Sentences with phrase «profits per partner for»

A few months back, 19 Am Law 100 law firms celebrated $ 2 million profits per partner for 2007.

Coupling a small bump in gross revenue with diligent cost - cutting efforts, Holland & Knight enjoyed a double - digit increase in profits per partner for the second straight year in 2011, according to The American Lawyer's reporting.

Not exact matches

«We have seen the arrival of the world's first # 1bn law firm, Clifford Chance, and Pinsent Mason's astonishing 71 per cent increase in profits per equity partner (the all important benchmark for law firm performance).»

Bond Dickinson's average profit per equity partner (PEP) has dropped 4 % from # 275,000 to # 265,000, as turnover remained flat at # 104m for 2016 - 17.

Travers Smith has reported revenue growth of 13 % and an increase in profit per equity partner (PEP) of 8 % for the year ended 30 June 2016.

As for «profits per partner,» the metric that matters most to firms, nineteen firms had profits per partner of $ 2 million or more, an increase of four over last year.

The profits - per - partner numbers for Canada's big firms are not widely available in the same way as those of Americans (AmLaw 200) and U.K. (U.K. 200) lawyers, and — so I've been told — are not as high.

Watson Farley & Williams and Holman Fenwick Willian have posted rising profit per equity partner (PEP) figures for 2016 - 17, while insurance rival Kennedys has seen PEP dip after a sustained period of international expansion.

Law firms also closed ranks and upped the requirements for partnership (especially after the American Lawyer started openly publishing profits - per - partner numbers in 1985.)

This will come at a particularly bad time for law firms, which are getting very strong signals from corporate clients that they're tired of underwriting the latest record profit - per - partner numbers.

Macfarlanes defied the depressed UK and European markets this year to record its second set of strong financial results in a row, with revenue up by 11.6 % and profits per equity partner (PEP) increasing by 9.5 % for 2012 - 13.

It reached turnover of # 1.303 bn for 2011 - 12, and saw profit per equity partner (PEP) rise 7 % to # 1.078 m.

Profits per partner, after dropping consecutively for three years, rose 2.7 % in 2016 to $ 2.115 m (# 1.69 m).

Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) has announced a 2.5 % drop in profit per equity partner (PEP) for 2016 - 17, alongside a 10.6 % rise in revenue.

Back then, the firm had just come off a banner year, with profits per partner of $ 2.9 million for 2006, double the figure from 2002.

Taylor Wessing's UK arm boosted its profit per equity partner (PEP) by 17 % over the last financial year, its results for 2014 - 15 show.

Still, with global firms bringing in billions in revenue and profits per partner at the top 10 firms all well over $ 2 million, it is hard to offer them much sympathy for having had to weather the downturn.

«On a macro level, the news is good for these firms: Revenue was up year - over-year by 7 %, revenue per lawyer by 9 %, and profits per partner by 11 %.

But for MacEwen, asking whether $ 160,000 is too high a salary is the wrong question; the ratio of associate salaries to PPP (profits per partner) also matters.

The firm is yet to provide profit figures for the past financial year, and last year declined to provide a figure for profit per equity partner.

Profit per equity partner for the sub-unit equals its profit divided by the notional number of equity partners attributable to the subProfit per equity partner for the sub-unit equals its profit divided by the notional number of equity partners attributable to the subprofit divided by the notional number of equity partners attributable to the sub-unit.

According to a report by the Georgetown Law Center for the Study of the Legal Profession, U.S. law firms saw revenue and profits per equity partner grow at staggering rates of 37.5 percent and 25.6 percent respectively.

Using the profit per partner metric allows comparing the relative contribution to the firm's profits per equity partner of, for example, a low - margin practice area having high associate leverage and a high - margin, partner - intensive practice area.

If you follow the legal media, one of the biggest stories so far this year was when the major law firm, Dentons, announced it was no longer reporting average profits per equity partner, saying that it was a meaningless statistic for a firm that operates in so many global jurisdictions.

Maister's Formula for Profitability, which has been influential in shaping law firms» profitability strategies, provides insight into the variables that can be leveraged to keep profits per partner high.

Profits per partner at Cadwalader rose to $ 2.4 m (# 1.5 m) for 2009, while revenue per lawyer climbed by 3 % to almost $ 1m (# 614,000).

