or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general - Page 693

post #10381 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenFrog View Post

May I ask why you fear you will not be able to go back into a good law position if the worst happened? Just curious, not questioning. My sense is that you are a very accomplished individual and that a "failed" stint in VC would still be tremendously valuable experience.

I don't know anything about law practices though so would love to hear your thoughts.

Short answer is that the Bay Area corporate legal market is prone to over supply during tech downturns. I would be far more exposed to that as a job seeker particularly going back to a law firm as an M&A practitioner. This would be magnified by the fact that it will have been 4+ years since I would have been at a law firm and would need to build up my client base from scratch in a challenging market. Essentially I think the law firm re-entry route (for the type of practice I have historically had) would be closed.

I would have a better shot at an in house gig due to recency of experience, my network and the fact that inhouse lawyers don't need to generate business, but those jobs can be few and far between during downturns because companies fold, fewer new ones are scaling and requiring lawyers and existing positions tend to see less turnover due to market conditions.
post #10382 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

Child care will get ya.  My wife has partially subsidized child care through her work so we save 50% on what we were paying while waitlisted at her work's place for a month.  

Win-win, brahs. Overseers eliminate the need for supplemental child care, a bit of extra income, building both character and muscle.

post #10383 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

No iGasm today from the usual suspects?

Is it just me or are the new Air Pods just v2.0 or those stupid BT earpieces?

I think the whole headphone jack thing is dumb--and offering $160 earbuds that will be prone to getting lost as an alternative is a little dumb too...

But I will say that the charging case is actually quite clever. Keeps them protected and together, and solves the battery life issue for a large number of users. No good for cross country flights or people who spend all of their day with one earbud in taking calls...but good for people who commute on the subway and maybe hit the gym after work. Figure there is no way you will be getting the full 5 hours of battery life after a year (and nobody wants to buy new $160 headphones frequently), but with the charging case, you should still be able to make it through the work week without running into an "oh shit, I forgot to charge my air buds" moment.

I kind of wonder how they will handle audio sync--most wireless headphones use a single receiver/amplifier and just run a wire to the second ear. Wireless technology using analog radio waves can just assume synchronization, but once you get a digital signal path with buffers, decoding, D/A conversion, etc...you open the door to weird issues where you either have drift between left and right ear, or you completely lose sync lock on one ear. Especially if you have interference issues when you are on a subway car with 25 other air bud users (50 buds)...
I know that they've gotten better at syncing things like multi-room audio speakers, so perhaps this problem was largely already solved in the bluetooth spec.
post #10384 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post


Short answer is that the Bay Area corporate legal market is prone to over supply during tech downturns. I would be far more exposed to that as a job seeker particularly going back to a law firm as an M&A practitioner. This would be magnified by the fact that it will have been 4+ years since I would have been at a law firm and would need to build up my client base from scratch in a challenging market. Essentially I think the law firm re-entry route (for the type of practice I have historically had) would be closed.

I would have a better shot at an in house gig due to recency of experience, my network and the fact that inhouse lawyers don't need to generate business, but those jobs can be few and far between during downturns because companies fold, fewer new ones are scaling and requiring lawyers and existing positions tend to see less turnover due to market conditions.

Sounds like a good opportunity at not the best time or most opportune market. 

 

I'd calculate it to figure out if you can survive the worst outcome. If you lost your job how long until you became insolvent? 

 

If you have a decent runway, go for it from a financial perspective.

 

At the same time, is this something you enjoy doing? I've seen a range of lawyers in the M&A process from those that add a lot to those that add little. Your value will be in the network that you can bring or create. Tech M&A is a scary place to be at the moment, but if it's a firm without much deployed capital there is profit to be made at others expense. 

post #10385 of 11163
Does anyone have a link to a dollar cost averaging calculator? Like, pick your year, how much a month, and what would the S&P have done for you in that holding period?
post #10386 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Does anyone have a link to a dollar cost averaging calculator? Like, pick your year, how much a month, and what would the S&P have done for you in that holding period?

 

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/

 

This will get you most of the way there.  You can also choose when you rebalance (if at all) and other little items.

post #10387 of 11163
Thanks, mate!
post #10388 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchapiro View Post

Sounds like a good opportunity at not the best time or most opportune market. 

I'd calculate it to figure out if you can survive the worst outcome. If you lost your job how long until you became insolvent? 

