Click here to post your comments (anonymously) and help build an insider's profile of this upwardly-mobile mid-market firm, using the categories listed below as a guideline.
Overview
A mid-tier firm that has made a better job of climbing the City ladder than most, Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP) divides opinions if nothing else. While some contributors point to a certain patchiness across the firm as a whole - "the lawyers are variable in quality - even the partners," says one poster - obvious exceptions include a heavyweight real estate team and an increasingly visible finance group. Corporate has also been a focus for expansion in recent years.
One contributor who joined from a magic circle firm suggests BLP is "not ready yet to take on the big guns", while another concludes that "if you're interested in real big-ticket cross-border and complex work, go to a top 15 firm, a boutique or a US firm's London office". However, the firm has plenty of ardent supporters.
"I'm fairly confident that this is the firm to watch in the City," says an admiring partner at Herbert Smith. "This firm will easily fit into the top 10 in the next couple of years. From what I understand the firm doesn't rest on its laurels and I've heard lots of talk from friends at the firm about enormous expansion in the coming years."
"I joined the corporate department and have never looked back," adds an ex-magic circle lawyer turned BLP loyalist. He now claims to enjoy a better quality of life without a drop in quality of work.
"I've worked with quite a few of the firm's lawyers on a number of deals [and] was impressed to say the least," sighs one contributor from a US firm, pointing to an "up-and-coming" corporate team in particular. "It doesn't take a genius to work out where it wants to be over the next couple of years."
The people are friendly too - which may have something to do with the firm's eminently achievable billable hours target of around 1,500 hours. Indeed, joining BLP is "very much a lifestyle choice" according to one battle-hardened contributor, although another BLP-watcher suggests lawyers in the corporate and funds groups do work long hours.
One ex-magic circle contributor says support areas such as human resources and even stationary are below-par compared to the magic circle. He suggests that quirks such as the availability of stationary supplies only between 10am and 2pm lends BLP a "regional feel" inconsistent with its aspirations of challenging the City elite.
"The first thing you see at your desk on arriving is a bin with pens in," notes one contributor, "[and] all costs are carefully controlled." Yet BLP has a good reputation for the quality of its support services - including what one contributor calls "the highest-rated IT support department in the City" - and there is evidence of it investing in this area (see?).
"BLP is very conscious of getting its PR right," observes another reader. Aren't we all?
History
Culture
"The hours are ok and the work is super," raves one former magic circle lawyer now at BLP. "I'm staying for a lot longer [and] I can't imagine another firm in London with better prospects of becoming one of the City's elite firms."
Key departments
BLP has put plenty of effort and cash into shedding its reputation as simply a property firm , albeit a very good one. While the flagship real estate group - including planning and development - is still a large chunk of the practice, corporate and competition are just two areas that have been targeted for investment.
"The work in corporate is more comparable to that of national firms or the likes of Lawrence Graham than the magic circle," says one contributor. "If you want AIM work it's a good place but it doesn't have the same bluechip reputation in private equity as, say, Ashurst, Macfarlanes or Travers [Smith]. And it doesn't have the same reputation in public M&A as the magic circle."
However, one Ashurst contributor (see post below) laughs off the suggestions that BLP's corporate team should be mentioned in the same breath as old Lawrence Graham, describing BLP as a "much more prestigious firm" in this regard.
"I think the [previous] contributor is right that BLP's work is more comparable to Lawrence Graham and the national firms than the magic circle or work of the top 10," counters another contributor. "When was BLP last on a billon-pound corporate deal? Which publications rate it as high as Travers, Macfarlanes or Ashurst in private equity and which rate it anywhere near the magic circle or international firms for public M&A?"
Another adds: "It may be a different firm in five-10 years but at the moment, from the inside, it is not doing the billion-pound deals or working on the most cutting-edge deals in private equity or M&A. It's not just miles away from private equity firms like Travers [and] Macfarlanes... but is also miles away from most of the firms above it in terms of public work too - not just the magic circle but firms like Norton Rose, Simmons, Ashurst and Lovells."
"BLP is an exceptional finance practice for its size," says an A&O lawyer, "and I would agree that it certainly cuts above the rest of the mid-market for its finance work. I had friends there who were snapped up by leading global finance practices, which tells a story about the quality of the finance people at the firm."
BLP has also made a play in sectors such as leisure and online gaming, with some notable successes.
National/international coverage
"The international strategy doesn't work," complains one BLP poster about the firm's policy of close relationships with firms in a number of jurisdictions. He points to this perceived failure as "a big factor" in his plans to leave.
"Opening the Singapore 'office' is all part of this indecision," the poster adds. "Kramer Levin - the US ally - never refers anything to us and neither does Beiten [Burkhardt] in Germany. Other firms have international business sewn up."
Key clients
Leading partners
While the hire of real estate head Robert MacGregor from Clifford Chance (CC) remains perhaps BLP's most eye-catching lateral of recent years, the capture of Lovells securitisation partner Tamara Box in 2006 is highlighted by one contributor as a "significant gain" for the City firm. The contributor regards Box as "one of the country's leading securitisation lawyers", with her hire emblematic of the major push BLP has made in this area of late.
In 2007 the firm bagged star Herbert Smith real estate partner Chris de Pury (following a fairly acrimonious split) - arguably one of London's top property lawyers - and the same year went back to CC for rated tax partner Michael Wistow.
Corporate finance chief David Collins is a high-profile member of the transactional team.
Career prospects
While the firm has expanded ambitiously with a series of eye-catching partner hires, one contributor says a consequence of this is an even tougher environment for home-grown lawyers to gain promotion. "Making equity partner is next to impossible," he complains. However, BLP seems to have acknowledged such concerns, with the firm among those to look at alternative career paths for its junior lawyers.
In 2006 the firm promoted a record 13 associates to partner, but that dipped to six a year later and in April 2008 the firm made up just five, all of whom were based in the City.
Salaries
One contributor questions the transparency - and the value - of the firm's bonus system. He writes: "The award-winning benefits package is a masterful display of smoke and mirrors: you actually just get less of everything and an incredibly over-complex claim to process."
"The bonus is a bizarre flat scheme whose calculation is unfathomable," claims a contributor. "It appears that most of the bonus money is already allocated to a few star partners so there is little left over for others. Senior associates tend to get £7,500 or so maximum, while juniors get £2,500 or so."
He adds: "The benefits package basically is £275 to spend as you wish - be it towards gym subscriptions or dental insurance. It doesn't compare to most other firms in the top 25 or better US firms."
One BLP assistant adds: "The firm cuts certain lateral hires (including assistants) deals that far exceed what they pay those who have been here for a long time. The inconsistancies, while not publicised, are very disheartening."
Recruitment
Overseeing graduate recruitment at BLP is trainee manager Jennie Moore. For an overview of all recruitment at BLP, click here.
Work-life balance
BLP is among those firms considering new career paths for associates as partnership across the City becomes increasingly elusive.
"Good idea with the alternative to partner," says a partner at a City rival, "though I'm not quite sure how it actually works."
Diversity
Why on earth is Lawrence Graham mentioned in the same article as BLP? BLP is a much more prestigious firm for corporate and it seems rather silly to have a wiki on BLP's corporate capabilities by comparing the firm to Lawrence Graham. How ridiculous.
I'm not at the firm and don't really have anything else to add about the firm, but this most certainly needs to be updated.
I think the contributor is right that BLP's work is more comparable to Lawrence Graham and the national firms than the magic circle or work of the top 10. When was it last on a billon-pound corporate deal? Which publications rate it as high as Travers, Macfarlanes or Ashurst in private equity and which rate it anywhere near the magic circle or international firms for public M&A? I'd be surprised if the contributor was really from Ashurst. Clearly they haven't worked at BLP or are very biased.
I don't know how anyone, let alone a partner at Herbies, can say: "This firm [BLP] will easily fit into the top 10 in the next couple of years."
To do this, even assuming static revenues at the 16 or so firms above it, it would have to increase its revenue by over 50% in a couple of years. Most firms find growth easier to sustain when they are smaller; it will only get harder, as Lovells has shown, for example, to grow at a rate of 20% a year or more.
Also, the finance practice can't realistically be called "one of the elite finance practices in the City". It doesn't even cover all of the major areas of finance. And to compare it to firms like A&O and Clifford Chance - not to mention the rest of the magic circle, Simmons and Norton Rose - is farcical.
The head of project finance has just left and the department is staffed by unhappy Aussies and Kiwis.
It is hard to say that it "is quite scary how big the firm has become internationally in such a very small amount of time. It only merged in 2001 and is now the country's real estate behemoth."
What the contributor really means is it's impressive that it's developed as a national practice. It has very little international practice.
I used to work in the corporate team at BLP. The suggestions in relation to corporate are true if they are talking about the firm two or three years ago but it is much different now. I obviously still have friends in the corporate department and from what I understand the work is becoming top-notch, increasingly doing complex cross-border work - and that is why the firm needs to push out internationally. Obviously the firm is not in the top 10 for corporate in the City, but give it time.
