I don't think it's rolling... Can someone please confirm this? I'm applying for the 27th Jan deadlineSeeing a lot of Sidley PFO's....is it worth still applying?
I don't think it's rolling... Can someone please confirm this? I'm applying for the 27th Jan deadlineSeeing a lot of Sidley PFO's....is it worth still applying?
Yes, Sidley is rolling basisI don't think it's rolling... Can someone please confirm this? I'm applying for the 27th Jan deadline
re-posting this!Does anyone have advice for Latham VI please? Much appreciated as this is my first VI and I don't know what to expect!
Nope!Anyone heard anything from Milbank lol, their deadline was on the 8th
Nowt.Anyone heard anything from Milbank lol, their deadline was on the 8th
Some of the corporate teams at law firms handle M&A transactions, so it is the bread and butter for these firms. The reduced borrowing ability to finance the new acquisition and get these transactions done will likely hinder deal activity, and ultimately, there will be less revenue/profit for these firms. I hope this helps!Hi guys! I had a bit of commercial question regarding the drop in M&A deals. We’ve seen how this affected Goldman Sachs, but what kind of effect will this have on law firms?
I don't fully agree with this. While total deal flow has decreased and this has been reflected by the significant drop in the top IB's fees during the past year it doesn't necessarily mean that a law firm will see a dip in revenue. American acquirers still need London’s legal services. With the dollar growing stronger against both the euro and pound, and European company valuations decreasing due to socioeconomic uncertainty, now could be an opportune moment for law firm's American acquirers to cement themselves further in the European market. I therefore believe that this potential increase in American based deal flow would signal increased work for certain law firms. Not only is it probable that law firms would be asked to provide more in-depth due diligence checks to better securitise against risks, but with the FCA and EU tightening antitrust and competition laws, I imagine that both London and Brussels offices would be required to advise. Lastly, I think that full service law firms could use their advantage over other transactional shops as a full-service firms to utilise their practice groups such as tax, employment and environment to support their M&A practice. Overall, while global risk appetite falters, law firms can provide more in-depth due diligence to their clients, aid American acquirers by utilising their full-service identity (if they have one), and can even aim to act for the companies being acquired. One can also mention that the countereffect is a rise in Rx work for law firms.Some of the corporate teams at law firms handle M&A transactions, so it is the bread and butter for these firms. The reduced borrowing ability to finance the new acquisition and get these transactions done will likely hinder deal activity, and ultimately, there will be less revenue/profit for these firms. I hope this helps!
makes sense but what does 'rx' stands for?I don't fully agree with this. While total deal flow has decreased and this has been reflected by the significant drop in the top IB's fees during the past year it doesn't necessarily mean that a law firm will see a dip in revenue. American acquirers still need London’s legal services. With the dollar growing stronger against both the euro and pound, and European company valuations decreasing due to socioeconomic uncertainty, now could be an opportune moment for law firm's American acquirers to cement themselves further in the European market. I therefore believe that this potential increase in American based deal flow would signal increased work for certain law firms. Not only is it probable that law firms would be asked to provide more in-depth due diligence checks to better securitise against risks, but with the FCA and EU tightening antitrust and competition laws, I imagine that both London and Brussels offices would be required to advise. Lastly, I think that full service law firms could use their advantage over other transactional shops as a full-service firms to utilise their practice groups such as tax, employment and environment to support their M&A practice. Overall, while global risk appetite falters, law firms can provide more in-depth due diligence to their clients, aid American acquirers by utilising their full-service identity (if they have one), and can even aim to act for the companies being acquired. One can also mention that the countereffect is a rise in Rx work for law firms.
Restructuring (and insolvency)!makes sense but what does 'rx' stands for?