Categories:UK

DWF reports 84 per cent growth to £188m

  • Print
  • Comments (19)

Readers' comments (19)

  • Turnover up 84%
    Net profit up 41%
    Profit per partner up 4%

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • turnover up 84%. Wow.
    net profit up up 41.3%. Wow.

    PEP up, erm, 4% to £429k. So the partners go a bit of above an inflationary pay rise.

    Wonder how much of that increase in profit/PEP came from increase in WIP and therefore accrued income year on year?

    Bet the silver circle boys are really worried.....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Net margin down from a worrying 14.2% to a frightening 10.9%.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • An extra £86 million in turnover gives each partner an extra £17,000 in income. So, on this basis, if they want an extra £170,000 each, they've got to increase turnover by £860 million.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Wow! 84%. Stunning. Well done to all those involved.

    I note the grumbles about the PEP, but isn't this expected? Don't shareholders usually wait until the growth to stabilise until before they take huge dividends?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • DWF marketing/ social media team are pretty slow off the mark today. Not a single post (yet) dismissing the neysayers as jealous....

    Probably too busy giving Gerard Starkey at legal week a nice little exclusive briefing in more detail about their expansion plans as they "refuse to stand still".....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Andrew Leaitherland is a genius. He's taken a small firm into the big time. With success, come the critics.

    I'd be interested to see how much turnover has risen in the Newcastle office (since they corrected the mistake of appointing John Flynn as office manager).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous @ 1:19: You jinxed it, now they're everywhere (1:22 and 1:11)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How much money have the partners had to put in to fund the growth? Is all of that worry worth 17k especially as those numbers will likely fall back next year but the firm's capital requirements will stay the same or possibly increase.
    Frightening stuff.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous at 1.11 needs to learn the difference between profit and drawings.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anon 2:01

    Read comment 1.22 again. I hardly think DWF's marketing team are going to want to highlight DWF's biggest management blunder of the last five years!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The comments regarding margin and profit are interesting, but this is on the face of it a good performance. Job losses are to be expected after consolidation and will be only one of the integration challanges faced.

    Would be interesting to know how the 84% growth is broken down - is it just the sum total of all of the individual firms being counted as one, rather than sepeately? - or - has the combined firm increased turnover, with the sum total being more than the individual parts?

    Will be interesting to see how the next year develops and how successful the integration is. Good luck to them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Yet another law firm, not "getting it" , nor having a proper handle on the crucial numbers. Turnover for vanity, profits for..... The margins , are tight to put it mildly. They are only going to get worse, by reason of the fact DWF, have a large "churn em and burn em" defendant PI practice. Awful rates, made worse by the MOJ reforms , which will result in them being instructed to defend, possibly as much as 50% less litigated cases, than they were before, given Portal Increases and the likely increase in the small claims court threshold. Moreover , with such thin margins, all it takes is for a profitable team(s) within the firm to go to leave and join a PROPER top 20 firm, for those margins then beginning to look more worryingly than one can possibly imagine. Once all these mergers have bedded down, and the full acquisition cost been made known in H1 of their next years accounts, you can be assured that these figures will fall, ( that is the figures that matter) And Mr Leitherland the figure is "GENUINE PROFIT" These acquisitions are funded by a large and ever growing tranche of debt. Given the cultural sensitivities in all these mergers, egos, and equity being held tightly, there will be teams leaving in droves in the next 12/24 months, of that you can be rest assured!
    In closing all that increase in turnover is almost certainly merger derived and not organic. Anyone can do that. As the poster above quite properly said, all that hassle for an extra £17,000 extra per EP! Mr Leaitherland is a genius... I doubt it , however time will tell. Now watch out DLA, DWF, are coming at ya! (reverse take over!)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I always assumed that when the numbers went up, that was good.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In response to Anon's post at 5.01. Not necessarily , the numbers need to be considered in context! When debt grows is that good!?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Gray going straight from Eversheds to DWF must have gone down really well with Eversheds senior partner Brian Hughes. Hee hee.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Normally, when there's been a merger, you do like-like figures.

    Anyone want to gather up Cobbetts, Biggart Baillie and Fishburns results from last year and add them onto that £102m and £14.5m so the comparison is like-like?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • According to the figures here: http://www.thelawyer.com/news-and-analysis/market-analysis/analysis-on-dwf-self-assembly-or-the-diy-law-firm/3001962.article £188 million represents no non-merger growth at all.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Have the trainee retention figures for DWF (and I guess Cobbetts) been published?

    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 (19)