I am not biased, but I don't waste my time relying solely on deal figures. It is about growth and in terms of the growth in corporate work BLP has certainly gone a long way in recent times. I don't actually care either way about the firm. I am not biased nor have I ever worked at the firm.
I am, however, a corporate lawyer and I know the market in which I practise.I have never compared BLP to Ashurst for corporate, but what I would say is that if the firm carries on the work it is doing now, attracting the clients it continues to attract, and grabbing some of the City's leading corporate lawyers from other firms then the firm can't really go wrong in securing a place as one of the City's best corporate practices.
It might not be today or tomorrow but in time my own professional opinion is that BLP will feature prominently in this market.
Personally, I have worked in big corporate deals where BLP was involved. Clearly the firm is nowhere near as strong for public M&A as the magic cirlce, but I've never suggested it is. All I say is that the firm is chosen by clients ever more frequently for its corporate expertise and the firm does pip the MC from time to time. If one looks at the firm's deals then, although not M&A, a recent corporate transaction worth £1.1 billion went through the firm's hands. This is no longer unusual at the firm and that is that.
BLP is a great firm that knows how to impress clients and will continue to do so. But so do many other firms - this isn't anything new.
I have contacts at the firm who are extremely well-paid and have a happy life as well. BLP does not wipe its lawyers out by making them work like slaves and it pays along City rates.
If you make partner - which can be hard to do unless you've been stolen from the magic circle, which is BLP's favourite thing to do at partner level - then you often get paid very handsomely.
The two posts by "Top 10 City firm (used to work at BLP)" and "Ashurst (and I am actually at Ashurst)" seem to be from the same person. Certainly they're ridiculously positive about BLP for someone who supposedly works for another firm. Funny that they have to say that they're not biased and not at BLP. Gave the game away I think...
It's hard for someone at another firm to comment on what BLP is doing when the information they hear is second hand; in fact they may have to rely largely on deal tables, reviews by directories like Legal 500, etc. So both comments can be ignored as they are not from the firm and are also totally inaccurate.
I think it's best to give more weight to empirical studies or at least those which involve surveys of lots of people from clients to others involved in the market place. You cannot just dismiss these as 'deal figures' and then rely on your second-hand information.
And the point about growth, aspirations, etc is a different issue. Yes, it may be a different firm in 5-10 years but at the moment, from the inside, it is not doing the £billion deals or working on the most cutting edge deals in private equity or in M&A. It's not just miles away from private equity firms like Travers, Macfarlanes, etc. but is also miles away from most of the 16/17 firms above it in terms public work too - not just the magic circle but firms like Norton Rose, Simmons, Ashurst, Lovells etc.
I think you have to distinguish the old BLP from the "new" BLP with its recent high profile hires who tend to be all ex-Magic Circle. From a previously unknown finance department to one that is being seen on more and more deals, the new hires have already started to make a big difference.
Lots of magic circle people leave to go to other top 10 firms like Ashurst, Norton Rose, Simmons, Lovells (not to mention the American firms) and always have - especially from our banking dept! But the change the previous post refers to is that now a few go to BLP too. But it's not the real top partners in the finance group who are going there or that many of the high numbers of senior associates who leave the magic circle.
I applied for a job at BLP last year and didn't get it. I'm a senior associate at one of the top 8 firms and have vast experience (6yrs PQE)and have worked on major deals in my area of practice (to remain anonymous I shan't disclose this)- more pay than at my current firm in case anyone is wondering why I opted for a cut. Just goes to show the firm is picky; I was more than qualified for the position.
Interestingly this discussion board seems to have generated a wide spectrum of opinion, more than the other wikis I've read. Though I can't see why anyone would make up the firm they're from, and to suggest that the individual is a BLP employee is odd. Why would any lawyer boast so much about their own firm - they're not exactly going to be paid an enormous bonus for posting on here and leaving a comment only opens the firm up to adverse comments from elsewhere.
I did have a look at the firm's website and some of the deals they've been involved with are impressive - £1.1 billion project finance deal in February apparently. So the firm is doing well it would seem.
The firm is brilliant for some areas, good for others and market average for most others. The comments that the firm isn't as highly regarded as other firms in the top 20 is odd as well, as this very much depends on practice area. The firm is not as well known for public M&A as the MC or the likes of my firm (which was mentioned in the previous post) but from what the Legal 500 says the firm is top of the mid-market for corporate.
I agree this is a firm to watch - it has certainly done extremely well in recent times. There is no point in speculating though.
Has anyone involved with corporate law actually heard of this firm? Or is all this chat about BLP just made up?
