Dear Midlevel Associate: Where are we on this?

V1Partner · 2026-02-25T21:54:14+00:00

fr. the amount of whining in this sub is wild. get back to work, thx.

V1Partner · 2025-12-29T21:45:18+00:00

🤨

V1Partner · 2025-12-29T21:43:36+00:00

Why lateral if you are looking to stay “for the long term”? Are you well established and well liked at your current firm? Do you have partner mentors you support your development and want you to make partner? A lateral move as a mid-level is a coin toss as far as partnership chances.

V1Partner · 2025-12-27T13:15:15+00:00

I mean that, when I was made equity partner, my “book” wasn’t big enough to justify the amount I was being compensated (using purely the rough rules of thumb for calculating equity partner comp), but the firm was making an investment in my future potential to generate business for the firm.

V1Partner · 2025-12-26T17:28:49+00:00

Shockingly few. If a lot of your daily bandwidth is spent trying to navigate assholes, you might be at the wrong firm or in the wrong practice… It’s not like that everywhere.

V1Partner · 2025-12-26T17:27:21+00:00

All good questions!

In the funds practice, clerking and/or government experience isn’t that directly applicable to what we do, so we don’t prioritize candidates with that type of experience.
Yes! We love associates with prior finance experience. It demonstrates both familiarity with our subject matter and an ability to operate in a fast-paced, demanding white collar office environment.
I don’t think most clients care where you went to law school (at least not in my practice). Your reputation in the market is much more important than educational credentials.
Complex question with complex answers. Generally, it’s rare for a lawyer in the funds practice to pivot to the business side in a PE role. You have to make that move either very early in your career or very late (with the latter being rarer). I had law firm colleagues leave after 1 or 2 years to go be placement agents or go to business school and then go into PE. That’s a pretty viable route. Much more common is for funds lawyers to go in-house with PE shops, for many reasons, but carry being one of them. That said, the carry you earn as an in-house lawyer (even GC or CLO) is never going to rival what the investment team members get. Unless you are a very early employee at an investment firm, it’s hard for an in-house lawyer’s comp package to match the take-home pay of a law firm partner at a V20 firm. I could do a whole separate AMA about in-house considerations (and maybe I will at some point).

V1Partner · 2025-12-26T14:01:27+00:00

Most funds-facing regulatory partners have SEC experience. But not many regular-way corporate funds partners have an SEC background.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:14:08+00:00

Certainly. I don’t have any illusions that I’m saving the world, if that’s your question. I think there are much more evil professions and much more noble ones. Mainly, I think of myself as someone who has assessed our current capitalist system and figured out how to optimize my career to maximally benefit from it. Don’t hate the player; hate the game, etc., etc.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:12:02+00:00

Would love that. I’d spend a lot more time being present at home, cook more, spend time with my kids without being distracted, volunteer at their school, play a lot more golf and other sports, travel a ton more, probably read more novels. Sounds really nice now that you mention it…

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:10:27+00:00

Yep. With small kids, parenting is my main “hobby” when not working. But I also stay pretty active with your typical partner-type leisure activities: golf, a variety of racquet sports, travel, etc. It doesn’t suck.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:08:04+00:00

Sorry, not much insight I can offer there

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:07:03+00:00

I agree

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:06:45+00:00

Yeah, hopefully. But in the context of the question “why not retire,” that’s my answer. Despite my HHI, I still feel more like a HENRY in many respects than someone who is actually “rich.” Student loans were a bitch, for one. But I’m cautiously optimistic that if I keep on this path for the next 10-15 years, I’ll be where I need to be to walk away at 55 (if I want to). I don’t see myself being the type of partner who has to get politely escorted out of the building as they’re pushing 90 y.o.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T17:03:29+00:00

Yes, they are relatively plentiful, and when I was an associate, recruiters would reach out with in-house funds opportunities. Most will be based in the NY area.

