Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is
20th June
.
👉
Read Becca's announcement post here
📝
Apply directly here
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 204129" data-attributes="member: 36777"><p>Hi [USER=33134]@TonyStark[/USER] I think you can think of competitors in two main ways. <strong>Firstly, at the level of the firms as a whole</strong>, we would essentially look for the firms that share the most important features of Skadden for the purposes of defining market position. While the exact features that are most important for outlining market position are debatable, I would describe Skadden in London in the following way: <strong>a large office of an elite US firm with a diverse offering of practice areas but a focus on high end transactional work. </strong>The two other firms that best fit this description are <strong>Latham & Watkins and White & Case.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>The second way to think about competitors is at a practice area level,</strong> where two questions are relevant - (i) which are the firms with the strongest teams in that practice, and (ii) which other firms would Skadden most often find itself pitching against when trying to win a mandate? For firms like Skadden, which excel in most of their practice area, there is a substantial deal of overlap between the two. Now, looking at Skadden's most important practice areas, we get the following:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Corporate M&A (</strong>which is Skadden's most important practice area by far<strong>)</strong>: the Magic Circle firms (as they are still the undisputed leaders of the UK corporate market) and Latham & Watkins, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk and Sullivan & Cromwell (firms Skadden would most often come up against when fighting for transatlantic deals or deals originating from US clients). </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Banking & Finance: Borrowers</strong>: Once again the MC firms have leading positions in this area, and on the US side we have Cleary Gottlieb, White & Case, and Ropes & Gary</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>International Arbitration: Commercial Arbitration:</strong> Kings & Spalding, Gibson Dunn, Latham, Quinn Emmanuel, Debevoise, and White & Case. </li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andrei Radu, post: 204129, member: 36777"] Hi [USER=33134]@TonyStark[/USER] I think you can think of competitors in two main ways. [B]Firstly, at the level of the firms as a whole[/B], we would essentially look for the firms that share the most important features of Skadden for the purposes of defining market position. While the exact features that are most important for outlining market position are debatable, I would describe Skadden in London in the following way: [B]a large office of an elite US firm with a diverse offering of practice areas but a focus on high end transactional work. [/B]The two other firms that best fit this description are [B]Latham & Watkins and White & Case. The second way to think about competitors is at a practice area level,[/B] where two questions are relevant - (i) which are the firms with the strongest teams in that practice, and (ii) which other firms would Skadden most often find itself pitching against when trying to win a mandate? For firms like Skadden, which excel in most of their practice area, there is a substantial deal of overlap between the two. Now, looking at Skadden's most important practice areas, we get the following: [LIST] [*][B]Corporate M&A ([/B]which is Skadden's most important practice area by far[B])[/B]: the Magic Circle firms (as they are still the undisputed leaders of the UK corporate market) and Latham & Watkins, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk and Sullivan & Cromwell (firms Skadden would most often come up against when fighting for transatlantic deals or deals originating from US clients). [*][B]Banking & Finance: Borrowers[/B]: Once again the MC firms have leading positions in this area, and on the US side we have Cleary Gottlieb, White & Case, and Ropes & Gary [*][B]International Arbitration: Commercial Arbitration:[/B] Kings & Spalding, Gibson Dunn, Latham, Quinn Emmanuel, Debevoise, and White & Case. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…