Wow. Interesting discussion. I'm at BLP - corporate. Admittedly we're not the biggest in the City for corporate but that's not where we want to be. It's not realistic to expect that at the moment. I enjoy the work I do here and we do get a lot of AIM and IPO and general corporate finance work from a variety clients from small companies to some of the largest plcs - again it depends on the type of work the client needs us for. For larger M&A deals you’d expect the magic circle to be chosen in the first instance – depending of course on client preference. Again, it is about where a firm’s strengths lie. According to Legal500, we're joint top for mid-market corporate work (anything up to £500m) with Norton Rose. Corporate is the second largest of our practices (after real estate as you'd imagine) and is definitely growing much larger with new instructions for much larger corporate deals that are coming in more and more frequently. I hope this clears up some of the issues for the “wiki”.
Leading firm in all aspects of real estate, including real estate finance. Firm is building corporate - excellent mid-market practice but not at the "top table" with the usual corporate suspects on public deals. Finance seems to be the area in which BLP is investing most - likely to succeed in relation to anything real estate-related. On the other stuff it remains to be seen.
Another post by whoever this person is - possibly HR at BLP? It may be a misguided attempt to add credibility to the obviously wrong statements about our firm. Just be honest with people: it's a real estate firm still with good AIM work but nowhere near the top 15 for finance, private equity or big M&A as was clearly stated before and can be seen from any surveys by e.g. Legal500.
No-one I know of at the magic circle gets paid less than at equivalent level at BLP. We're paid under the market and the bonus is poor.
I know from seeing the New Joiners email that the majority of people who join are not magic circle or from the other top 15 firms in London. They're from a range of places but more likely to be from West End firms or Guildford than the top corporate or finance practices.
You are possibly the only person on this board who is very clearly not from BLP. Look at TheLawyer.com's career report 2007 in its survey section. As you can see, the firms that BLP recruited people from are A&O, Clifford Chance, Dewey Ballantine, Linklaters, Lovells, McDermott Will & Emery and Slaughter & May. The report goes on to state, and I quote, "Renowned for having a big-spending lateral hire policy"... I don't think the firm has been scratching around in Guildford for people whoever you are. I agree, AS DO MANY ON THIS BOARD, that firm is not MC for M&A but it is top for AIM according to Legal500. This is anything up to £500m in case you are unaware. Who cares where I'm from or what I do (no I'm not HR), what I've given is fact. Like it or not.
I agree that the bonus scheme could be better - but that can depend on the department. Pay is not below market rate, as sad as that is to say (from my POV at least). What everyone has to remember though is that the W/L balance is truly exceptional at the firm, again I can only speak for myself, but I find it better than my previous firm.
If I was not from BLP how would i know about the New Joiners e-mail?
Clearly not from BLP: look at where the new partners come from and senior associates who couldn't make partner; the few star new partners being the star laterals you quote and not the majority of recruits. As I said, if you look at the New Joiners' e-mails amongst other things (the woeful responses to the 'HIT Teams' from the top universities is another example) it is clear that few people from the top firms come here as associates or as majority of lawyers recruited. It is definitely true that a lawyer was recently recruited from a Surrey firm.
This farcical pretence that BLP is now just under the magic circle doesn't help people wanting to know what it's really like. Apart from you - in various guises - most people do not believe BLP are in the same league for finance, M&A and top private equity; we're a real estate firm that is good at AIM and improving in all areas.
You're not just presenting the facts: you're distorting what we do, which does BLP no credit and doesn't help people wanting to apply here.
Will someone please give us a decent bonus?! I am in corporate and we get diddly squat basically. My friends at the magic circle, Lovells, Slaughters, Simmons get over ten grand as standard and don't work any harder than me. Come on Neville, give us a bit back!
I second the bonus request. Our firm's run for about 60 people who are equity partners and the rest of us work our arses off and get paid less than most other places.
Agree with the other post: who are BLP? We never deal with them in corporate or finance
Aren't most firms run for a small group of equity partners?
Most firms don't have such a low % of equity partners - almost DLA-like.
How can you say that the pay is less than the majority of the other top 20 firms? Just a simple comparison of the starting wage on the various legal sites shows that it's at least on par for NQs. At three years PQ, the firm has higher pay than other firms like Simmons & Simmons, and only marginally less than the others (by 2k).
I think the best thing for everyone to do is fololow the legal press. They can be sued. People on these boards can't so they'll write what they like.
