Speechly Bircham and Charles Russell in merger talks to create £126m firm

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Readers' comments (5)

  • Another sign of the consolidation happening in the market, though Withers would have been a better fit than CR.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Not sure I agree with you, Pesto. If I remember correctly, Withers' PEP was considerably higher than SB's. My impression from past dealings with people at all three firms is that Withers can be a bit up themselves whereas that generally is not the case at SB or CR. I hope this goes through. Would appear to make a lot of sense.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Who is next? Addleshaws? Nabarro? Simmons? Other?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This seems like a prudent move by both firms on the surface of it but the proof will be in the way it is communicated to partners and the integration.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is often said that combining two firms with declining profitability won't create one healthy firm. Why merge with another firm in exactly the same space which doesn't really add anything in terms of services? Clients follow indivduals and departures follow mergers just as night follows day. What is left is some of the clients and some of the partners plus higher overheads (which of course will be reduced by disruptive office moves and morale-sapping redundancies) but nothing better in terms of long term offering accompanied by the same vain search for increased profitability. This smacks of desparation with no clear vision of the future.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (5)