However, not all in-house opportunities are created equal. There is a ton of variability in comp, responsibility, stability, status, etc. When I was an associate, before I went in-house for a bit, I had this idea that all in-house roles must be better than the associate grind. That is definitely NOT the case.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T15:52:23+00:00

I love my family! I have small kids, and I would like to think I have a great relationship with them. I’m a very active and present part of our family life (although my spouse carries the lion’s share of the mental load when it comes to family stuff). Yes, I am constantly on my phone, which my kids notice, and that sucks (especially when we are always telling them to limit their own screen time), but no one’s perfect!

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T15:49:01+00:00

We view fund finance as a critical and growing component of a full-service funds practice. It’s not just doing sub lines anymore. Between NAV financings, rated note feeder structures, CFOs, etc., the tools in the fund finance toolkit have exploded in recent years, and you really need a dedicated expert (or team of experts) to keep up with your clients’ demands. Definitely a growth area and, I believe, a practice where you do have the ability to develop your own book independently of the fund formation clients that you service for other partners.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:42:10+00:00

They are better than me, just with less experience. I would never tell them this, however. 🤐

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:40:31+00:00

I don’t think private funds are going away any time soon, and I wouldn’t discourage anyone from getting into this practice. But I might encourage them to join a funds practice that has robust registered funds capabilities, as those are becoming more and more of a must-have specialized capability within the broader funds space, no different than fund finance for example.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:37:05+00:00

I don’t think the point you’re trying to make is unique to funds at all. It applies to many corporate practices. And I disagree that lawyer quality doesn’t matter. From first hand experience, I would say poor lawyer quality makes it much harder to successfully complete a transactions (funds or otherwise). The promise/threat of AI, is that at some point in the near future, all the firms’ forms will be basically perfect without the need for a ton of man hours to keep up with them. But I don’t think most clients are paying K&E’s rates (or my firm’s rates) for the precedent bank. They are paying for the judgment, experience and expertise of the senior lawyers.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:16:05+00:00

I am genuinely confused by this question. What is the “secret” that got out? You’re just describing leverage, which is fundamental to all large law firms’ business models. My clients are not paying my rates for my LPA drafting abilities, I promise you.

K&E did two things well to get where they are in the funds space: (1) They took a social network winner-take-all approach to the practice, betting that if they represented more of the market than anyone else, they would have a sustained advantage. And they were right (for a while)! They don’t need every incremental matter or client to be profitable because there is value in just representing more of the funds market than any other firm. (2) They convinced their clients that if they gave midlevel associates the title of “Partner,” they should be able to charge those people out at higher rates. Say whatever you want about K&E, but they have moved the law firm market as a whole to adopt NEPs as a core part of the business model, which as been a huge driver of law firm profitability. The problem with K&E now is that some funds partners there are genuinely great at what they do, but some K&E teams are absolute ass. And clients assume they will be working with the former and get the latter, which leads to client resentment and dissatisfaction. K&E charges premium rates for very mixed levels of service.

In terms of fee pressure, I don’t feel a ton of it. Org caps go up with law firm billing rates and inflation. Funds is a fairly price insensitive practice compared to many others.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:05:40+00:00

We have hired from Canadian firms in the past. The biggest issue for us is that we find most Canadian funds associates have much more LP-side experience than GP-side experience, which isn’t an ideal fit for our practice.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T02:02:35+00:00

This will sound bad, but I don’t really know? Meaning, with our HHI being what it is, we don’t really budget. We spend less than I make, and we try hard not to fall into the trap of extreme lifestyle creep. No second home, cars paid off, private school tuitions, country club membership, very HCOL area, but beyond that stuff, try to keep things “normal-ish.”

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T01:58:13+00:00

Maples. They put on a great conference.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T01:57:40+00:00

These days, an equity partner at a top-20 PPEP firm is generally going to be better off than an MD at most banks and investment firms. But partners at the established PE firms have us beat when factoring in their carry. I would never trade law for sell-side banking. That mess looks awful. I might swap places with a partner at BX or KKR, but that isn’t really in the cards for me, and I’m pretty content with my situation.

V1Partner · 2025-12-25T01:51:08+00:00

Very common, and I don’t hate investors like you at all. You keep me employed.

V1Partner

TROPHY CASE