ PE i.e. valuations, sales, servicing debt, borrowing costs.
- Competition and the stance in Europe and UK- push on innovation i.e merger remedies review and new CMA head, but crack down in certain sectors i.e tech and new laws, new national control hybrid clause, and the Nippon Steel case in the USA which could influence the stance in the UK
- Political stability- tariffs, uncertainty around trumps policies and how that affects willingness to complete deals cus of effects on inflation/ value of the pound
- For Equity Capital Markets- the July 2024 new listings regime and potential affects on the LSE
- Private credit growth due to high interest rates but how its likely to stay due to flexibility of borrowing terms

i'm not OP but just wanted to say this was super helpful! thank you for sharing
this is probably super silly but i was wondering if you had any recommendations for resources for learning about these particular stories/your personal favourite commercial awareness resources. the things you listed are clearly highly important commercial stories - some of which i actually hadn't heard of!

i understand how limited my commercial awareness is when i hear about these things. i knew about the political instability point bc i'm an american politics fiend but most of the other stuff you mentioned (e.g., the ECM point, the private credit point) i didn't know about!
off the top of my head, some random stories i remember recently were the the tariffs + interest rate stuff + potential sale of WHSmiths! i've definitely got some way to go in improving

thank you again for the write-up. it was not only informative, but an important wake-up call!

 

[ashwright]

I think one way someone could measure prestigious is from the PEP of the firm. I think Kirkland and Paul, Weiss have the highest PEP’s out of these firms. Davis Polk is smaller in terms of the number of lawyers it has whilst also having a high PEP. I would say it’s one of these three firms. Most likely I would say Kirkland because it also has the highest overall revenue. To be honest though prestige is very subjective.​

Similar question to my most recent one...but i've got to ask, how did you learn about PEP? 😅 i had no clue what that was until i saw this.
and more generally, because you're truly one of the most well-informed people around here on TCLA, may you share what you do to build your knowledge of these things about firms/commercial law + commercial awareness too?
If I even had one percent of your intelligence + commercial/legal acumen, I would feel so proud of myself. You're honestly one of the TCLA GOATs!

 

[TonyStark]

Possible.

Would need a sizeable shift in mentality from the senior partners in NY. Thing is their set up works really well for them rn in the US, especially for the top partners. Until their profitability drops, competition racks up and they lose mandates theres no need to risk the investment in another jurisdiction. Freshfields has made some big hires from cravath in NY, and theyve dropped rankings in some M&A league tables, which might trigger a shift. But they're so high end in their own jurisdiction that they probably don't need to in the near future (Slaughter and May?).

But tbh the bigger problem is who do you hire? Paul, Weiss happened pretty much out of the blue, because an internal power struggle at K&E meant top partners with big clients wanted to move (Johnson, Sachdev). Sure, they were offered a lot of money, but they also had an incentive to leave and build up something new. Cravath does mainly public M&A; big corporate clients tend to be tied to a firm (or panel of firms) for the range of legal advice they need, and top dealmakers are usually culturally and financially committed to their firms (Roland Turnill, Claire Wills, Jonny Myers are all execs). That's why Bruce Embley's move to CC was so big. I don't see Cravath making such a breakthrough any time soon in London. But you never know...

Can I ask how on earth you built up so much knowledge /insight into these firms? Are there any particular sources or things you do to help you keep up to date with such developments?

 

[Chris Brown]

Similar question to my most recent one...but i've got to ask, how did you learn about PEP? 😅 i had no clue what that was until i saw this.
and more generally, because you're truly one of the most well-informed people around here on TCLA, may you share what you do to build your knowledge of these things about firms/commercial law + commercial awareness too?
If I even had one percent of your intelligence + commercial/legal acumen, I would feel so proud of myself. You're honestly one of the TCLA GOATs!

Thank you for your kind words, I really appreciate it. 🙂

PEP = Profit Per Equity Partner.

I actually first came across PEP on Legal Cheek (the firm’s most list), way back in July/August when I was beginning to think about which firms I wanted to possibly apply to in this application cycle. On each firm’s Legal Cheek profile, it shows what their PEP is. To see this, click on ‘select a criteria’ and then click on ‘partners’. There are other sources out there which show this but I think Legal Cheek has the simplest format.

To my understanding, PEP is how a firm’s profitability is calculated. Law firms will have two groups of partners (equity partners and non-equity partners). Equity partners have an ownership stake in the firm, and their earnings are derived from the profits the firm makes after all expenses are deducted (such as overheads and associate salaries).

I will use Paul, Weiss as an example. Paul, Weiss has revenues of around $2,002,027,000. I think Paul, Weiss has around 178 equity partners at present. The firm’s current PEP stands at around $6,500,000. By multiplying these two figures together, you can calculate Paul, Weiss’ profits, which I think works out to be around $1,150,700,000. This shows that Paul, Weiss is a very profitable firm. Generally speaking, the higher the PEP, the more profitable a firm is and these firms are considered to be more prestigious (e.g., Kirkland & Ellis, Davis Polk, Latham & Watkins, Gibson Dunn, Paul Hastings, etc.). All of these firms have PEP of at least $5,000,000.

