Deal lawyers set to AIM slightly less low in 2010
Ask a corporate partner specialising in work on London's Alternative Investment Market (AIM) to describe 2009 and "horrendous" and "not a good year" are some of the milder descriptions you're likely to hear. Looking at the statistics it is easy to see why, as the market saw a dismal tally of just 36 admissions, with the number of initial public offerings (IPOs) barely scraping double digits at just 13.
January 27, 2010 at 05:40 AM
4 minute read
Is the three-year slump on London's once-feted junior market near an end?
Ask a corporate partner specialising in work on London's Alternative Investment Market (AIM) to describe 2009 and "horrendous" and "not a good year" are some of the milder descriptions you're likely to hear. Looking at the statistics it is easy to see why, as the market saw a dismal tally of just 36 admissions, with the number of initial public offerings (IPOs) barely scraping double digits at just 13.
From that base, staging any kind of comeback is going to be fairly easy but, even allowing for such a poor comparison, advisers – both legal and financial – are more positive about 2010. This is just as well – given that the once white-hot AIM hit its slump months before the onset of the credit crunch in 2007, a recovery can't come soon enough for AIM advisers. Although the market has yet to see a flotation so far this year, following a 12-month period that saw the market virtually closed to IPOs, partners report that there are now junior companies queuing up to try and list, with some firms claiming to be at least four or five times as busy with potential new offerings than they were this time last year.
Given the total number of deals in 2009, any predicted increase is hardly likely to equate to a massive uptick in dealflow for those firms best known for AIM work, such as Pinsent Masons, LG and DLA Piper, but it will clearly make it easier for lawyers to fill their days. This will perhaps avoid the need for further firms to follow Hammonds' symbolic decision in early 2009 to offer bargain-basement de-listings from the market for a flat fee of just £5,000.
In particular there is an expectation that, given the problems the private equity sector has seen over the last year or so, there could be a spate of new AIM activity coming through buyout houses trying to exit parts of their portfolio on the market, rather than through trade sales. As LG corporate partner Tom Nicholls says: "There's certainly greater confidence, but we've yet to see any flow of IPOs coming through. There's anticipation that there will be some private equity players looking for an exit and the resources sector is likely to be strong."
And while it could take several months for many of the potential floats to come off, there is both consolidation and additional fundraising activity keeping people busy in the meantime. Indeed, even though 2009 was the worst year for admissions since 1995 and a flurry of de-listings helped take the total number of companies on the market down to 1,293 – the lowest level since 2004 – the total amount of money raised was up on 2008, as companies moved to take advantage of the rebound in equity valuations. Some £5.5bn was raised on the market in 2009, with all bar £740m coming through further fundraisings.
Even allowing for further de-listings from AIM and for concerns about new and reduced standard listing options for the main London Stock Exchange making junior markets such as AIM less attractive, there is a general consensus that the market will have better fortune this year.
David Stevenson, Pinsents corporate finance partner, believes: "We will see an incremental increase in activity. It's a function of pent-up demand caused by new issues put on ice during the economic crisis and will be accentuated by private equity houses now having an appetite for considering exits on AIM."
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
© 2025 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 AllInternational Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute read'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Capital Markets Partner Rejoins O’Melveny Ahead of Expected Uptick in Demand
- 2Pharma Company Faces Breach-of-Contract Claim Over $1.3 Million in Unpaid Invoices
- 3KPMG Law Seeks Alternative Business License, Shaking Up Legal Status Quo
- 4Pittsburgh's Reed Smith, K&L Gates Join Fight to Save Nippon Steel-U.S. Steel Merger
- 5Milbank, Wachtell, Ropes and Pittsburgh Duo Aim to Save Nippon Steel-U.S. Steel Merger
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