Ever since large law firm salaries for new associates jumped to $ 160,000 back in January, we've heard commentary from a variety of constituencies, ranging from (see this post) law firm recruiters, warning that increased billables will place more pressure on associates, to lawyers, arguing that increased salaries demand concommitant salary raises for the judiciary, to (see this post) law firm economists, suggesting that associate salaries are proportionately lower than ever when viewed in the context of their relationship to profits per partner, to law firm marketers who view increased rates as opening opportunities for less expensive, midsized firms.

RPC has posted a 12.4 % drop in profit per equity partner (PEP) for 2016 - 17 after a year in which the firm expanded its all - equity partnership and invested in new business lines.

Reed Smith has posted a 7 % rise in global revenue for 2014, while average profits per equity partner (PEP) have increased by 6 %.

His extended note begins, «A possible explanation for the lower profits per partner in the U.K. is that clients in the U.K. are more sophisticated, demanding, less willing to pay high rates, and more insistent on budgets... If U.K. companies spend less proportionally on legal fees, there's less money to go round...»

LG has posted a 26 % drop in profits per equity partner (PEP) for 2011 - 12, with revenue also fallng for a second consecutive year.

Lawrence Graham has posted a 7 % fall in revenue for the 2012 - 13 financial year, while profits per equity partner (PEP) dropped 14 %.

Now, brace yourself for Henderson's highly counterintuitive findings: In his opinion, firms that have switched to two - tier structures that allow so - called «nonequity» partnerships are actually producing lower profits per partner (PPP) and have lower prestige.

The firm posted a 2.2 % increase fee income to reach # 94m for the 2010 - 11 financial year, while profits per equity partner (PEP) rose 7 % to # 510,000.

DAC Beachcroft has posted rising turnover and profitability for the 2016 - 17 financial year, with profit per equity partner (PEP) rising to a new record high.

Macfarlanes has posted a 16.7 % fall in profit per equity partner (PEP) in the last financial year as net profit for the firm fell 8.9 %.

When firms are laying off associates to stay afloat (or, for the more cynical, to preserve profits per partner), will they still care about associate happiness — or be grateful to see associates leave voluntarily to spare themselves the negative publicity of announcing mass terminations?

Specialist litigation firm Stewarts Law has posted a 30 % jump in average profit per equity partner (PEP) to # 2m for the 2016 - 17 year.

Ashurst has announced an 11.5 % profit per equity partner (PEP) hike to # 672,000 for 2016 - 17, marking a rebound for the firm after a difficult 2015 - 16 when PEP plummeted by almost 20 % and revenue fell 10 %.

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld has posted a double - digit increase in profits per partner (PEP) for 2017, with the metric rising 13.5 % to $ 2.4 m after another strong year for lobbying and dealmaking.

Average profits per equity partner at Maclays now stands at # 315,000 - a 15 % increase on the # 275,000 recorded last year, when the firm released its full annual results for the first time.

The City firm took in fee income of # 57.5 m for the last financial year, broadly in line with the 2011 - 12 figure of # 57.6 m, while profits per equity partner (PEP) fell 3 % from # 303,000 to # 293,000.

The Foundation has also argued that Reed Smith's fealty global clients and PPP (profits per partner) lead the firm to charge more than what is appropriate for a smaller client which lacks financial resources.

Berrymans Lace Mawer has posted a 4 % increase in revenue for 2012 - 13 while seeing profits per equity partner (PEP) dip by 13 %.

Simmons & Simmons has posted a 10 % drop in profit per equity partner (PEP) for the 2015 - 16 financial year to # 585,000, as the firms costs rose «significantly».

Dentons has opted to stop reporting average profits per equity partner, citing the metric as «meaningless» for a global firm, and claiming it could be potentially damaging to client relations.

Tarbert is leaving A&O after a strong 2016 - 17 for the magic circle firm, which this July posted a 26 % increase in profit per equity partner to # 1.51 m, while revenue rose 16 % to # 1.52 bn.

Watson Farley & Williams has strengthened its London office with the addition of two partners from US law firms, in the wake of a strong 2016 - 17 for the firm which is expected to result in profit per equity partner (PEP) rising by at least 25 %.

Olswang and pre-merger Berrymans Lace Mawer have each grown their revenues for 2013 - 14, with profits per equity partner (PEP) at the former expected to dip by nearly 4 %.

Ashurst has posted falling revenue and profit per equity partner (PEP) for the second year running, with PEP falling to an 11 - year low.