Sorry Clients: Higher Law Firm Billing Rates Really Do Pay Off
An analysis by Citi Private Bank's Law Firm Group shows the advantage of aggressively raising published billing rates.
February 21, 2018 at 05:20 PM
2 minute read
Law firms do better when they raise their published billing rates at a faster clip, even if those increases result in a widening gap between published and realized rates, according to a recent analysis by Citi Private Bank's Law Firm Group.
“The analysis we have is how the consistently most successful firms have increased rates versus the broader industry during 2010-17,” explained Gretta Rusanow, head of advisory services for the group.
Top-performing firms increased their rates at an average annual rate of 4.4 percent, compared with an increase of 3.3 percent for the broader sample, Rusanow said in an email. While those top performers saw a wider gap between their published and realized rates, their realized rates nonetheless grew faster than at the other, less aggressively priced firms.
At top-quartile law firms—grouped by Citi based on profitability, contribution per lawyer averages and net income margins—“realized rates grew at an average annual rate of 3.5 percent, compared to 2.8 percent for the broader industry,” Rusanow said.
“The key takeaway,” according to Rusanow: Firms continued to increase published rates while taking deeper discounts. That's how the top echelon of firms “widened their rate advantage.”
The trend persisted in 2017. Citi's most recent survey of law firm performance showed that for the most successful firms, published rates increased 5.6 percent, versus 4.2 percent for the broader sample. At the same time, realization rates increased 5.7 percent for the most successful firms, versus 2.9 percent for the broader sample, Rusanow said.
Billing rates overall have continued a steady climb in recent years, despite pressure from clients insisting on discounts, decreases and other cost savings.
For law firm consultant Janet Stanton of Adam Smith Esq., the Citi analysis confirms that the elites have a built-in advantage.
“This is more of the same,” Stanton said. “There has been a pulling away of firms with a stronger performance. To me it also says something about the greater value of brand strength.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Utterly Bewildering': GCs Struggle to Grasp Scattershot Nature of Law Firm Rate Hikes
Am Law 50's Runaway Rates Put Onus on Legal Departments to Stiffen Resistance
4 minute readSenior Partners Approach $3,000 an Hour, As More Billing Rate Hikes Expected in 2025
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-59
- 2The American Lawyer Names Industry Award Winners
- 3Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
- 4Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 5Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250