With some firms now claiming to source as much as 80% of their work outside the Midlands, a cynic might wonder how long this gravity-defying expansion can continue; on current trends
Obviously, it is not all doom and gloom. While
Another contradiction? Well, the big firms had some eye-catching instructions at the top-end, but their businesses have always run on a larger chunk of bread-and-butter local work than they let on. That work still exists — it has even expanded considerably — but with so many entrants hungry for business there is more competition and price-pressure, which has eaten into the big five’s margins. The irony is that
The cap that fits everywhere
Interesting to hear ‘revelations’ of the shock use of liability caps. Perhaps it was slightly less revelatory three years ago when Legal Week established that Eversheds was using such limits on potential negligence claims in its standard terms, at the time the first law firm to admit using a tactic that had already become common among accountants.
The initial debate was whether such tactics could be deployed by top City firms. That question was soon answered when three magic circle firms in 2005 conceded that they were regularly capping on vendor due diligence reports in corporate auctions. Attitudes change quickly in the City and what was once considered risky from a client perception viewpoint is now common.
There is a wider issue here, and that is the impact of sponsor-driven auctions on other aspects of legal practice. This type of corporate disposal has already made the concept of multiple bid roles acceptable. How long before this practice — and other controversial innovations — are translated into traditional public M&A?
See legalweekblogs.com/editorsblog for more deal comment.
