Aussie firm Slater & Gordon posts turnover rise after acquisitive year
Share
Australia’s Slater & Gordon, the first law firm to float on a stock market, has posted a 21 per cent jump in turnover to Aus$124.7m (£71.8m) for the 2009-10 financial year.
Profit at the firm grew 16 per cent to Aus$19.8m (£11.4m).
The results follow the firm’s Aus$57m acquisition of Queensland personal injury firm Trilby Misso – one of six mergers by the firm this year.
Other acquisitions by Slater & Gordon this year include Melbourne’s Kenyon’s Lawyers; Long Howland and Adams Leyland Lawyers in New South Wales; and McGlades Lawyers and Steward & Noble Lawyers in Victoria.
In May 2007, Slater and Gordon became the first law firm in the world to go public, when it floated on the Australian Stock Exchange with an Aus$35m IPO (21 May 2007).
In the months following the flotation the firm began its acquisition spree, buying up three regional Australian firms in November 2007 (30 November 2007).
In the 2008-09 financial year the firm’s turnover rose 27 per cent while net profit was up 42 per cent (21 August 2008).
Readers' comments (3)
Caveman, of Chancery Lane | 26-Aug-2010 3:20 pm
I don't understand why any law firm would want to float and have to pay dividends to shareholders.
I imagine the process involved some investment banking snake oil saleman convincing a bunch of lawyers, who thought they were incredibly commercially savvy and forward-thinking, that it was worth forever paying out a share of their profits in exchange for a short-term boost from the capital injection from the float.
Maybe they'd also be interested in building a monorail?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Deborah Meaden | 27-Aug-2010 10:06 am
I fully understand that partners at the major UK firms actually capable of flotation want to hoard all profits for themselves, but the reluctance to float is plain contumacy fueled by injudicious greed. I would rather float than merge with a US firm as global exposure would enhance without having to infiltrate a foreign culture into the business. The general public still think that law is a cash cow, and would happily throw their money at a firm with robust accounts.
If Slater & Gordon's net profitability has risen 42%, then imagine what a major UK firm could do with the extra capital input. Partners at pioneering floated firms could eventually sell their shares at a huge profit and probably get around to retiring at an even younger age with even MORE cash.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Caveman | 27-Aug-2010 1:28 pm
I just looked up 'contumacy' in a dictionary: "stubborn refusal to obey or comply with authority, especially disobedience to a court order or summons"
Not sure if that's what Debs intended to mean.
Those points will all have been made in said iBankers' ever-so-slick powerpoint slides, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a bad idea from the point of view of partners in law firms doing anything other than high volume commoditised work.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment