Billing Rate Gap Widens as Big Firms Demand Ever-Higher Premiums
When it comes to hourly billing rates, the largest firms have pulled even farther ahead.
February 27, 2018 at 02:12 PM
4 minute read
Bigger may not always be better, but there's no denying that partners at bigger law firms are able to get away with ever-higher hourly billing rates compared with their smaller-firm counterparts.
That was one of the takeaways from a report released Tuesday by CounselLink, LexisNexis' legal pricing data service, and it echoes the news from other recent law firm billing rate studies.
CounselLink analyzed 2017 partner billing rates at firms with 750 or more lawyers and compared them with rates at firms with 501 to 750 lawyers. The study found that the gap between the two groups widened by 11 percent over 2016, with the bigger firms now demanding a whopping 45 percent higher rate on average than their less gigantic counterparts.
To reach their conclusions, CounselLink researchers analyzed 2017 data derived from $30 billion in legal spending, including almost 7 million invoices and about 1.7 million legal matters.
Kent Zimmermann, a Chicago-based consultant at Zeughauser Group, wasn't surprised by the findings. “This is further evidence of the benefits of scale,” he said.
➤➤ Want more reporting on the evolving legal industry? Sign up here for The Law Firm Disrupted, a weekly briefing on the trends rocking the legal sector.
Other recent reports have shown that when elite firms hike their published rates, their realization rates increase faster than at firms publishing smaller rate increases.
When hiking rates, big firms have the advantage of momentum, Zimmermann said. “With scale, firms can grow their breadth and depth and quality in less rate-pressured practices and, by doing that, those firms tend to command higher rates than the rest of the pack,” he said.
The phenomenon builds on itself. The larger firms, precisely because they charge higher rates, have access to larger profit pools and may use that money “to spend on highly sought after lawyers” in practices such as M&A and private equity, Zimmermann said.
“Smaller firms generally don't have the resources to get as many as those high-quality, high-rate people,” he said.
Bolstering that thesis, the CounselLink report showed that the larger firms dominated in the M&A area—a practice for which rates rose higher, at more than 4 percent, than for all other practices except corporate, tax and IP.
The larger firms were responsible for 68 percent of the billings generated by M&A transactions, reversing a trend shown in prior years' CounselLink reports that showed such work shifting to the second-largest tier of firms.
For those lawyers who are not at big, often New York-oriented firms, there's some silver lining in the report's finding that rate increases were a bit more widespread geographically in 2017. The report showed that Seattle, Chicago, Los Angeles and Boston all rivaled New York for partner billing rate increases. The Big Apple firms still led the pack, with a 5.7 percent growth rate. But firms in those other cities experienced greater than 4 percent annual growth in their rates. Nationwide, partner rates increased an average of 3 percent, with Minnesota, Georgia, Oregon and California seeing the highest increases on a statewide basis.
In a similar trend, a slighter broader group appeared to be grabbing more client matters, with CounselLink showing that clients' consolidation of their outside law firm had stabilized. According to the report, 60 percent of companies in the data pool have 10 firms or fewer accounting for at least 80 percent of outside counsel fees. In 2016, 62 percent of the surveyed companies were in that camp.
See Also:
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 AllClifford Chance Further Modifies Lockstep to Better Reward Top Performers
2 minute readIt's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
4 minute readBig Tech to Big Law: Is the Compensation Gap Closing?
Trending Stories
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