According to nearly all the better ranking surveys I can see the firm is top in the UK for the mid-market/AIM. Forget what people on here say and stick to the figures and the facts. If you work for a firm your judgment is tainted; if you don't then probably more so. If it appears in a survey then at least it is vetted and can be proven. The Lawyer ranks the firm as a top of mid-market/silver circle firm. Legal 500 ranks it as joint top with Norton Rose for mid-cap corporate. Enough said on this whole point I think!?
I agree with tha last post that you should just stick to the surveys. So BLP is just a real estate and AIM/mid market corporate firm. Go to Ashurst, Macfarlanes or Travers Smith if you want good corporate work
So many better firms for finance - all of the magic circle obviously but also Ashurst, Simmons, Norton Rose, specialist firms like my firm, US firms................
Finally some honesty from whoever that person is. As I said above, we're not a leading firm for big M&A or top private equity; we're a real estate firm who does AIM work well but not the big M&A but we're expanding.
As said before, the surveys are the things to read when they were dismissed as mere "deal figures".
If you look on RollonFriday etc. you can see BLP pays less than the 15 or so firms above it. But the key is the bonus is less than other places so when you're already £2k down on most firms, you need a good bonus to be level. My friends at Slaughters get 15% now and at Simmons they have always got big bonuses of over £10k, even for junior lawyers.
Definitely pay is in question at associate level here as highlighted by an 11th hour 'package' rushed together to prevented further walkouts from the Funds group.
I've been on the other side of a corporate deal. Some of the firm's corporates can get pretty fierce and I was pretty shocked (not going to say firm for fear of being called a liar), but I've only dealt with this team on a few occasions. Some people say some things and some say others and I think the start of the wiki is true - one thing BLP does do is divide opinion. The clients like the firm so who else gives a hoot. There hasn't been any other firm in the City that has impressed and grown so much over the last 2 or 3 years.
We've grown more than BLP over the last 2-3 years
Just cos Tesco has done well. We've grown at a far greater rate than BLP over the last 2 to 3 years
Apart from if you're after real estate work, don't go here.
Does anyone from a decent firm actual deal with BLP except for property? Who are they?
To the Linklaters contributer, presumably you do know who they are given that you are taking the time to post a remark on them. I would venture to say your remark sounds a tad defensive. I think the days of the "untouchable" magic circle firms are over. There are lots of firms nipping at their heels. As a client, we no longer take things for gospel simply because they come from a magic circle firm.
Dealt with them for some finance deals.
I have dealt with them for some real estate work, but not in any of my other seats i.e. corporate, banking or capital markets.
Clients come to us not because it's "gospel" but because we are the best in our areas: principally all finance and corporate work, but lots of others too.
Never dealt with them in 6 years of doing capital markets and other finance work
We've probably grown more than BLP in the last few years. And we're a more interesting place to work.
We're better at almost everything than Berwins, including AIM work.
Bypass these firms scrapping for the crumbs below the magic circle and the good finance firms - go to a US firm for real quality
We're superior in Projects, TMT, corporate and finance, and will soon be a long way ahead given our global presence.
I'm about to leave BLP to go to a top 15 firm. We just don't have the quality of corporate work I want. The international strategy doesn't work and is a big factor. Opening the Singapore "office" is all part of this indecision. Kramer Levin - the US ally - never refers anything to us and neither does Beiten in Germany. Other firms have international business sewn up.
I dealt with them on quite a big deal when I did my seat in corporate. I think it was one of their first big instructions in this area though. I did a seat in banking litigation as well and I came across the firm quite a few times for different things. Just because you don't come across a firm in your time doesn't mean they don't do the work. I've got mates there and they love their work. If you flick through the wikis this is the firm that is most talked about, or at least it's the busiest wiki.
Why people keep saying "who are they" I don't know. Any lawyer worth their salt can't fail to notice the leaps that firms like BLP and DLA have made. I'm at Norton Rose and we deal with BLP on a regular basis for mid market corporate work - our firm ranks equally with BLP at no 1 for mid-market work. The firm doesn't do a lot of public M&A (maybe it will, maybe it won't) but for corporate work generally the firm seems well liked by its clients and we see a lot of the firm. When posters on here say "who are they", they really mean "who are they for massive M&A" I think. The firm's finance dept is getting much larger as well - still not as big as ours, but it hired Tamara Box from Lovells, who is supposed to be one of the best securitisation lawyers in the City. Hats off to DLA Piper as well - perhaps more so than BLP, but the poster from Olswang is being a bit silly.
I don't agree that NR are better than BLP for corporate - Legal500 ranks them both equally and so both firms are likely to say they are better than one another, that is natural.
