|
wannabee
|
Posted - 03 February 2010 18:29
I've got a mate looking to apply for a TC. Which of these firms has the best prospects these days, Travers seems to have slipped a bit in the rankings this year but seems like a decent practice whereas NR seems to have pulled itself out of a 5 yr slump.
Any thoughts?
|
|
Rhyme Minister
|
apply to both - both great firms. if he's lucky to get an offer from both, choose the practice that best suits his aspirations. with NR you'll get more exposure to different practice areas and, i believe, they still have 6 seats x 4 month system. they are also highly rated in most practices. however, they are a big firm and a completely different beast to TR in terms of culture. TR are a top-notch corporate/finance/banking firm.
|
|
JonJohn
|
It seems very odd to have whittled it down to those two, as well as being quite presumptious as to getting an offer from both. But Rhyme Minister's post basically says it all.
|
|
BryterLater
|
In terms of prestige they're broadly similar - NR have more international opportunities and a wider variety of respected practices, but if your mate's particularly interested in corporate/private equity work then TS is probably still the best bet.
|
|
H. Stamper
|
Absolutely agree - apply to both and he can think about it further later on. Both are good firms and are doing well (relatively) now but it is confidence in the extreme if you apply for one TC!
|
|
yorlaw
|
I'd be wary of relying on "rankings" of firms, as if they were university league tables. The "rankings" are based on revenue and aren't a clear reflection on the quality of firms. TS is a relatively small firm and subsquently has a smaller turnover that puts it around no.45 in terms of revenue. That said, I doubt many would argue that TS is not as good as Eversheds, which ranks in the top 10 for revenue.
|
|
BuzzAldrinsSpacehoppers
|
MacDonalds has massive revenues. Chez Bruce does not. That is all.
|
|
Rhyme Minister
|
depends whether the OP is referring to the UK 200 (revenue) rankings, or the chambers & partners and Legal 500 rankings. the latter are much more likely to give you a better picture of the practice overall.
|
|
ratypus2
|
Firstly - Travers had a tough couple of years as a result of their heavy exposure to private equity / corporate work, which was hit hard by the recession. However, the quality of their clients and people has not changed.
Secondly - absolutely ignore rankings - the numbers make no difference to the quality of NQ coming out of the training contract, and that is the key purpose of a TC: to make you a good qualified lawyer.
Those caveats out of the way.....
The two offer quite different training experiences.
NR - Wider practice area and more projects / shipping / finance work if that is of interest. Also opportunity to do 6 seats of 4 months for a broader spectrum of experience. Also more opportunity for an international secondment, if that is a factor. NR is supposed to be a decent place to work (firm treats staff well). Larger trainee intakes than Travers and generally a "big firm" feel.
Travers - more heavily focused on corporate and private equity, but a seriously quality outfit in the areas it operates in. Much slimmer chance of international secondments as a trainee, but their training structure is second to none - if your mate wants to become a serious corporate / PE NQ who knows what they're doing, Travers would be hard to beat. A smaller firm, so has a different / familiar feel since you will know most people.
I'd say those are both good TCs, but very different. Some of the decision will depend on personality (NR is probably more modern / international than Travers in its approach); some on interests - if your mate is interested in being thrown in at the deep end and becoming a top-notch corporate NQ, take Travers. If your mate would rather try a bit of everything and possibly get 4-6 months somewhere outside the UK into the bargain, take NR.
|
|
wannabee
|
Some great points raised and def some perspective as I haven't dealt with either of the firms before.
|
|
yorlaw
|
I agree - strange combination of firms to choose from. That said, both are very good firms. I think Travers might just pip NR when it comes to prestige, but this is highly subjective. They are different types of firm and I'd suggest thinking about what kind of law you are interested in first. If you don't know (which in all fairness is entirely understandable) then I'd go with NR as they have a wider spectrum of practice areas.
|
|
SunshineQueen
|
Travers is a solid practice, i enjoyed my vac scheme there.
Apparently NR is also good though and have slightly wider practice areas
|
|
GundamPilot
|
Hi guys, just wondering how long does one have to wait until NR invites you to the interview/PFOs you? I applied there for a TC end of Nov, still heard nothing. Anyone had similar experience with them?
|
|
Pacemaker
|
Travers is a boss firm, nice work and good people. The food is beyond shyte though, and the canteen is in the basement. The windowless basement.
|
|
shinyhappyperson
|
With the scary metal door that looks like it should be in a prison...
|
|
SunshineQueen
|
I disagree on the food, the brie and cranberry baguette i had was awesome haha!
|
|
Pacemaker
|
In fainress you cannot screw up a baguette, within reason. I would hesitate to give most of their main courses to a  . |
|
ratypus2
|
"In fainress you cannot screw up a baguette, within reason."
I have five words for you and those four words are Royal Courts of Justice Cafeteria.
|
|
Rhyme Minister
|
that's five!
|
|
HIGNFY
|
Norton Rose every time for me though you would do well to get into either firm.
|
|
09876
|
NR for sure
|