If you have a decent runway, go for it from a financial perspective.

At the same time, is this something you enjoy doing? I've seen a range of lawyers in the M&A process from those that add a lot to those that add little. Your value will be in the network that you can bring or create. Tech M&A is a scary place to be at the moment, but if it's a firm without much deployed capital there is profit to be made at others expense. 

I'm thinking of it less about insolvency than about eroding capital and retirement funds. My wife has a healthy career so we could live on her income (with some lifestyle changes - goodbye nanny although by that time we are likely to be out of the nanny business due to the kids aging up).

To be honest I enjoy everything. I liked being an M&A attorney and got to work on some really cool deals both high and low profile and enjoyed my client base (mix of PE and tech). As a younger partner I didn't generally own my relationships but that takes time and this move inhouse has improved my network greatly which would give me some fertile hunting grounds over the next decade - but that's the upside case assuming tech M&A doesn't crater.

The VC opportunity would have at least 3 years of committed capital since I would be joining in connection with the closing of the next fund and my annual salary would be sufficient to maintain my current lifestyle during that time.

Interested to hear more about why you think tech M&A is scary right now. The practice I left and would likely return to if I went back to a firm is booming right now and they have a number of good opportunities that they would like me to help close.

I'm a bit uncertain as to whether I would actually prefer the VC role vs going back to M&A vs remaining a GC which is probably the biggest thing that will drive my decision but I appreciate hearing the different viewpoints on the risks.
post #10389 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post


I'm thinking of it less about insolvency than about eroding capital and retirement funds. My wife has a healthy career so we could live on her income (with some lifestyle changes - goodbye nanny although by that time we are likely to be out of the nanny business due to the kids aging up).

To be honest I enjoy everything. I liked being an M&A attorney and got to work on some really cool deals both high and low profile and enjoyed my client base (mix of PE and tech). As a younger partner I didn't generally own my relationships but that takes time and this move inhouse has improved my network greatly which would give me some fertile hunting grounds over the next decade - but that's the upside case assuming tech M&A doesn't crater.

The VC opportunity would have at least 3 years of committed capital since I would be joining in connection with the closing of the next fund and my annual salary would be sufficient to maintain my current lifestyle during that time.

Interested to hear more about why you think tech M&A is scary right now. The practice I left and would likely return to if I went back to a firm is booming right now and they have a number of good opportunities that they would like me to help close.

I'm a bit uncertain as to whether I would actually prefer the VC role vs going back to M&A vs remaining a GC which is probably the biggest thing that will drive my decision but I appreciate hearing the different viewpoints on the risks.

Unfortunately any non certain job will have that risk, but that is part of why you have so much more potential upside. If you could live off of your wife's income your absolute risk is low, which takes a lot of stress off the table. 

 

I'm not sure if the "coolness" factor wears off after a while. I still get excited about learning something new for a deal, but generally just view a deal as a deal at this point. If you're closer to the sourcing side it can certainly get a little more boring than the negotiation side and execution side. 

 

At least speaking to the tech people I know the on the East Coast, a lot of valuations around here have been coming off sky high levels. I've heard about a lot of down rounds. Capital has been a bit harder to raise. General concerns about if the bubble is coming to an end. Then again, talking to only around 20 or so people, my sample size is not large and it's not my area of expertise. Coming from an industry with durable cash flows I always consider tech a bit flaky and prone to volatility. Usually takes a bit of time for the legal side to reflect the industry side. 

post #10390 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post

I'm thinking of it less about insolvency than about eroding capital and retirement funds. My wife has a healthy career so we could live on her income (with some lifestyle changes - goodbye nanny although by that time we are likely to be out of the nanny business due to the kids aging up).
Just make sure that her job isn't selling luxury products to successful VCs. You could end up with some unfortunately high correlations.
post #10391 of 11163

Discount equities day! :slayer:

post #10392 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

Discount equities day! icon_gu_b_slayer%5B1%5D.gif

Just remember to buy at the bottom.
post #10393 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post


Just remember to buy at the bottom.

 

That's what I've been doing wrong all these years...

post #10394 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

That's what I've been doing wrong all these years...

I believe that's called contrarian investing.
post #10395 of 11163
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post


I believe that's called contrarian investing.

 

I don't know what it is called, but my advisor told me about all these cool short put options where I can't lose money no matter where the market goes.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Business, Careers & Education
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general