Editor's comment: Guts, patience, maturity
Everyone has agreed for years that large US law firms should have taken the City by storm. They have the profitability and scale to outmuscle all but a handful of UK practices, strong banking connections and are driven by an impenetrable and huge domestic market. What could possibly go wrong? Quite a lot, as it turned out. US firms have been too unwilling to invest or trust their local lawyers and often greatly overestimated the global power of their brands. Arguably, an even bigger problem has been their sheer naivety about the City legal market, which has led to a series of breathtakingly daft senior recruitment decisions.
June 16, 2010 at 04:34 AM
3 minute read
What US firms need to cut it in the Square Mile
Everyone has agreed for years that large US law firms should have taken the City by storm. They have the profitability and scale to outmuscle all but a handful of UK practices, strong banking connections and are driven by an impenetrable and huge domestic market. What could possibly go wrong? Quite a lot, as it turned out.
US firms have been too unwilling to invest or trust their local lawyers and often greatly overestimated the global power of their brands. Arguably, an even bigger problem has been their sheer naivety about the City legal market, which has led to a series of breathtakingly daft senior recruitment decisions.
In truth, since 2002-04, which was an almost universally tough period for major City law firms, US rivals have struggled to stay in the game. With a few notable exceptions, American firms have been largely either too conservative to marshal a major assault on the City or not profitable enough to keep up with resurgent UK rivals.
Which brings us to 2010, a year that in many ways looks the most promising for US firms in London for nearly a decade. They have the benefit of UK growth eked out painfully over the years, strong relative profitability thanks to less cyclical practices and the dollar's revival in their favour. And they are facing City rivals that are generally unsettled.
The key question asked in our annual international firms in London feature is: will they seize their moment? In most cases, I suspect not. Cracking London takes a lot more than money. It requires a very particular and delicate mixture of characteristics that US firms have displayed only sporadically.
First up, you need the guts to make substantial investments – not something that comes naturally to the breed. At least as important is the patience required to break any competitive market and a long-term plan that accepts there will be some reverses along the way. Many firms have managed a year or two of dramatic expansion only to fall back – but no-one ever cracked London in that kind of timeframe.
The final quality is maturity, both of the practice and in local knowledge. For US firms that means understanding that developing and retaining talent from associate to partner is crucial to long-term success. Too often US firms have focused on senior partner recruitment, as if you can simply assemble a business like a jigsaw rather than seeking to build something organically.
But City firms would be wrong to be too complacent. By trial, error and stubborn pride, considerable progress has been made over the last decade and lessons have been learned by the most committed. For a very select few, those grandiose international ambitions are starting to sound rather less fanciful and altogether more credible.
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 AllBig Law Sidelined as Asian IPOs in New York Dominated by Small Cap Listings
Workload and Getting It All Done Top Challenges for In-house Counsel: Survey
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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