<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wall Street Even Owns Tech Deals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/</link>
	<description>Life in, and after, BigLaw</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:33:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julie Triedman </title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-1734</link>
		<dc:creator>Julie Triedman </dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-1734</guid>
		<description>Thanks, lawshucks, for the hat tip to my post. I did the story, as you note, very quickly. Somehow I missed one of the Fenwick representations -- was drawing from our own deals coverage, where there was a gap on one of the deals. But the point is valid--SV firms appear to be losing out on the big tech deals. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, lawshucks, for the hat tip to my post. I did the story, as you note, very quickly. Somehow I missed one of the Fenwick representations &#8212; was drawing from our own deals coverage, where there was a gap on one of the deals. But the point is valid&#8211;SV firms appear to be losing out on the big tech deals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julie Triedman</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-3731</link>
		<dc:creator>Julie Triedman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-3731</guid>
		<description>Thanks, lawshucks, for the hat tip to my post. I did the story, as you note, very quickly. Somehow I missed one of the Fenwick representations -- was drawing from our own deals coverage, where there was a gap on one of the deals. But the point is valid--SV firms appear to be losing out on the big tech deals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, lawshucks, for the hat tip to my post. I did the story, as you note, very quickly. Somehow I missed one of the Fenwick representations &#8212; was drawing from our own deals coverage, where there was a gap on one of the deals. But the point is valid&#8211;SV firms appear to be losing out on the big tech deals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lawshucks</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-1559</link>
		<dc:creator>lawshucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:28:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-1559</guid>
		<description>I was just working with the ComputerWorld list.  I might do a followup, if there&#039;s interest, because there are a few other deals that they didn&#039;t include for some reason that I thought of later, like Dell-Perot, not to mention cross-border stuff like NEC-Renesas</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was just working with the ComputerWorld list.  I might do a followup, if there&#8217;s interest, because there are a few other deals that they didn&#8217;t include for some reason that I thought of later, like Dell-Perot, not to mention cross-border stuff like NEC-Renesas</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lawshucks</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-3730</link>
		<dc:creator>lawshucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:28:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-3730</guid>
		<description>I was just working with the ComputerWorld list.  I might do a followup, if there&#039;s interest, because there are a few other deals that they didn&#039;t include for some reason that I thought of later, like Dell-Perot, not to mention cross-border stuff like NEC-Renesas</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was just working with the ComputerWorld list.  I might do a followup, if there&#8217;s interest, because there are a few other deals that they didn&#8217;t include for some reason that I thought of later, like Dell-Perot, not to mention cross-border stuff like NEC-Renesas</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pete</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-1558</link>
		<dc:creator>pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-1558</guid>
		<description>You missed Adobe/Omniture.  $1.8 billion</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed Adobe/Omniture.  $1.8 billion</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pete</title>
		<link>http://lawshucks.com/2009/12/wall-street-even-owns-tech-deals/#comment-3729</link>
		<dc:creator>pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawshucks.com/?p=3799#comment-3729</guid>
		<description>You missed Adobe/Omniture.  $1.8 billion</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed Adobe/Omniture.  $1.8 billion</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