I don't understand. On the one hand you've got Chambers UK 2007 saying "For a number of glod standard clients this group just has to be the first stop for a UK firm outside the magic cirle" (a direct quote). You've got Chambers UK and Legal500 putting the firm in the highest rankings for corporate finance mid market work and AIM (respectively). Yet there are people saying "who are they"? Obviously BLP is not a major player in massive M&A, but how can you argue with most of the legal press?
Just to add to my previous posting, Chambers UK 2007 stated: "For a number of gold standard clients this group “just has to be the first stop for a UK firm outside the magic circle .” Despite the Doubting Thomases, it is clear that the firm has “shaken off the 'real estate mainly' tag” and established genuine credibility in corporate finance. It is an unashamedly mid-market player, generally “at the classy end ,” handling deals from just a few million pounds to half a billion and more...AIM work is a natural adjunct to the mainstream corporate offering; in fact, in this area it is “frankly massive"". This is just for those who require a little bit more info than petty sarcasm.
I've had to deal with the firm on numerous occasions in the past year or so, on fairly big project finance transactions. Good firm for this work of late.
Are BLP based in London or in the regions?
Obvious sarcasm. But, if you try to read the overview, you might just manage to grasp the location.
Not sarcasm - although I have now seen you're based in London. Eversheds are not based in London but they have an office there.
It's funny the way the magic circle trainees/associates rest on their firm's status as magic circle to demean firms outside it. Is macho posturing and arrogance really that bad in the MC?
Has the wiki moderator gone on hols? A whole week without chat on BLP?!
The firm should really be raising salaries a LOT higher than they are - especially for trainees. This is just a comment for the firm to bear in mind.
Yeah - stop resting on paying "market rates" and try to be a market leader with pay for goodness sake.
Trainees work bloody hard at this place, and very often on a scale similar to that of magic circle trainees. Why are we being paid less?
Totally agree. If the firm really does want to make itself the most attractive place to work then it has to up the trainee and associate pay in line with the MC. I think it would be a poor move to repeatedly keep its salaries just under the MC - every student (or at least 90%) is most concerned about pay when they leave Uni/Law School. UP YOUR PAY and you'll get more fantastic applicants. You'll see.
£30k plus £2,500 was great last year - it's not amazing anymore. Should be £35k plus £2,500 golden hello. Why is it that this firm thinks it has to wait to see what others do? It's going to have to offer this type of salary sooner or later or face losing the best applicants to firms who are willing to pay for good people.
£36k, £2,500 to help buy suitable work stuff and to help with first month, plus 10% bonus - that would be market average for a firm of BLP's standing. Anything less seems a waste of the firm's time - and of its potential trainees.
I think £36k plus £2,500 is going a bit too far this stage. I'd say £34k plus £2,500. This is what the likes of Simmons & Simmons is offering and BLP simply must match this if it is to remain competitive on a graduate level. I therefore don't think it's an issue of if the firm will do it, it will. It's just a question of when.
The firm will obviously increase its trainees' salaries as well and I agree that it's just a Q of time. But I think it's quite poor not to have announced an increase by now. Not that the firm is knee-jerk to the City but if Simmons and Nabarros have done it, then what's with BLP taking so long?
Trainees here get to work at a top quality firm with overseas secondments as well. It's hardly a fair comparison.
What the post above doesn't state is that although BLP is a firm on the up, away from its bargain basement roots, it is still behind all the real corporate finance firms according to the same section in Chambers. It is below many firms in the table for domestic corporate finance work, and it doesn't appear AT ALL in the international table.
For the domestic table it's behind all of the magic circle obviously, Herbert Smith, Macfarlanes, Ashurst, Lovells, Norton Rose and Travers Smith. So if you want to just do domestic corporate finance work, go to these firms.
For the international table, the magic circle again appear as well as Skadden, Ashurst, Cameron McKenna, Herbert Smith, Lovells, Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw, Shearman & Sterling, Weil Gotshal & Manges, Baker & McKenzie, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Jones Day, Norton Rose, Simmons & Simmons,
Sullivan & Cromwell and White & Case. So if you want to do cutting edge international work, go to one of these firms.
Not really true. I'm a trainee at the firm and the travel opportunities I have are extensive - it's whether you always want to take them that can be an issue. It's time-consuming and quite draining to travel on a deal and certainly not as glamorous as some arses on here make out.
Try actually READING the Chambers and Parners low-down on the firm. I think what people tend to do is see something negative and pounce on that, rather than the positives. I think that can be a sign of weakness, jealousy or stupidity. Stick with the directories and form your own opinions, some of the posters on here obviously have a naive view of how the City actually works and how clients view the firms they choose. If the firm's client list is impressive, the firm is one to go to (usually)!
