Mayer Brown seeks to grow London through hires
Mayer Brown London senior partner Sean Connolly claims that “a merger isn’t plan A” for his firm after formal talks with Simmons & Simmons broke down.
Sean Connolly
The firm’s executive partner, Jeremy Clay, said the firm had been approached by Simmons and, despite its attitude towards a merger, agreed to talk with the firm. “There are a lot of UK firms looking to do deals. Most don’t get past the first phone call, but Simmons did because it’s a good firm.”
Clay and Connolly said Mayer Brown is “not looking for a big deal” and is focusing instead on “growing out London” through hires into finance and corporate, as well as targeting expansion in New York and China.
However, a source close to the situation disputed that the initial contact was made by Simmons.”The initial approach came from Mayer Brown to Simmons. Simmons was open to the idea, [but] it’s not the product of a merger itself. [It doesn’t have a] merged mentality.”
While management of the two firms were thought to have been attracted by practice and client synergies, stumbling blocks are thought to have included geographies and the £200,000 divergence in average profit per equity partner (PEP) between the two firms.
Readers' comments (2)
Anonymous | 5-Jul-2010 2:22 pm
Clay and Connolly aren't looking for a 'big deal' for two reasons:
Firstly no firm, with even a modicum of intelligence, would consider striking a deal with Mayer Brown.
Secondly, they know that the firm's decision makers (in Chicago) would never sanction a deal that would bolster London.
Plan A, what plan? The firm is out of options seeing they have no chance of hiring talent, who would want to work for Mayer Brown?!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jul-2010 6:16 pm
This is simply MB trying to get ahead of the PR game following the collapse of talks. MB is already scraping the bottom of the barrell when it comes to laterals. No doubt some (such as William Charnley) have done ok, but most of their finance partners have struggled since coming across and have little or no work. Many have come and gone within two years of starting. Their well known problems (management, culture, the Maher soap opera, the long list of departing partners, the huge real estate expense in London and various litigation claims against the firm) would make any lawyer with a book of business think twice before moving there.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment