Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (167390)	5/15/2009 6:39:22 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362864

In Sign of Industry Shift, a Legal Giant Loses 2 Top Partners ____________________________________________________________ By ZACHERY KOUWE The New York Times May 15, 2009 David Fox and Daniel E. Wolf, two top partners at the New York law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, have defected to Kirkland & Ellis in a move likely to send shockwaves through the Wall Street legal world. The loss of Mr. Fox, 51, who was among the highest-paid lawyers at Skadden, is a blow to the firm, where revenue has fallen across nearly all practice areas. A prominent mergers-and-acquisitions lawyer, Mr. Fox is leaving after more than 20 years with the firm, founded in 1948. It is rare for an established firm to lose such a senior lawyer to a less-known rival, and the move is the first time a partner in Skadden’s New York M.& A. practice has jumped to a competitor. The loss of two noted partners, who together generated tens of millions of dollars in fees annually for Skadden, could signal a broader shift in the corporate legal landscape as lawyers at large full-service firms leave for more focused, profitable shops. Last year, Kirkland generated about $2.47 million in profit for each partner, a closely watched measurement, compared to $2.07 million in profits per partner at Skadden, according to The American Lawyer, an industry magazine. “Skadden is a terrific firm and has been a home for my entire career,” Mr. Fox said in a short interview. He added that Joseph H. Flom, the firm’s leader, “is one the greatest lawyers and one of the greatest people I know.” Mr. Wolf, 36, is a rising star in the tight-knit world of deal advisers and, at 30, was one of the youngest people to make partner at Skadden. He has worked on several prominent mergers with Mr. Fox, including BHP Billiton’s $150 billion bid for Rio Tinto last year — the largest attempted takeover in history. (BHP ultimately gave up its pursuit of the company.) While they were partly lured to Kirkland by higher salaries, people close to the private talks said Mr. Fox and Mr. Wolf saw an opportunity to build the firm, based in Chicago, into one of the top five worldwide M.& A. advisers. The firm is currently not in the top 10, according to Thomson Reuters. Skadden is No. 1. Kirkland bills itself as younger and more entrepreneurial than some of its long-established competitors, which also attracted Mr. Wolf and Mr. Fox. The firm is also more focused on specific profit-producing areas like M.& A. and bankruptcy, while bigger firms like Skadden, Jones Day, and Latham & Watkins offer a vast swath of legal services. These legal superstores have been cutting costs as business dries up across several practice areas. This year, Skadden offered to pay its 1,300 associates a third of their base pay not to show up at work in 2009. Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (167390)	5/15/2009 6:54:47 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362864

Microsoft drops K&L Gates as preferred provider legalweek.com Author: Nate Raymond Published: 15/05/2009 Microsoft has completed a review of its preferred legal providers - and K&L Gates, the firm named after Bill Gates' father, is nowhere on it. Microsoft carried over to the firm after Preston Gates & Ellis merged with Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham in 2007. At the time, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith welcomed the merger as a positive step for both firms and its clients. However, following an extensive review of the firms it uses, Microsoft has announced a new list of legal providers, without K&L Gates. "We have had a preferred provider programme in place for several years to consolidate a portion of our legal work and manage our legal costs efficiently," Microsoft spokesman David Bowermaster said in a statement. "We recently decided to refresh the program. We solicited competitive bids from a number of firms and conducted an extensive review. That led to a selection of 10 firms across the country." Microsoft began its preferred provider programme in 2005, though this is the first time it has reviewed the list, a source familiar with the selection process said. The previous list had 16 firms, the source said. The new list of 10 firms includes Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft, Covington & Burling, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, Sidley Austin, and Weil Gotshal & Manges. Microsoft declined to provide the names of those firms previously deemed preferred, although it did confirm that a partial list published in The National Law Journal last July was accurate. Of the seven named in that article, three are missing this time around. Heller Ehrman dissolved, which explains its omission, while Arnold & Porter and Sullivan & Cromwell have also been left off as list. But the most notable omission is K&L Gates. Microsoft had been one of the top clients of Preston Gates, the firm co-founded by Bill Gates Sr. It took the company public in 1986 and assisted Sullivan & Cromwell during Microsoft's epic antitrust battle of the 1990s. However, former Microsoft general counsel William Neukom, who rejoined Preston Gates in 2002, left K&L Gates last year to become managing general partner of the San Francisco Giants. Microsoft's Bowermaster said that K&L Gates will still carry out some work for the company, despite not being on the provider list. “K&L Gates remains a valued and longstanding partner and a significant contributor to our success,” he said in a statement. -Additional reporting by Leigh Jones of The National Law Journal.