I was referring to a training contract in the last post, by the way - not NQ.
Ok, agreed, so BLP isn't an international firm, but it doesn't pretend to be, in all honesty, there are plenty of high quality domestic deals to cut your teeth on. In terms of the salary, I'm sure that there is going to be an official announcement soon. ROF have already announced an unofficial salary rise with NQs on 62k, not amazing I know, but lets wait for the official word...
It's wrong to label BLP as not being an international firm. If you work in Projects then you'll find that most of your work is international in nature - not so long ago the firm won an award for International Project Finance firm of the year or something like that. In corporate, most of the clients have an international business and the work in this department is extremely international in nature. The same goes for banking, some finance, and definitely litigation. Certainly quite a bit of the firm's work comes from the domestic market, especially in real estate and commercial, but in terms of the above mentioned departments their work is hugely international in nature. This is really the main reason that the Singapore and Paris offices had to be opened. Neville Eisenberg made us aware of the fact that the 16% increase in turnover for the year was a direct result of increased international work. If you're in real estate, then work is pretty much UK/Europe-based. If you're in corporate, the work is split, approximately half domestic, half international. Projects is 80% international and the department has a number of very big clients in the middle east especially. Banking, 35-40% international, with big clients coming from as far as South Africa for mainly European based deals. No matter what firm you work in there is bound to be a significant amount of domestic work. Nearly all of my work at BLP is domestic, but that's the nature of my practice really.
On the domestic level, the firm tends to be generally at the top end for nearly all of its practice areas. Room for improvement internationally, but very big in international project finance and increasing amount of international work in other main departments of corporate and litigation (especially US and european litigation).
My above point is not that BLP doesn't engage in work with an international aspect to it – it clearly does, but merely that, office-wise, it's hardly DLA or CMS. I know that it has developed a best-friend network and alliances etc.
So does that comment apply to Slaughter and May then?
This post is full of rubbish - we don't have any international secondments or opportunities.
Not sure what point the disingenuous waffle is supposed to make. If you read Chambers it is clear that all of those other firms are superior in corporate work. This is unhelpful and innaccurate spin by BLP
Presumably this is the projects group which recently lost its head and has just lost another partner?!! Just goes to show if you want international work go to an international firm.
I loved my overseas seat in Singapore for 6 months with a great chance to see a totally different market. I wouldn't call myself an arse for thinking this.
I had a brilliant time at Sullivan & Cromwell in New York - not really the sort of thing a firm like BLP could offer
BLP isn't an international firm and 1 man offices in Paris and Singapore hardly point to it being one. We've done brilliantly in Europe this year. Come to us if you want real international work and experience
International secondments to Brussels as trainee - for competition seat. A current trainee at the firm is on the Brussels secondment now. True to say the firm needs more international secondments, but that's not to say a lot of the work isn't international in nature. I've travelled quite a bit during my training contract - and it's no fun really, you fly out, eat with the client, drink with the client, talk with the client (just generally have late nights), go back to your hotel room, talk about the deal, phone home, go to sleep, wake up, fly home. Now where's the fun in that? Of course if the client needs it, you do it. That's that. But it shouldn't be the absolute prerequisite for accepting a TC because it can knacker you out! Although one trip I had to Dubai was absolutely amazing! (And, apparently, the firm is considering more international secondments, but on a 3-month basis I think, as opposed to a full 6-month seat, though I'd wait for that to be confirmed before you take my word as gospel!)
Yes, projects has had people leaving, but the firm has just had an enormous projects instruction in conjunction with Shearman & Sterling (see story on the main legalweek.com website), DESPITE the partners leaving. People seem to think this is RollonFriday and that sarcasm is somehow useful. For most of the corporate work that the firm does (i.e. mid-market and AIM) the firm is widely reported to be top of its game - see Legal500 and Chambers UK. Granted it's not Slaughter & May for public M&A, but the firm doesn't pretend to be and that's what readers and posters have got to remember.
Quality of work is one thing, quality of life and environment is at least half the story. As ex-Magic Circle, can't say that it was ever a happy ship there. BLP is generally a much happier place to work.
BLP is an international firm. Own offices in Brussels, Paris and Singapore. Alliance offices in most other jurisdictions. Work in the London office (depending on department of course) can be very international in nature or work can be purely domestic. I'm not quite sure how many times this has to be said. It's neither comparing BLP to any other firm nor contrasting it with any other firm. It's neither bigging the firm up, nor dumbing it down. You're right to say that international secondments for trainees needs to be looked at.
