TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[Wannabe_Lawyer]

In relation to Faegre Drinker's vac scheme - does anyone know how long it is or the dates? The information on the website was very limited.

 

[legallyrach]

Just to add to the great response from @Ram Sabaratnam to understand capital markets I think you need to understand how it contrasts to banking. Both capital markets and banking are fundamentally about the same same things: one party will provide capital to another party that needs it, expecting to obtain some sort of return in exchange. However, in general banking and finance, that comes in the form of loans, which you will already be quite familiar with: you will borrow money from a creditor (normally a bank; or, more recently, private credit funds) who will in return be entitled to periodic payments representing a percentage of the total borrowed sum plus an interest payment. Unless you become default and the loan is also unsecured (ie you have provided no asset as collateral), the creditor should recover the initial sum and obtain a return on it.

Capital markets is also about bringing together parties with lots of capital seeking to generate a return on it (however, here we have a way wider set of investor, from pension funds, hedge funds, and PE firms to retail investors) and parties who are in need of said capital. The basic distinction here is between debt capital markets (DCM) and equity capital markets (ECM). The difference is what is being given in exchange for the capital: either debt most often in the form of bonds for ECM (a promise to give a certain sum of money in return for the supplied capital) - or equity for ECM (a part of the shareholding of a given company).

DCM's bonds might seem at first virtually indistinguishable from loans finance and banking - both involve a party with capital giving it to another in exchange for a legal entitlement to be paid back the initial sum + interest. However, there are a number of crucial differences you should understand:

1. Bonds are (to introduce another bit of jargon) classified as securities, which essentially just means that they are tradable financial instruments. If you have purchased a bond from a company X, you own an entitlement to certain payments from X and you can easily sell that entitlement to other investors. Thus, I could purchase that bond from you and now company X owes me the payment instead. This is a significant advantage for many investors, as it makes bonds highly liquid assets (which is another term of jargon just referring to the fact that they can be easily turned into cash if need be). Loans, on the other hand, are not by themselves tradeable; they have to first undergo a process called 'securitization' - which just refers to their repackaging into securities that can be similarly traded. Following the 2008 crisis, this is a highly regulated are of finance, which means that the trading of debt in the form of loans involves a more difficult process.
2. Bonds take a different form to loans: imagine company A needs 1 million dollars to fund a project and wants to pay the debt to a creditor B over a period of 1 year and pay an interest of 5%. Now, if the money is provided in the form of a loan, supposing A agrees on monthly payments, A will need to pay every month 1/12 of the borrowed sum of 1 million (around 83,000 dollars) + the 5% interest of that 1 million (around 4000 dollars). If the capital is provided via the purchase of a bond instead, A will only need to pay back the interest monthly (the 4000 dollars) and then will pay the initial lump sum of 1 million (for which the jargon term is 'the principal') at the end of the year (the jargon for which is 'the maturity date'). While in this scenario the total sum paid back would be 1,050,000 dollars irrespective whether this is a loan or a bond, for many companies the details of when exactly they have to make large payments by matters a lot. In particular, if they expect large increases in revenues at a later date, a company can prefer the later payment of the principal required by a bond.
3. Commercial loans are more often than not secured over assets, while bonds are more often than not unsecured, making the latter prima facie riskier.

Turning to ECM, I think Ram has already explained well how an initial public offering (IPO) works. The only thing I wanted to add here is that another major part of ECM is secondary offerings: when a company that is already publicly listed wants to issue additional shares to the market - a move that will once again dilute current shareholding in exchange for capital. This can sometimes result in very significant transactions. For instance, Boeing recently raised around $21 billion from a secondary offering.

Finally, as for the work done by the lawyers in both ECM and DCM, it essentially involves the legal work necessary to set up an offering of shares/bonds/other securities in compliance with regulations and on advantageous terms for their clients. To get a clearer picture as to the actual tasks this involves, I would advise you to read this Chambers Article on work in capital markets.

Thank you both @Ram Sabaratnam and @Andrei Radu for such detailed explanations! This is so incredibly helpful, I can't thank you both enough for taking time out of your days to respond

I will definitely check out the article, thanks again!

 

[Andrei Radu]

Thank you for this Andrei, like you have stated, I doubt these issues would affect their satellite offices (mainly London) in terms of recruiting policies, but it’s quite interesting how they have removed/ changed their DEI policies or reworded them, to appease the Trump admin.

Also wouldn’t this potentially affect client relationships, considering some of these client companies may be invested in some of these causes which have now be compromised, and now may not seemed to be aligned with these firms.

On a surface level, it seems like a targeted measures towards firms, that were aligned with the Democratic party, i.e., the Paul, Weiss Partner whose name escapes me (I think his name is Brad something).

Yes, I believe this could and will affect relationships with clients who are very invested in these causes, but it should be kept in mind that a wider distancing from DEI is taking place in corporate America following the election results. Before anything started happening in the legal industry, the biggest players in the tech like Meta and Amazon had already started rolling back on DEI policies.

