Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
US vs UK Legal Market
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jaysen" data-source="post: 1974" data-attributes="member: 1"><p>Some thoughts:</p><p></p><p>It was/is arguably easier to crack the London market than crack the US (NY) market. When US law firms first came to London, it was because their clients were expanding internationally. They used these existing relationships – with US corporations and Wall Street banks – to anchor their practice in London. These firms concentrated on a small number of practice areas, catering to their US clients, which justified the huge costs and challenges of entering a competitive financial market.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, the magic circle law firms are trying to build a presence in the world's most competitive market for legal services. US law firms will be first pick for inbound deals or for overseas clients requiring US expertise and US law (e.g. leveraged finance). The magic circle have struggled to dent these longstanding relationships or differentiate their practices from US law firms when it comes to high ticket deals. Some have done better in niche areas, such as Clyde & Co's insurance practice, but in corporate and finance the New York elite reigns.</p><p></p><p>US law firms also have the benefit of the world’s most litigious market. For many law firms, litigation contributes as much as 50% to total revenue. Kirkland & Ellis, for example, has not only stormed the London market in private equity, but it also happens to be the world's biggest litigation firm. The global financial crisis also led to a boom in regulatory and investigations work, which meant huge increases in revenue for many US law firms. UK law firms don't have this opportunity. Litigation-derived revenue is far smaller. Although, some law firms, like Freshfields, have tried to enter the US market by focusing on regulatory and investigations work.</p><p></p><p>The remuneration system for UK law firms is another big challenge. Most operate on a lockstep model, where partners are paid according to their seniority at the law firm. This limits their ability to adjust their pay and therefore attract high performing partners in US. And, even if they tweak their lockstep system, which they have been trying to do, they risk unsettling their existing partners. The top UK law firms also generate far less profits per equity partner (PEP) compared to the New York elite. PEP is a metric that matters when you are looking to attract star partners.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jaysen, post: 1974, member: 1"] Some thoughts: It was/is arguably easier to crack the London market than crack the US (NY) market. When US law firms first came to London, it was because their clients were expanding internationally. They used these existing relationships – with US corporations and Wall Street banks – to anchor their practice in London. These firms concentrated on a small number of practice areas, catering to their US clients, which justified the huge costs and challenges of entering a competitive financial market. Meanwhile, the magic circle law firms are trying to build a presence in the world's most competitive market for legal services. US law firms will be first pick for inbound deals or for overseas clients requiring US expertise and US law (e.g. leveraged finance). The magic circle have struggled to dent these longstanding relationships or differentiate their practices from US law firms when it comes to high ticket deals. Some have done better in niche areas, such as Clyde & Co's insurance practice, but in corporate and finance the New York elite reigns. US law firms also have the benefit of the world’s most litigious market. For many law firms, litigation contributes as much as 50% to total revenue. Kirkland & Ellis, for example, has not only stormed the London market in private equity, but it also happens to be the world's biggest litigation firm. The global financial crisis also led to a boom in regulatory and investigations work, which meant huge increases in revenue for many US law firms. UK law firms don't have this opportunity. Litigation-derived revenue is far smaller. Although, some law firms, like Freshfields, have tried to enter the US market by focusing on regulatory and investigations work. The remuneration system for UK law firms is another big challenge. Most operate on a lockstep model, where partners are paid according to their seniority at the law firm. This limits their ability to adjust their pay and therefore attract high performing partners in US. And, even if they tweak their lockstep system, which they have been trying to do, they risk unsettling their existing partners. The top UK law firms also generate far less profits per equity partner (PEP) compared to the New York elite. PEP is a metric that matters when you are looking to attract star partners. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
US vs UK Legal Market
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…