The current issue of The Lawyer features the cover
story
, "US top
50’s £23.4bn haul makes 2007 the best year ever."  (That’s
$46.8-billion to us.)  Top-line:

  • Year over year revenue for the 50 largest US-headquartered firms was up
    more than 16%, from $40.27-billion in 2006
  • The average PPP rose 11% from $1.55-million in 2006 to $1.72-million in
    2007
  • The leaders in revenue growth were:
    • DLA Piper, +110% largely by virtue of consolidating its EMEA operations
      with its US operations
    • K&L/Gates, +51.3%, and Reed Smith, +38.2%, helped by mergers
    • Debevoise and Latham, each up 23.5%, on sheer performance
  • The laggards in revenue growth were:
    • WilmerHale, 4.8%
    • Akin Gump, 3.4%
    • Pillsbury, 1.9%
    • Jones Day, flat
    • Holland & Knight, -0.2%
  • Highest PPP:
    • Wachtell, $4.48-million
    • Cravath, $3.30
    • Sullivan & Cromwell, $3.13
    • Simpson Thacher, $2.87
    • Cadwalader, $2.72—notable for also being 49th out of 50th in
      "growth in PPP," at -6.2% [see below]
  • Lowest PPP:
    • Hunton & Williams:  $850-thousand
    • K&L/Gates: $800
    • Fulbright & Jaworski:  $777
    • Jones Day:  $770
    • Holland & Knight:  $699

As always, take all PPP figures with a tablespoon of salt.  "Your
mileage may vary."  That’s why it may be more informative to look
at strongest and weakest PPP growth—at least we can assume (can’t we?)
we’re comparing last year’s apples with this year’s apples.  So:

  • Strongest PPP growth:
    • Baker Botts, +30.0%
    • Debevoise, 27.2%
    • Latham, 22.7%
    • Baker & McKenzie, 21.8%
    • Paul Hastings, 20.0%
  • Weakest PPP growth:
    • Fulbright & Jaworski, +0.9%
    • Jones Day, flat
    • Holland & Knight, -0.1%
    • Cadwalader, -6.2%
    • Akin Gump, -7.0%

Here’s the cover
page
, the second
page
of the article, and the key 50-firm
table.  With
all this information out now, why wait for the AmLaw 100?

I’m also happy to
report that I was able to contribute a few thoughts, including the warning:

"that while the record results were partly down [sic:
due] to increased levels of work across most practices last year, a large
portion of the increase in revenues was driven by rate hikes.

“On the extremely plausible assumption that activity cools this year, additional
rate hikes are essentially the only tool firms have left if they expect to
generate year-on-year revenue growth,” said MacEwen. “One has to question
whether corporate clients will have the stomach for additional rate increases
in this economic environment.”

What’s striking about these results is how fast firms have to run just
to stay in place.  Solid double-digit increases in revenue and profitability
would be the envy of many a corporate CEO.  (And we have enjoyed this
for several years in a row, now.) 

But this year the challenge for these
firms will be avoiding the temptation to stand pat in a worrisome environment.  Challenging
times tend not to re-cement the status quo but rather to make for the emergence
of new leaders.

Related Articles

Email Delivery

Get Our Latest Articles Delivered to your inbox +
X

Sign-up for email

Be the first to learn of Adam Smith, Esq. invitation-only events, surveys, and reports.





Get Our Latest Articles Delivered to Your Inbox

Like having coffee with Adam Smith, Esq. in the morning (coffee not included).

Oops, we need this information
Oops, we need this information
Oops, we need this information

Thanks and a hearty virtual handshake from the team at Adam Smith, Esq.; we’re glad you opted to hear from us.

What you can expect from us:

  • an email whenever we publish a new article;
  • respect and affection for our loyal readers. This means we’ll exercise the strictest discretion with your contact info; we will never release it outside our firm under any circumstances, not for love and not for money. And we ourselves will email you about a new article and only about a new article.

Welcome onboard! If you like what you read, tell your friends, and if you don’t, tell us.

PS: You know where to find us so we invite you to make this a two-way conversation; if you have an idea or suggestion for something you’d like us to discuss, drop it in our inbox. No promises that we’ll write about it, but we will faithfully promise to read your thoughts carefully.