Overview

Last year, when we launched The Lawyer Rising 50, it published the turnover of many firms for the first time. We felt it was appropriate to include in the list only those firms that had volunteered their figures, as this was a new venture for both us and them. Consequently, we left out a significant number of firms that we suspected would otherwise have easily been placed in last year's turnover bracket, which ranged from Birkett Long's £5.7m up to Nelsons' £14.9m.

This year is different for several reasons. First and foremost, once The Lawyer Rising 50 was published last year, we were inundated with firms demanding to know why they had not been included. "That would be because you refused to tell us your figures," we replied. This year they were considerably more forthcoming.

A second group took more prodding, but ultimately the firms were persuaded that acting like a proper grown-up business and discussing revenues and business models in a public and transparent manner was a good way to go. After all, that is what many of their clients do. They too provided figures.

The third group was more of a challenge (and dare we say it, from a journalist's perspective, even more interesting). These firms refused to provide revenue figures. In some cases they also refused headcount figures, despite this being publicly available information. And inevitably, there was also the one firm - although we will not name it - that refused to provide female partner numbers, despite the fact that the numbers are listed on its website.

The figures for these firms have been estimated. The estimates, as with those increasingly rare firms in The Lawyer UK 100 Annual Report that still refuse to report year-end revenues, are based on interviews with numerous sources. These may be directly connected to the firm or not, but in all cases the estimates have been put to the management of the firms in question for comment. Again, as with the UK 100 list and in the interests of fairness, we have not identified those firms that have provided us with figures and those that have not.

Rising higher

The most significant effect of the inclusion of so many more firms in this year's publication is to increase the total monetary value of The Lawyer Ris- ing 50. Last year, the 50 firms generated £476.1m between them. This year, the list is worth £623.4m - an increase of 31 per cent.

The entry-level turnover has also rocketed, from last year's £5.7m to £9.7m - an even more seismic step change of 70 per cent. At the other end of the scale the top firm's turnover has increased by 12 per cent, from £14.9m to £16.8m.

True, the combined total of the 50 firms is less than Clifford Chance on its own, or indeed any of the UK's global four. But size is no guarantee of quality.

In The Rising 50 there are firms with a revenue per partner (RPP) and revenue per lawyer (RPL) considerably higher than many in the UK 100. Silverbeck Rymer and Golds top the RPP table, the former with the staggering figure of £4.1m per partner. But insurance litigation specialists are structured entirely differently from most firms. Look at The Lawyer UK 100, where Sheffield-based litigation specialist Irwin Mitchell pipped Slaughter and May to the top spot with £2.9m RPP, while Slaughters came in with £2.2m.

More typical examples are City corporate finance boutique Rosenblatt and AIM specialist Memery Crystal. The two firms regularly appear on complex, high-value corporate transactions that many far larger firms would be happy to claim. No surprise then that Memery Crystal's RPP, at £600,000, would secure it a spot in the relevant table in the UK 100, alongside bigger rivals such as Mishcon de Reya (£590,000), Finers Stephens Innocent (£607,000) and even Pinsent Masons (a worrying £610,000, but then it was a merger year). And Rosenblatt's barnstorming £909,000 would just miss it a slot in the top 20 - Denton Wilde Sapte held the 20th position this year with an RPP of £917,000. Size, as has long been suggested, is not everything.

Lifestyle

The lawyers who inhabit many of the firms in The Rising 50 are often every bit as talented, able and experienced as any in the global elite or the UK 100. In many cases they used to work there and chose to leave.

These firms are crammed with former City lawyers who bring a depth of expertise and technical know-how to many firms in the regions or smaller outfits in the City. As one regional managing partner says of his firm: "We can offer City lawyers the same spread of work, but more responsibility at an earlier age. Plus it's a more relaxed place to work." Many of these firms offer a major opportunity for lawyers looking to escape the City, but lawyers are only likely to take a probable hit in remuneration by moving to the country if the firms have the right quality of client base to offer similar work to that they would get in the City. Many of these firms do just that. Several also match or even beat their City rivals on average profit per equity partner.