As for your last point, in Paul, Weiss' case connections to the Democratic party could definitely be a reason they were targeted, as Brad Karp (the firm's chairman) orgainsed a fundraiser for Kamala Harris' campaign, one of the firm's partners coached her for the presidential debates, and other partners were associated with the Robert Muller investigations and claims related to the January 6th events. The same probably applies to Willkie - as I mentioned previously, Kamala Harris' husband is a partner at the firm. However, I would not infer from that that the firms with no strong ties to the Democrats have no reason for concern.

The White House published a list of 20 firms that were being investigated for their employment practices: Debevoise, Cooley, Goodwin Procter, Kirkland, Latham, McDermott, Milbank, Morgan Lewis, Morrison & Foerster, Perkins Coie, Reed Smith, Ropes & Gray, Sidley Austin, Simpson Thacher, Skadden, White & Case, Freshfields, Hogan Lovells, A&O Shearman, and WilmerHale. Some of the firms on this list who are already reportedly looking to strike deals with the Administration, such as Kirkland, are not thought to be particularly close to the Democratic party.

 

[OliverTwist]

Hey! They said they'd reimburse but it might take a while because they have a huge backlog. But you'll deffo hear back.

Hey, thanks for the response. Did you just email grad rec, or was there a special email for their finance dep't. I lost the piece of paper I jotted the details down on...!

 

[helenaskelton]

Hey, thanks for the response. Did you just email grad rec, or was there a special email for their finance dep't. I lost the piece of paper I jotted the details down on...!

You email grad rec just attach a screenshot and proof

 

[Justin]

Has anyone completed the sky group interview? Wondering what the format is in terms of timing and how it works interviewing with a group. Thanks!

I'm also not sure about the process, since its AS interviewing us and not Sky.

 

[User5678]

Has anyone heard back from sharpe Pritchard yet?

 

[toad92]

finally got a VS offer 😭 was starting to lose all hope that i can start training in 2027

 

[1123tripod]

Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.

 

[lawyersum]

Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.

That sounds pretty harsh. Was there any other feedback?

 

[1123tripod]

That sounds pretty harsh. Was there any other feedback?

Nothing substantive/ something I can improve upon; I was told I got "excellent scores" in all components and was a strong candidate, but that it came down to these "details" in making a decision.

 

[User2640]

Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.

If I may ask, was your work experience in your home country at the overseas offices of international law firms?

 

[1123tripod]

If I may ask, was your work experience in your home country at the overseas offices of international law firms?

My country's regulations don't allow international firms to set up offices. Nonetheless, a chunk of it was at national Tier-1 corporate law firms

 

[User5678]

Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.

This is extremely harsh especially because you weren’t even asked a question directly in relation to this and seems to me like you indirectly prove your commitment in your answers

Really scared now as an international student myself! You are clearly a great candidate and I’m sure you’ll get an offer elsewhere

 

[ad.]

During a VS if we’re mostly and more naturally given work by trainees (particularly our trainee buddy) rather than our supervisor (because they don’t necessarily have much we can help on at the moment), is that problematic, how would it reflect in feedback given? (Assuming our supervisor knows what tasks we’re doing and what we’re up to throughout the day, and assuming we also speak to them on a daily basis so they know we’re present). Thanks in advance for your advice

 

[Futurelawyer123]

Anyone still waiting to hear from Paul, Weiss after interview? I had mine on the 25th of March and I’m getting nervous waiting to hear back

 

[User5678]

During a VS if we’re mostly and more naturally given work by trainees (particularly our trainee buddy) rather than our supervisor (because they don’t necessarily have much we can help on at the moment), is that problematic, how would it reflect in feedback given? (Assuming our supervisor knows what tasks we’re doing and what we’re up to throughout the day, and assuming we also speak to them on a daily basis so they know we’re present). Thanks in advance for your advice

Hi, this is completely normal

I have seen this - associates in the team would have told your trainee buddy to give you some tasks so you get a good experience and have sufficient work to do because associates sometimes don’t have such tasks at hand which they can give to vac schemers due to various reasons.

When I was a placement student, I was also told to give some tasks such as scheduling, research or basic drafting to vac schemers to help them get the best experience.

It won’t affect your feedback - your supervisor will look at the work you’ve done for the buddy at a later stage but you might not be aware about this.

It is definately a positive so don’t worry about it

 

[TC129129]

just received Winston WG

 

[Egco]

Anyone heard back from Mishcon post summer AC?

 

[1123tripod]

This is extremely harsh especially because you weren’t even asked a question directly in relation to this and seems to me like you indirectly prove your commitment in your answers

Really scared now as an international student myself! You are clearly a great candidate and I’m sure you’ll get an offer elsewhere

I believe (and hope) that this experience was an anomaly - many of my international friends have secured VS & TC offers this cycle & the feedback from my other AC did not focus on my background in the slightest! As non-natives, we unfortunately have extra hurdles in the recruitment process immigrationally, financially, and naturally, but they are surmountable, as others have done before us. Wishing you the best of luck with your applications💫