How do you value your law firm when selling?

Print This Post

7 March 2013

Posted by Ben Holmes, managing director of Legal Futures Associate Invest in Law

Holmes: whether goodwill has a value depends on the likelihood of repeat business

When attempting to put a value on your firm, never has the quotation of economist Jonathan Reeves been more appropriate: “Something is only worth what somebody is willing to pay for it.”

There will be those who will try and put an arbitrary value on your firm, but can you be sure this isn’t just to entice your custom? Then only later on do you find out that the reality of the market is somewhat different, or that a simple multiple of net profit is too blunt an instrument.

Of course, there are indicators as to value, such as turnover and profitability, but is there any goodwill? My view is that there can be goodwill, but this is the exception to the rule at the moment. Key to whether this is present is the likelihood of repeat business.

Take, for example, a personal injury client. One would hope (for their sake) that they’re not a repeat client, but on the other hand a client who made a will with you, and named you as an executor almost certainly will be (unless the estate is so small probate is not required).

That’s not the entire picture though. The personal injury client may have received an excellent service, and whilst they may not be injury prone again, they may recommend you to their friend who is. Meanwhile, the relatives of the probate client might feel they were over-charged and may never go back to your firm as a result.

Possibly the best solution would be to conduct a survey with the ‘man on the street’, but this isn’t very practical, and more often than not an educated guess about a firm’s potential for repeat business has to be drawn.

A buyer would also look at the reasons for the repeat business. Is it the excellent reputation or relationships attached to an individual, or has it transcended individuals to become part of the firm? If it’s the latter, there is a case for the goodwill having a value, but if it’s the former, and that individual is leaving as part of the sale, an acquirer would be more reluctant to offer value for goodwill. If there’s uncertainty whether it’s an individual or the firm that has the reputation or relationships, a buyer would also err on the side of caution. A period of consultancy by the leaving individual would mitigate this as much as is possible.

The most obvious example of where there is goodwill is perhaps where the firm has large institutional clients, with whom they have an ongoing contractual relationship.

A firm’s name can have goodwill attached to it, but if for other commercial reasons that name has to go in the acquisition process, an acquirer will be reluctant to offer value, or as much value for it. It is certainly more costly promoting more than one brand and sending mixed messages to consumers.

There have been occasions where a firm has such a strong brand and reputation that it will remain in place post-acquisition. The public does need to be made aware over time though that two have become one, and it is costly educating them.

On this point I notice Russell Jones & Walker’s signage on its Chancery Lane offices has over the last two years changed from ‘Russell Jones & Walker’, to ‘Russell Jones & Walker – part of the Slater & Gordon Group’ to now simply ‘Slater & Gordon’. My point is the process is gradual, and the actual cost of the signs is very much only the tip of the iceberg.

Another difficulty is that a law firm is not a particularly liquid asset. In my view, the most important factors as to valuation are getting sufficient initial interest from acquirers, within the right timescales.

Take the recent example of the DWF’s pre-pack acquisition of Cobbetts from the administrators. I’m sure that the two were having decidedly different conversations last year when they were considering a merger. The timescale was the most important factor here – and linked to this was the fact that several firms weren’t even allowed to the table after DWF secured exclusivity (as sanctioned by the Solicitors Regulation Authority).

Needless to say, acquiring firms from administrators can be attractive to acquirers, but it’s not only failing law firms that need to be sold. There are a number of reasons why a very successful firm might want to sell, for example when the partners are retiring, or they decide that they would like to be part of something bigger.

In my view, the most important factor in receiving the right value for your firm is by making sure you reach out to the greatest number of potential acquirers from the outset. Your firm might be an ideal fit for another firm looking to consolidate in your area, or with your client base. You just need to ensure that they become aware of you and at the earliest opportunity.

2 Responses to “How do you value your law firm when selling?”

  1. It’s important not to forget the assets a law firm may have, too.

    They might have…

    …a specialist team in an area a buyer wnts to make a big–and quick–move into.

    …the buyer may want to get rid of a competitor

    …the buyer might be after the seller’s website if it is especially successful at getting clients in. Too many accountants miss the website issue as they are so used to having to value it at a very low value for Balance Sheet “rules” reasons.

  2. Andrew Woolley on March 7th, 2013 at 9:47 am
  3. I couldn’t agree more that the firm’s assets would have a value…

    …but what if the acquisitive firms (with the acquisition strategies you mention) never get to find out about the opportunity…they might have been the perfect fit, but they won’t get a chance to make an offer…

    …I would be cautious about attaching too much value to a web-site however…you would have to be very careful about how much work was really generated by the SEO and PPC spend…whether the content could be easily replicated…and whether the links are solid….

  4. Ben Holmes on March 8th, 2013 at 10:14 am

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

The LSB’s proposals for legislative reform: let’s be clear

Caroline Wallace LSB

The publication of the Legal Services Board’s vision for legislative reform of legal services regulation on 12 September has generated a healthy level of interest and debate. This can, on the surface, seem a somewhat dry subject. However, it has an impact not just on existing regulated practitioners, but also on providers of legal services more generally, as well as everyone who uses or benefits from an effective legal sector. And, let’s face it, that’s all of us.

October 25th, 2016