I think equity partner pay also varies depending on experience and seniority. For example, I saw on LinkedIn that Neel Sachdev and Roger Johnson (Paul, Weiss London Co-chairs) are being paid around $20,000,000 per year! This is of course a lot higher than the PEP average of $6,500,000.

In terms of how I develop my commercial awareness, I mainly use LinkedIn, but I also use other things like law firm websites. The bulk of my commercial awareness at present has come from attending virtual events on AllAboutLaw, Legal Cheek, etc. I also see a lot of posts on this forum (especially from both @Andrei Radu and @Amma Usman) which have definitely improved my understanding of certain things.

This forum has been the most helpful resource for me this application cycle. I am by no means an expert at this stuff at all, I have a long way to go yet. 🙂​

 

[xMontmorency]

I think one way someone could measure prestigious is from the PEP of the firm. I think Kirkland and Paul, Weiss have the highest PEP’s out of these firms. Davis Polk is smaller in terms of the number of lawyers it has whilst also having a high PEP. I would say it’s one of these three firms. Most likely I would say Kirkland because it also has the highest overall revenue. To be honest though prestige is very subjective.​

I agree, PEP is probably a reliable way of measuring the prestige - or at least the profitability of a firm. But I think there is a better metric - billable rates.

The main problem with PEP is that it is just shows the overall profits available for distribution to equity partners. This means that the results are skewed depending on how many equity partners a law firm has. Firms that are highly leveraged on associates (e.g. associate/counsel to partner ratio of 5+ to 1) or non-equity partners will have higher PEP, with more junior lawyers churning out the cash for the equity partners. The other problem is that it doesn't account for different profits levels in different geographic regions, where profits are equally distributed between offices which bring in different levels of revenue (assuming no swiss model).

The real thing you want to know is (i) whether the firm can land the top mandates and (ii) whether they can charge more for each hour worked at each level. Firms with high PEP (US firms) tend to fulfil these criteria, but in London elite MC firms with lower PEP do too. A firm like FF or CC would be able to charge out a partner at c£1,300-£1,500+/hr and senior associates / counsel for c£1000/hr in their top practice areas (private equity, corporate). Comparable US firms - Weil, K&E, STB - wouldn't be too far off. So the 'prestige' of those firms' practices are quite similar. And it shows: they land similar mandates and are in tough competition with each other. It would be a different story if we compared these rates to, say, Jones Day or Goodwin's corporate/PE practices (no offence). There is one caveat: you need to adjust for the discounts law firms give their clients (i.e. take the WACC, which represents the real rates charged post-discounts). The fact that these figures are usually confidential means PEP remains the gold standard.

I have no idea what the billable rates are at K&E or Davis Polk, so it's all speculation, but I have a feeling Davis Polk has higher average rates.

 

[SamiyaJ]

Wishing everyone a positive and prosperous week ahead! ✨

 

[rapunzel]

Wishing everyone a positive and prosperous week ahead! ✨

Second that! Manifesting good energy for this week ☺️

 

[Paul Jules Steullet]

HFW AC this morning 🙈

 

[pepsicola96]

Still waiting to hear back from HL post WG for a potential AC invite, no actual rejection email. am i being delusional thinking there might be a chance?

I was rejected approx 1 week after I sat the WG, so I think no news is good news!

 

[g.cl.2020344]

Hoping that by the end of the week any1 who did the ML TI should hear back as that’s what they told me in the TI! 🤞🏼

 

[Rus]

Hi all, I have a withers summer vacation scheme interview next week, does anyone have any insights/advice on how to prepare? Any help would be greatly appreciated

Congrats on the interview!

Not sure if they've changed the format this year, but last year it was mainly a competency interview, so def practice for that. They asked a lot of the competency questions you find online, like tell us a time you broke the rules, etc. Make sure not to sound like you've memorised your answers, and make sure you understand how exactly a law firm operates (i.e. what are its costs, how does it make profit, and how can it increase its revenue, etc).

 

[g.cl.2020344]

Goodwin post-VI PFO

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Hey everyone - how should I answer the interview question 'Where do you see yourself in the next 5 years?'

I'm unsure what law firms are looking for in this question, and if it should only revolve around a career in commercial law or involve some personal goals too?

Hiya @addy2004

This can be a really common question in law firm interviews, and it's good you're thinking about it I think the key here is to demonstrate that you have a practical and realistic understanding of career progression for commercial lawyers, while showing ambition and engagement with the profession. I've generally seen successful applicants mention a number of different themes here, usually 2-3 of those mentioned below.

One strong area to focus on is where you see yourself in terms of practice area/department. It could be worth mentioning a particular team or practice area that interests you as a potential qualification destination, explaining why that practice is compelling. At the same time, I'd also briefly mention/show openness to exploring different seats and recognising that your interests may evolve during training contract. I think this approach balances enthusiasm for particular areas of work and also adaptability.