The lawyers in this market often also pride themselves on being closer to their clients than lawyers in larger firms may be. As Manby & Steward chief executive Valerie Bowles puts it: "Businesses in the regions require more than just legal advice. They need hands-on practical help from lawyers who themselves are commercially astute and in tune with the local economy." Lawyers in The Lawyer Rising 50 are often, although not always, able to be more manoeuvrable, entrepreneurial and flexible than their big City cousins. Consequently, they may be more in tune with the needs and issues of their clients than a lawyer at a larger firm.

"If you ask many buyers of legal services what matters to them," says Biggart Baillie's managing partner Derek Ellery, "they'll say it's the individual, the personal relationship. Which means they'll often go to a particular lawyer even if he or she is at a smaller firm." So, the IBM option, ie buying the brand, is not always best.

Costs

Mergers and takeovers between firms may be a more regular occurrence in the Rising 50 bracket, but a firm's size alone does not make it a target, either for predatory larger firms looking for a bolt-on or a struggling firm looking for an escape route. As the managing partner of one single-site outfit puts it: "We'd prefer not to get ourselves into a position where a multi-office firm who may be finding it tough uses us as a catalyst to sort out their problems. Sort out your own issues first then come back and perhaps we'll talk."

As with the UK 100, this is of course an artificial group. The only reason the firms are grouped together in one place is because of their turnover. There are a myriad of other indicators that we could have chosen to create a list and the different business models, client bases and cultures of the firms in this group will number 50.

But with the increased value of the list and the number of new firms that have been added (24) comes the realisation that The Lawyer Rising 50 has defined a market; one that the banks with major professional services teams would recognise immediately. Barclays' professional services team, for example, divides its business banking into three categories: small business (often one-man operations); medium business (£1m to £10m); and large business (the top 100). "The banking needs of the top 100 are far more sophisticated than those in the first category and even some in the second," says Barclays research manager Andy Jobson, "but there are quite a few in the mediumsized category that absolutely fall into the third category in terms of their banking requirements."

Those borrowing needs are determined largely by the strategy of the firm, whether it is planning an aggressive programme of expansion, and its client base. Firms with a significant portion of international work are likely to have more regular conversations with their bank manager and may well have a large number of separate client accounts. It is an attractive group for the increasingly active professional services bankers.

What is clear is that the majority of firms in The Lawyer Rising 50 fit easily into the category of small-to-medium-sized firms, a group that lies somewhere between the high street and the corporate-focused firm, be it in the City or the major player in the region. For firms such as the South West's Thring Townsend, this is a major opportunity.

The firm has embarked on an aggressive growth plan, evidenced by its acquisition of Laytons' Bristol office in November 2005. The deal will add revenues of around £1.5m to Thring Townsend's turnover, taking it to at least £14m.

The firm, traditionally known for private client work, has spotted a gap in the Bristol market for high-end advice in this area. But its ambitions do not end there. The firm also plans to expand its new Bristol outpost immediately. It is seeking to build on Laytons' commercial property and insolvency platform and has already begun scouring the recruitment market for hires. Its entrepreneurial attitude is typical of many of the firms in this dynamic market.

Siverbeck Rymer - RPP which outstrips Slaughter & May

Among the most striking stories to emerge from this year's The Rising 50 is the top-of-the-table revenue per partner (RPP) figure of Liverpool-based boutique Silverbeck Rymer.

The insurance litigation specialist, which has more than doubled its turnover during the past three years to £16.4m, has emerged as a key player in the North West. It recently announced plans to pursue an ªaggressiveº growth strategy; local rivals watch out. Incredibly, Silverbeck has just four partners, which means the RPP is a staggering £4.1m. The quartet no doubt work extremely hard, but it is the sky-high leverage - the firm has just 28 qualified lawyers but a total of 172 fee-earners - that accounts for the impressive stats.

Legal director and senior partner Kingsley Hayes says the firm takes a unique approach to operating its business. Silverbeck has its own call centre operation, which acts as the first point of contact for the majority of claims, and the firm has not made up any equity partners for more than three years. "A few years ago, the Rymer brothers, who own the firm, decided it made more sense to adopt a business model with a board of directors than having a traditional equity partnership. As that transition has been taking place we haven't made up any partners," says Hayes.