This discussion just goes to show that BLP does not yet have the industry profile and respect that it so deserves. BLP is a serious player with big-name clients and is a real success story following the Berwin Leighton/Paisner & Co merger. It is not a challenger to magic circle firms but makes no pretence of being so. On a lighter note - where did the statement in the overview about stationery available between 10am and 2pm come from? All stationery cupboards here are fully stocked, unlocked and unsupervised in all departments...
The way to get industry profile and respect these days is through publishing record PEP increases. Where does BLP sit on that front?
PEP at BLP is for less than 50% of the partners. If BLP had more equity partners then it would be a fair comparison with the 20 firms above it
Training here is not as good as my friends say it is at CC, A&O, Norton Rose, Simmons & Simmons or even Travers Smith. Most of them get international secondments or work lots on cross-border deals. Whatever the posts says above, we definitely don't in the main.
BLP isn't a challenger to real longstanding international firms or a serious player except in real estate and AIM.
The alliances are being totally revised - Kramer Levin doesn't refer anything almost - we're more of a domestic firm wanting to break out of it
People on here are writing some absolutely ridiculous comments. BLP is a excellent player in a number of key markets. If it wasn't then it just wouldn't have the clients. And look at the growth. Some of the posters on here are either jealous, arrogant or just plain stupid. If you read the legal directories and press you will get an accurate picture of the firm.
to the last post, your comments sound overly defensive. BLP is currently 18th largest firm in the UK, so it is not a major player yet, it may be in a few years, and it is certainly heading that way, but public perception counts for a lot and no amount of haranguing by a BLP insider will change that. Why has BLP not published its PEP figures?
Wow! People are really getting themselves exercised. What I do not understand is the following:
1) Why are non-BLP people so keen to bring down BLP? If you are not and have never been at BLP then all you can talk about is your perception and not the reality. That said, it seems as if for the most part on this wiki the perceptions are not good - something that the management of BLP needs to consider. But what do you care anyway; surely you do not want BLP to improve to avoid it threatening the position your believe your firms are in.
2) Why do BLP people feel the need to be so defensive? If you are at BLP and unhappy leave or at least have the guts to speak up internally to the partners. But for goodness sake stop thinking that the grass is greener unless you are prepared to go over the hill.
I think you are misreading the mood on the wiki, most comments have been positive. I think some of the negative comments stem from firms/individuals who are unpleasantly surprised at how well BLP is doing and how much attention it is getting for an "upstart" firm. Give it a few years - it will be in the top 10 firms.
I'm not outside BLP and have made critical posts on here. But a lot of this including the complete waffle on 4 June is untrue, misleading to people who came here under false pretences and misinformation
I think on the contrary the post on 6 June misreads the mood: it's not positive; it is, as the article says, "patchy". It's the spin and disingenous posts by BLP HR or whoever it is that have distorted probably an overall slightly negative wiki board.
I am currently looking to "go over the hill"
I love working at the firm. I came from another City firm and the corporate work seems the same really, just a bit more pleasant place to work. Have travelled internationally, worked on international deals and no issues salary wise given the hours I do. Obviously, I want more salary but that's through greed rather than the fact that I'm being shafted, like some of my mates at other firms. But there are people who aren't happy here - that's the same no matter what firm you're talking about.
OK - look you have a point - we are not international and we're not prestigous like the top 15 firms, but watch out for us in 5 years time
Why 5 years? you will probably be in the top 10 in 2 years' time.
busting my nuts and getting paid a lot less than everyone else in the City
"not prestigious" - oh don't be silly now
Some people just don't have a clue. First, why are you bothered about posting on here all the time. Secondly, some of the comments are right, some of them are not. But a lot of the comments are just silly. If you've got nothing to add about an insight into the firm's workings then shut up. Comments like "the firm is amazing" or "the firm is appalling" won't get anyone anywhere. Just give the goss, the info and let people form their own opinions. I wanted to come on here to help me with my job move from my current firm. It's just a load of nonsense.
post on 12 june doesn't add anything - it's just waffle
another solid year of growth in revenues. But profits not doing great, are the new hires costing more than they are billing?
Like the new meeting rooms. Best views in the City!
What's going on in projects there? I worked opposite them on a deal in the Gulf and now the whole team has walked out. Can't be a great department to be in at the moment? Anyone know why everyone seems to be leaving?
the projects team's departure was actually considered quite a good thing by the rest of the firm !
Does BLP do any high-profile work except real estate?
Related Articles
Latest Jobs
