CMS Eversheds flirt alert
At the end of last week an excellent new rumour hit town: that Eversheds and CMS Cameron McKenna were in merger talks to create a £580m firm.
Given the rate of consolidation in the legal market, the idea seemed eerily plausible, particularly after the Clyde & Co-Barlow Lyde & Gilbert and Beachcroft-Davies Arnold Cooper announcements last month.
I am duty-bound to say that the story is better described as a dollop of projection with a sprinkling of wish fulfilment on top. For there are sort-of denials from both firms. As in: No, we’re not in proper merger talks, but in this crazy world who knows what might happen? One source describes the encounter as “a bit of a showing of ankles”.
Despite another managing partner unkindly calling it “two drunks propping each other up at the bar”, CMS Eversheds is an arresting idea. The kneejerk derision that they attract from certain sections of the legal market is often unfair. It doesn’t help that both firms’ reputations as nice places to work have been damaged - in Eversheds’ case, over its handling of redundancies, and in Camerons’ case, over the deal with back-office outsourcer Integreon; much as Allen & Overy’s was when it announced it was moving functions to Belfast. (Memo to managing partners: legal folk memory lasts longer than you think.)
It’s easy for certain City types to jeer at the firms, but both have shown more strategic imagination than, say, Travers Smith or Macfarlanes.
Now that Eversheds has integrated its volume business into the firm and undergone a painful recovery period, it is considering US and City mergers. It has always wanted a City merger, so nothing new there; but with PEP at £555,000 and a client satisfaction rate that ought to be the envy of its rivals, it has never been so well-placed.
Camerons is more focused on international expansion, but it’s well-known that its German colleagues are agitating for more heft in London. However, it’s not just Camerons that Eversheds would have to woo, but the entire CMS network, which makes the proposition infinitely trickier.
So, Camerons and Eversheds: not quite dating, but definitely up for a dance. Time to dim the lights.
catrin.griffiths@thelawyer.com; www.twitter.com/lawyercatrin
Readers' comments (14)
Anonymous | 4-Jul-2011 11:37 am
A CMS/Eversheds merger would actually be a great move for both firms and would give them far greater resources for expansion outside of Europe.
It is also pointlessly duplicative for each to fund the development of separate global office networks.
A merged firm would of course also be in a far stronger position to negotiate mergers with other firms in due course.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jelly Roll | 4-Jul-2011 12:18 pm
It looks to me like Eversheds is on the up and Camerons is on the way down., so it sounds like a good deal all round.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
oops | 4-Jul-2011 2:10 pm
Judging by the way that Cameron McKenna has treated its support staff over the last couple of years I would say 'dollop' is defintely the right word to use when describing anything to do with them.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Beat of the Brum | 4-Jul-2011 2:33 pm
If the Olympic Stadium comes up for grabs, may be Cameron McKenna could relocate there. Seems to be the perfect home for any team that thought they were premiership quality but ended up failing under new management,
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ironytastic | 4-Jul-2011 2:35 pm
Anyone finding it ironic that on Independence Day we're talking about Cameron McKenna sounding like they might lose theirs? Actually, thinking about how they've been run recently, no.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Neutral Corner | 4-Jul-2011 10:50 pm
CMS Eversheds? Aaargh.
You can tell this is an Eversheds work of fiction, or Cat at her most kittenish. If it were from Camerons, it would be the equally delusional CMS Ashurst, or something like that.
Mergers are the last resort of the strategically bankrupt, the final throw of the dice for vain managing partners looking to leave a legacy. The longed-for magic dust does not make quality out of quantity.
Or maybe it’s a brilliantly Macchiavellian strategy to make CMcK partners realise how lush the grass is on their side of the fence: "Cough up yer £70k with a smile, boys and girls - it's a price worth paying to stave off merger."
Cat knows - we ALL know - that Delphic denials from the firms to to the meeja are designed to be identical whether denying a false or true rumour. So move along, nothing to see here. I thought crowbarring the beloved Norton Rose into last week's headline about the global elite was dubious journalism; this week's editorial proves the silly season is in full swing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jul-2011 4:23 am
Nevermind the possibility of a CMS - Eversheds merger, what about the chances of a Dickinson Dees - Shoosmiths link up?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jul-2011 4:21 pm
I think CMS have missed the boat on this one. I don't work in London so don't know too closely the work that CMS does, but I think that Eversheds is now working at a higher level. Look at Superbrands for a start, and also some of the deals that Eversheds do in the regions - we are not talking pocket change.
Eversheds are never going to be doing Slaughter & May type work, but I honestly think that if Eversheds do accept a City merger it will be with Clifford Chance. That is the closest match in my view.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Cilla White | 6-Jul-2011 5:17 pm
Bit of a theme going on here -
BarlowClydeGilbertDACBeachcroftEvershedCameronMegaLawLLP
coming to a city near you.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 7-Jul-2011 2:15 pm
Hilarious
"I honestly think if Eversheds do accept a City merger it will be with Clifford Chance"
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
OcockOff LLP | 8-Jul-2011 3:47 pm
Heh. Excellent work @ anonymous 4:21!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Haha CC/Eversheds | 11-Jul-2011 8:33 pm
Eversheds "accept" a merger with CC. What planet are you living on that you would imply such an offer would ever be on a table for The Shed to accept. I don't have any affiliation to, or love for, CC but come on! What a crock of...
Wonder where u work - 'The Shed in the clouds'??
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Jul-2011 3:34 pm
I've read the above with interest and surprise.
I would have thought it was obvious - if Clifford Chance were to want to merge with a UK law firm it would choose Dickinson Dees LLP.
After all, Dickinson Dees LLP likes to tell people that they are the "Clifford Chance of the North". They also have well regarded Stockton and York offices which could boost Clifford Chance's profitability.
Seriously, who else would get a look in?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Jul-2011 8:58 pm
It would be interesting to see how the cultures of Dickinson Dees and Clifford Chance would inter-act following a merger.
For example, in Dickinson Dees it is permissible for staff to bring pets such as dogs into the office. Whereas at Clifford Chance such behaviour is frowned upon.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment