There is no doubt that US firms are doing extraordinarily well over the last decade as a result of the PE boom. I think the PE boom isn’t going to end in the near term however, when that ends things are going to be ugly for US firms because all they have all their eggs in one basket but are not otherwise diversified sufficiently to withstand any economic downturn.

I’ve seen a strong push by US firms to build their competition, IP and restructuring/insolvency offerings. With the exception of K&E and L&W I honestly can’t think of a US firm that has succeeded in the fields mentioned.

Trainees/junior associates tend to believe that pay alone determines the prestige and market standing of a firm. This is bollocks, and reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal market. Time will prove them wrong.

Last but not least, if asked whether MC firms would lose their relevance in the near future, the answer would be a solid no. US firms can whisk away avaricious MC associates but the spirit of MC firms is what will continue the English legacy.

I’ve*
But obviously that was deliberate, right? Because if your partner caught you making those mistakes… it’s game over😬

While you were still secondary school, some of us were in the real world during the last big recession. The market was awash of junior lawyers desperate having been made redundant. I recall very clearly real estate, corporate lawyer being let go from every firm around the country.

Granted under-performing senior associate’s were too! With the huge wages at the junior end they are less profitable and more disposable then they have ever been. You really thing firms won’t be ruthless if they have to be?

On the other hand employment, litigation and insolvency lawyers will be quids in!

Economic nationalism / protectionism is the only answer. The Magic Circle will be gone in a decade.

Throw out the US firms, force foreign law firms to employ only UK qualified lawyers.

Clueless.

If a recession hits then M&A, real estate etc. doesn’t grind to a halt. Distressed acquisitions and group restructurings become commonplace, litigation increases.

Firms may reduce their trainee intake and retention rates may drop to around 70%. The greatest sufferers are not going to be NQs but probably senior associates and support staff, though the latter has decreased over the last few years due to working patterns anyway.

I think it’s (trying to) making the following points:
1. US firms are slowly taking over London
2. While U.S. forms expand in London, the magic circle has tried to break into the U.S. FBD + A&O have done better than say LL and CC but at the cost of potentially alienating their fee earners in London. Why? Because they pay Cravath in the U.S. and not near U.S. in London. Especially A&O.
3. In order to achieve point 1, the UK firms have had to change their remuneration structure, no longer lockstep (ie seniority) but instead, eat what you kill centric. This is good because it’s a “better business model” which resembles US power houses, but the question becomes: why do UK firms exist then if they copy American firms?
4. Finally, if the MC wants to regain and retain its notoriety depending on how you look at out, they must watch out not to lose the British mindset which is often seen as more collegial and for lack of a better word, gentlemanly.

Honestly, if you ask me, the MC is in a decline, it’s too bloated and I think that theyll slowly become like DLA Piper. If not, they’ll kill themselves or ruin their upcoming trainee cohorts by not posting London market rate and instead kamikazying into the US market….

This is spectacular compared to what Legal Cheek usually put out….

If you think this is boring you might want to rethink a career in law – it’s not exactly exciting generally and certainly more boring day to day than reading this article.