Another point you might consider is your involvement in the firm beyond client work. Many candidates mention an interest in helping mentor and support more junior lawyers, including future trainees. Mentioning these sort of things can signal your commitment to a long-term investment in the firm’s culture, a sense of teamwork, and professional development. It also allows you to highlight that you're aware that you'll have some experience by that point which can be valuable to those who are less further along their careers.

These are just some suggestions, but again the key point is to ensure that any points you mention should be realistic and demonstrate an understanding of firms and the typical career path for junior lawyers. Hope this helps and good luck with any interviews/applications you have on at the moment!

 

[legallycurly]

Farrer & Co post-app PFO

 

[Chris Brown]

White & Case post-VI/TI PFO. 🥲

For reference, I think I applied on the 5th of Jan, received VI invite around the 28th of Jan, and sat the VI around the 31st of Jan. I had applied for both Spring and Summer VS.​

 

[legallady123]

Does anyone have any advice on how to prep for the assessments that aren’t Watson Glaser. For example, the WBD one? 🙏🏻

 

[g.cl.2020344]

does any1 know when OC will get back to us post virtual AC?

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

genuinely curious but what sort of answers do firms want/expect to hear when they ask you questions along the lines of would you still work for a client if you had moral qualms about them etc etc

Hiya @aspiringlawstudent123

This is definitely a tricky question, and has actually come up for me during interviews. It's also not just hypothetical - it's something that's come up a lot during discussions of professional ethics in my SQE course as well. The reality is that your moral/ethical/political/social views won’t always align with your clients’ (or your employer's for that matter). Part of being a professional is knowing where your own boundaries are. In your answer, you may want to really highlight 2-3 of the following themes or points:

• Show an awareness of professional limits. You may want to ensure that it's absolutely clear that you wouldn't do anything unlawful or anything that could jeopardise your ability to practise. You can also mention this by reference to the SRA Code of Conduct, which is clear on professional/ethical obligations.
• Being a lawyer isn’t the same as endorsing a client. If working only for clients you personally support is important to you, your options are limited (you may need to go freelance or find a company that aligns with your values).
• Law firm branding and reputation matter. Very often, the scenarios in which the question comes up will test your ability to weight the reputational risks associated with both advising the client, as well as refusing to do so. If I were ever asked to work on something ethically questionable, my biggest concern would be whether it could seriously damage the firm’s reputation. But in reality, the firm would have already made that judgment before taking on the work.

Beyond that, I think your answer will depend on whether they’re asking about your personal stance or what the firm should do. Again, depending on the scenario, you'll want to consider what ethical/regulatory obligations bind the firm.

I hope this helps and let me know if you have any other questions! Good luck!

 

[thelawjournal]

Hi, does anyone who has done the Mayer Brown SJT know whether there is a video interview element?

 

[Chris Brown]

Hiya @aspiringlawstudent123

This is definitely a tricky question, and has actually come up for me during interviews. It's also not just hypothetical - it's something that's come up a lot during discussions of professional ethics in my SQE course as well. The reality is that your moral/ethical/political/social views won’t always align with your clients’ (or your employer's for that matter). Part of being a professional is knowing where your own boundaries are. In your answer, you may want to really highlight 2-3 of the following themes or points:

• Show an awareness of professional limits. You may want to ensure that it's absolutely clear that you wouldn't do anything unlawful or anything that could jeopardise your ability to practise. You can also mention this by reference to the SRA Code of Conduct, which is clear on professional/ethical obligations.
• Being a lawyer isn’t the same as endorsing a client. Moreover, if working only for clients you personally support is important to you, your options are limited (you may need to go freelance or find a company that aligns with your values).
• Law firm branding and reputation matter. Very often, the scenarios in which the question comes up will test your ability to weight the reputational risks associated with both advising the client, as well as refusing to do so. If I were ever asked to work on something ethically questionable, my biggest concern would be whether it could seriously damage the firm’s reputation. But in reality, the firm would have already made that judgment before taking on the work.

Beyond that, I think your answer will depend on whether they’re asking about your personal stance or what the firm should do. Again, depending on the scenario, you'll want to consider what ethical/regulatory obligations bind the firm.

I hope this helps and let me know if you have any other questions! Good luck!

Hi @Ram Sabaratnam,

In relation to the final point, what would you say about a hypothetical situation where the firm may have made its initial judgement that advising a client would not impose harm to their professional branding and reputation, but it actually later turned out that it most likely would (and the partners leading the deal were unwilling to accept that fact out of fear of losing the deal or client altogether).

Would it be fine in this scenario for a trainee or associate (on grounds of the work being ethically questionable) to refuse the work? How do firms balance their need to take on work which is billed to clients, which helps firms make revenues and profits for equity partners, whilst also making sure that the work isn't ethically questionable and won’t have an impact on the firm’s reputation?

I understand this is probably a very strange and unlikely scenario, but it crossed my mind and I thought if this came up in an interview, I need to have considered everything. 😂😂​