Commentary: Losing AIM - three years of market boom has come to an end
Barely into 2007 and already it seems a long time since the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) was somewhere everyone wanted to be. Yet only a few months back, London's junior market was booming, driven by high investor confidence and the queue of foreign companies waiting to list. As such, a sector once derided by bluechip advisers was being actively courted by the likes of Norton Rose and Ashurst, not to mention US players such as O'Melveny & Myers and Hunton & Williams.
February 21, 2007 at 09:19 PM
4 minute read
But there are reasons to believe AIM will still be rewarding those who keep the faith
Barely into 2007 and already it seems a long time since the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) was somewhere everyone wanted to be. Yet only a few months back, London's junior market was booming, driven by high investor confidence and the queue of foreign companies waiting to list. As such, a sector once derided by bluechip advisers was being actively courted by the likes of Norton Rose and Ashurst, not to mention US players such as O'Melveny & Myers and Hunton & Williams.
However, the twin shadows of market indigestion and the long-simmering concerns regarding the quality of some of the companies floating have finally called a halt to the AIM express.
Perhaps in retrospect lawyers should have spotted the high watermark of the bluechip-to-the-bone Linklaters advising copper mining group Nikanor on a $1.5bn (£770m) AIM listing in July 2006, with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, no less, acting for JP Morgan Cazenove. It may have been the highest-ever AIM valuation but it also pretty much marked the end of the current head of steam that has driven the market the last three years.
Of course, newspaper headlines regarding the current Serious Fraud Office and the London Stock Exchange (LSE) investigations into AIM-listed software provider Torex Retail have also taken their toll, though regulatory concerns had been brewing for months.
Little wonder that the lawyers that have in recent years been mining AIM's rich seam are being very cagey when asked how they currently fill their days. The more candid concede the poor state of the market after what was dubbed a 'disastrous' fourth quarter in 2006. And current indications are that the market is not going to be recovering until well after the spring at best.
Goodbye, abort fees
Still, as bad as it looks, there are a number of reasons to believe that the market will come good for those advisers that are really committed to the sector. For a start, there is still no shortage of companies wanting to float and the more bearish investor sentiment has still left the market open to the more credible end, cutting out more of the deadwood, cash shells and dodgy foreign-listers.
Likewise, the current slowdown looks more dramatic because of the substantial expansion of AIM in recent years. There were 14 floats in January, against the 21 managed in the booming January 2006 and last year as a whole is still a record year in terms of capital raised.
In addition, advisers are currently pushing to cut back the use of abort fees and tough discounts that were a regular feature of the boom time because of the sheer number of advisers vying for a piece of the action. This goes double when dealing with the smaller companies that are most likely to struggle to raise capital. AIM firms with decent mid and upper-market corporate coverage are also able to nudge some of the larger clients on their books towards a full listing.
The current betting is that AIM will remain a highly significant market for City lawyers, particularly since its main international rival, Nasdaq, is regarded to have made a hash of its protracted LSE bid. But advisers will have to ride out a not-inconsiderable period of "necessary correction", as one glum lawyer last week dubbed it. "We are paying the price for the number of deals done in 2005 for companies of questionable quality," says another. "It is a vicious circle – people are talking themselves into it."
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'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute read'Never Been More Dynamic': US Law Firm Leaders Reflect on 2024 and Expectations Next Year
7 minute readTrending 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