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (167390)	5/15/2009 7:04:00 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362864

Law leaders: crunch won’t cause legal revolution legalweek.com’t+cause+legal+revolution.html Author: Ross Todd Published: 13/05/2009 Law firm managers are not planning to make radical changes in the way they run their firms, despite client pressure in the wake of the financial crisis, according to new research. A survey of 208 law firm leaders conducted by management consultancy Altman Weil canvassed opinion on how firms are dealing with strategy, growth, pricing, staffing and business development in light of the current economy. "Law firms are not doing anything dramatic and are not planning to do anything dramatic [in response to the economic downturn]," said Eric Seeger, an Altman Weil consultant and co-author of the survey, entitled Law Firms in Transition. "That contradicts some of what we hear from their corporate clients who are demanding budgets, fixed fees, and discounts," Seeger continued. Altman Weil distributed the survey to 687 firms with 50 or more lawyers, and 30% of the firms responded, including 32% of the 250 largest firms in the US. According to the survey, the most likely development in the legal profession in the near future is a reduction in the number of equity partners at top firms. Thirty-eight percent of firms with 500 to 999 lawyers say it is likely or possible that they will cut additional equity partners in 2009. However, Seeger describes the staffing cuts at large law firms as "more of a market correction than a seismic shift." "Law firms are making changes now that they have wanted to make for a while," he said. Law firm respondents of all sizes identified four areas that will undergo permanent change: an increase in price competition, a longer partnership track, more use of contract lawyers and more non-hourly billing arrangements with clients. The survey also identified four changes that are considered temporary: reductions in first-year associate class sizes, associate salaries, profits per partner and associate-to-partner leverage. Respondents across the board identified an increase in pricing competition as a permanent change, despite few firms, and none with 250 or more lawyers, reducing their billing rates in 2009. "The question we are left with is whether the day of reckoning between firms and their corporate clients will actually come," said Seeger. -This article first appeared on The Am Law Daily blog on americanlawyer.com.

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (167390)	5/20/2009 11:18:54 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 362864

Drinker cuts starting pay _______________________________________________________________ May 12, 2009 -- (Crain’s) -- New lawyers at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP are going to get a greater dose of in-house training, including study of client business operations, as part of the law firm’s response to the recession. And the tuition won’t be free. Philadelphia-based Drinker, which has 156 lawyers in Chicago as a result of its 2006 merger with Gardner Carton & Douglas LLP, will cut starting salaries to $105,000 from $160,000 in Chicago and other big cities during the minimum six-month training period. “Any client work they perform will be billed at a significant rate reduction to ensure that, if new lawyers perform work for clients, the value is clear,” the firm’s top partners wrote in a memo to lawyers. The good news for the 34 attorneys (nine of them in Chicago) expected to join Drinker in September: Starting dates will not be delayed, as they have been at other law firms also confronting a slump in demand for legal services. The memo also said Drinker would “probably be entering into a greater number of alternative fee arrangements over the next few years,” relying less on billing by the hour. “Our clients are now telling us — in no uncertain terms — that they question whether the value provided to them is properly measured in this way,” the memo said. Accordingly, the firm said, lawyer bonuses will be based on “merit and quality of service,” not just the number of billable hours.