North East firm Dickinson Dees and South West firm Bond Pearce are discussing a potential merger which would catapult the combined firm into the UK’s top 40.
The firms confirmed the talks today. The news comes six months after Bond Pearce ended merger discussions with Scottish firm Maclay Murray & Spens (14 March 2012), citing commercial reasons.
In a statement Dickinson Dees’ managing partner Jonathan Blair said: “Our strategies, cultures, sector capabilities and geographic footprints appear to be sufficiently complementary as to warrant consideration of whether, in a rapidly consolidating market, a merger of our two firms would facilitate the execution of their respective strategies.”
“Both Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees have clearly articulated strategies. By merging the two firms we could take a major step towards fulfilling our longer term strategic goals, implementing now a client and values driven merger to create a firm in the top 30 in the UK capable of delivering the strength in depth and specialist skills required by our clients, be they large corporates, major organisations or high net worth individuals. It is that opportunity that we now wish to explore,” added Bond Pearce’s managing partner Victor Tettmar.
Both firms recorded turnover of £46m in 2011-12. Dickinson Dees’ revenue hit £46.1m, a slight increase on the previous year (16 May 2012), with average profit per equity partner (PEP) of £235,000. Bond Pearce’s turnover was £46.5m, also with PEP of £235,000.
The combined firm would have 125 partners and more than 450 lawyers.
Bond Pearce has offices in Aberdeen, Bristol, London, Plymouth and Southampton. Dickinson Dees, meanwhile, has two Newcastle offices and one in the Tees Valley, as well as bases in Leeds and London. It closed down its York office in June last year, transferring all staff to Leeds (29 June 2011).
Blair told The Lawyer that while the firms had agreed not to make further comment, the talks had reached the stage where the firms were building a business case and this was “making sense”. He added that the discussions were still in very early stages and due diligence had not yet begun.
Readers' comments (52)
Anonymous | 12-Sep-2012 4:04 pm
Good on them.
Why should it only be successful firms that get to merge?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Outright monetary transaction | 12-Sep-2012 4:25 pm
These firms should keep in mind that a Matt Le Tissier plus a Paul Gascoigne does not a Messi make.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Sep-2012 4:47 pm
It is bizarre that this has become public before any meaningful due diligence has been conducted. Is neither firm capable of drafting an effective confidentiality agreement? Can't their partners be trusted with commercially sensitive information without blurting it out?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dayglo Dave | 12-Sep-2012 6:00 pm
@Anonymous 12 Sep - 2012 4:47pm
Yours is the most interesting point so far. It is bizarre how it seems many firms accept that they just can't keep these things quiet. I seem to remember that when Coward Chance hooked up with Clifford-Turner all those years ago they cooked up some story about the senior partner's secretary being on compassionate leave so she could work full-time on the merger without others in the office suspecting anything. That shows the lengths they went to in those days to keep things under wraps.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Sep-2012 6:35 pm
Anon & Dayglo Dave,
Presumably most firms keep talks quiet because if either firm leaves talks after this announcement, the assumption will be it is because the other has financial problems.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Sep-2012 6:50 pm
The Golden Turd Award from RollonFriday as noted on DD's Wikipedia entry must surely have been a deal clincher for Bond Pearce. Quality outfit!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13-Sep-2012 2:15 am
It is clear what will happen after this merger. REDUNDANCIES!!!!!! Support staff beware. Dickinson Pearce will not need two HR departments, two IT departments, two finance departments and two marketing departments etc etc. They may even cull wayward senior staff such as directors. The only people who will benefit from this merger, as always, will be the partners.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13-Sep-2012 9:46 am
What a shabby outfit. Their reputation for bad mouthing their own people should be enough to send any self respecting merger partner running for cover!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Graham | 13-Sep-2012 10:10 am
I can't see the business case, other than shedding support staff.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
P. Lain-English | 13-Sep-2012 12:10 pm
With such pithy statements from both managing partners, they should get on like a house on fire. They must have been watching re-runs of Yes Minister.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment