Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Anon08" data-source="post: 73483">To add my two cents to this:(1) It is highly unlikely you are going to be asked random 'definitional' technical questions with no context. They'll arise as and when such terms get mentioned in the interview/if you have mentioned such terms in your application.For example, I mentioned 'private equity' and 'leverage' (amongst other things) in an interview at a US law firm. Because of that, they asked me 'what is private equity?' and 'you mentioned &quot;leverage&quot;, what is that?'. This wasn't a problem because I had all my technical/commercial knowledge, and I did not bring up things that I did not know about! (PSA: as I am sure you all know, never do that - firms will pick you up on it! Contrary to popular belief, in this instance, 'fake it until you make it' is not a good idea...)(2) I can't advise specifically on CC/Links; however, for A&amp;O having strong technical knowledge was (I hesitate to say necessary...) a real asset. You should have basic knowledge of the differences between a public and a private acquisition, and from that you can build a rudimentary understanding of boardroom/shareholder dynamics. A little bit of research into market regulators (like the CMA) and the Takeover Code won't hurt, but the latter is bonus knowledge. Of course, this is all on top of your general knowledge of acquisitions.(PS) Investopedia is probably your best bet. Also, much to the ire of several individuals, I recommend Wikipedia. Don't overdo this kind of knowledge - it is 'bonus' stuff you can bring up in interviews to, in the illustrious words of Chris Eubank, 'add a little bit of spice'. Ensure your fundamental technical knowledge is rock solid and then you can garnish, as it were, with knowledge of 'golden shares', 'poison pills', and so on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Anon08, post: 73483"] To add my two cents to this: (1) It is highly unlikely you are going to be asked random 'definitional' technical questions with no context. They'll arise as and when such terms get mentioned in the interview/if you have mentioned such terms in your application. For example, I mentioned 'private equity' and 'leverage' (amongst other things) in an interview at a US law firm. Because of that, they asked me 'what is private equity?' and 'you mentioned "leverage", what is that?'. This wasn't a problem because I had all my technical/commercial knowledge, and I [I]did not bring up things that I did not know about[/I]! (PSA: as I am sure you all know, never do that - firms will pick you up on it! Contrary to popular belief, in this instance, 'fake it until you make it' is not a good idea...) (2) I can't advise specifically on CC/Links; however, for A&O having strong technical knowledge was (I hesitate to say [I]necessary[/I]...) a real asset. You should have basic knowledge of the differences between a public and a private acquisition, and from that you can build a rudimentary understanding of boardroom/shareholder dynamics. A little bit of research into market regulators (like the CMA) and the Takeover Code won't hurt, but the latter is bonus knowledge. Of course, this is all on top of your general knowledge of acquisitions. (PS) Investopedia is probably your best bet. Also, much to the ire of several individuals, I recommend Wikipedia. Don't overdo this kind of knowledge - it is 'bonus' stuff you can bring up in interviews to, in the illustrious words of Chris Eubank, 'add a little bit of spice'. Ensure your fundamental technical knowledge is rock solid and then you can garnish, as it were, with knowledge of 'golden shares', 'poison pills', and so on. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Search

Search

Reply to thread