Ropes & Gray: What do Private Equity Lawyers Actually Do? — Wed 14 Jan 2026, 5–6pm (UK), Zoom
Register →
TCLA Premium: Now half price (£30/month). Applications, interviews, commercial awareness + 700+ examples.
Join →

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 219752" data-attributes="member: 36777">Hi [USER=41021]@CharlesT47[/USER] I think you should seek to be a bit strategic when describing your motivations so as to explain why you prefer JD. I do not think it is an issue to mention that two criteria for selecting firms to apply to were strong PE and Restructuring practices. Nonetheless, you should explain that:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">These were not the only criteria for selection, in that there are aspects you look for in a firm in which JD scores better than the set of firms which have better PE/Restructuring practices; and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">That you care more about these other selection criteria than the strong restructuring/PE practices ones.</li> </ol>As for what these other selection criteria where JD scores better could be, I think you have made some really good suggestions. Firstly, if you want to have a lot of freedom and autonomy in terms of the work you take on and your general TC experience, there is arguably no better firm to go to than JD. Secondly, while the other firms on this list may also describe themselves as global powerhouses, I think there's a plausible argument to be made that JD is more of a "truly" global law firm than they are: JD has 40 offices, compared to Kirkland's 22, Weil's 15, Willkie's 16, and Cleary's 14. Furthermore, the offices of these other firms tend to be based in major financial centres, whereas JD operates a broader platform and has a presence in a greater variety of jurisdictions. As for your concern that these firms may not market themselves as strongly as JD as being "global" and that thus it may appear implausible that you care so much about this feature if you have nonetheless applied there - I would advise you not to worry. Firms are well aware that there are many aspect a candidate can look for in a firm, and that no one firm will score top in all of them; thus, the fact that you have to make some compromises will not be held against you. Finally, there are some other possible selection criteria JD scores well in that you could consider linking your motivations to:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The firm has a very strong mid-market corporate M&A practice, with a band 1 Chambers UK ranking; since corporate M&A work is very similar to PE work (with the only major difference being that firms will advise corporations on strategic acquisitions rather than PE funds on acquisitions of portfolio companies), having an interest in it would definitely not appear implausible.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Strong real estate, capital markets, and international arbitration expertise;</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Arguably, JD is one of the US firms which comes closest to having a full service offering, which could be attractive to someone who wants a broader and more well-rounded training experience.</li> </ul></blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread