GMT: The Podcast For Globally Minded Law Firm Leaders
GMT: The Podcast For Globally Minded Law Firm Leaders
Part Two of GMT's conversation with Special Guest Gus Sellitto Founder of Reputation and Media Powerhouse Byfield Consultancy
Welcome to part two of GMT’s season opener. Murray and Rob are joined by media pro and founder of Byfield, Gus Sellitto.
In this insightful episode, we explore the intricate balance global firms must strike as they navigate the challenging role of maintaining a global voice within diverse local markets.
Key points discussed include:
- Collaboration with Internal Teams: Gus explores how external consultants complement in-house PR by offering specialized insights and a broad market perspective, particularly useful in crisis and reputation management.
- Harmonizing Global and Local Values: We discuss how a law firm’s global values, such as respecting diversity and upholding certain ethical standards, can coexist harmoniously with the local laws and customs of the places where they have offices.
- Challenges of Balancing Acts: Finally, we look at the gray areas in balancing global firm values with local laws. And we conclude that although challenging, it is possible to successfully navigate without compromising on either front.
Please stay tuned for the next edition of GMT: The Podcast for Globally Minded Law Firm Leaders.
For more information contact:
Gus Sellitto
Rob Bata
Murray Coffey
Contact Rob and Murray:
Robert C. Bata, Founder and Principal, WarwickPlace Legal
Email: rbata@warwickplace.com
Murray M. Coffey, Founder and Principal, M Coffey
Email: murray@mcoffey.net
Um, welcome to part two of GMTs conversation with Byfield founder Gus solito.
Rob Bata:So let's so let's go back to to risk management and PR, or, versus PR, or including PR, what? What is it you you talk about how leading law firms now all have internal resources, and what is your process in terms of how you deal with with the internal legal executive, with the internal executive team and and who are the people that you normally work with in terms of, terms of the services that you provide, and how does that come about?
Gus Sellitto:Well, as you know, Robert now, most of the larger law firms, all of them, will have in house, PR and marketing teams, and they're very, very established teams, and very good at what they what they do, but it's a finite resource, and so there will always be space and room for external consultants to come in, who can bring you know, particularly when you look at reputation management and crisis, they can bring a sort of dispassionate view to some of the issues that a law firm may be facing. We can also bring a kind of horizon scanning view of what the rest of the market does. We specialize in the legal sector, so it's our business to be looking at what other law firms are doing, how the market is developing, what the media is writing about, where the next big legislative change might happen, and how that's impacting the reputation of the sector as a whole, but also individual law firms operating globally or locally. And I think that kind of horizon scanning view and that dispassionate view when it comes to crisis and more sticky reputational issues can be a real benefit for law firms to be able to bring in that expertise, certainly in terms of what we do on the more brand, building proactive PR sides, again, as I say, law firms don't you know, teams are much, much larger than they were a few years ago, but it's a finite resource. So you may have a project or a campaign, let's say, you know, insolvencies are up because of where the economy is. You want to do a big push into insolvency, you would perhaps bring in an external PR agency like us to help you devise that campaign to give your internal team that additional resource that's required on a project by project basis. And obviously the great thing about bringing consultancies in is you can flex. You can flex that muscle for peak times, peaks and troughs of when you're doing profile raising and campaigns. And this is across the board. It can be marketing consultants. It clearly applies to what you do as well to what you both do. But having agencies that really understand your market, the industry and the clients you're trying to reach, I think, can be very, very valuable. That's certainly why people that's certainly why our clients call us in when it comes to crisis and risk and where law firms are facing litigation, it's very good to often take that away from the in house, PR, who's focusing on the core communications and the good news, you want to try and isolate that incident as much as possible. And again, that incident can take a hell of a lot of headroom up. You know, it can be all consuming for two weeks or two months or even longer, depending on how big the issue is, and therefore bringing in external counsel, PR counsel, whatever the expertise might be, can be very, very useful for those firms. So we're seeing increased demand, because law firms are offering more services, more products, more initiatives. They are wanting to get good brand building PR around those campaigns. So we're doing a lot more campaigns. We're doing a lot more practice area support that, as I say, supports a particular market movement or an initiative a law firm is involved in. And then, of course, the crisis in litigation and risk and reputation management, for all the things I said earlier about the global environment just becoming much more in the public glare, that that leads to a lot more instructions for us as well.
Rob Bata:And so it I'd like to have your perspective also on the not quite crisis type of situation, but as you say, market developments and so forth. And especially from my perspective, what I do is law firm mergers, including cross border ones, and where does what you do come into that in terms of both the messaging. And perhaps, in some cases, dealing with what might be some negative perceptions about a proposed merger or an actual merger that is already happening.
Gus Sellitto:Well, this is an area that that you know, you and I would work very, very closely on Robert the you know, the whole point around merger communications is they are often leaked at the discussion phase. And if you're ill prepared or not prepared for that leak, it's kind of the genie is out of the bottle. You haven't been able to prepare messaging around the rationale some of the internal discussions that may be going on, you know it may mean that the media gets to know about the proposed discussions before your internal people even have, have got to know about this, and that sets the wrong tone and narrative from the start. So communications around merger, talks and discussions, you know, we know there's a there's a long process to them, there's the discussion, then there's a vote so there is, there is a process that that needs to be followed and making sure that you're prepared for any leak scenarios. While those discussions are ongoing, preparing a really detailed communications pack as to the rationale for the merger, what it will mean for your people, what it will mean for your clients, all of that pre planning work needs to go on way in advance of any potential leak scenario being possible and prepared for any leak scenario. And then, of course, you're going to get the difficult questions around rationalization. What does this mean in terms of job security and all of that needs to be prepared for to give those discussions the best chance to progress and to ensure that when the information does come out, whether it's leaked or you've proactively put it out, you're sending the right message to the market, internal stakeholders, external stakeholders, and you're giving those discussions the best chance of success. I mean, we talked about that, you know, obviously the big ano Sherman, the way those communications were handled were excellent. In terms of, there was a microsite that was prepared. And we were talking about the big merger recently, Trans Atlantic. The way those communications were prepared, there was an announcement in the Financial Times, I think, that on the Sunday, there was a microsite ready with a Q and A there would have been a lot of background stakeholder communications going on in advance of that, and I think that set the tone for a positive process to happen. But very interested to hear how your experience being on the advisory side of the M and A process. Robert,
Rob Bata:well, my experience is very much to reduce it to a simple sentence. Is a leak is almost always a death sentence, if once it gets into the press at the wrong time without appropriate management of the situation, almost invariably, will result in the merger not taking place, or enough people walking away from it that that it's no good. This is just not likely to happen. And of course, the longer that a prospective merger is in the public eye as still being discussed, the more likely it is that, one, it was subject of a leak, and two, that it's not going to go anywhere. And then there are a number of those, those situations that that have happened. So I think that's very important. Going back to the ano Sherman, I think one of the you're absolutely right, that was fantastically managed. And one of the things that I think I mentioned on this podcast before, as I understood it, it was so well prepared that on that Sunday, or perhaps it was Saturday, when they decided to release it, apparently the small group that was putting all of this together got wind of the fact that there might be a leak, and so they accelerated the release of the information several hours earlier. And but, but we're so well prepared to do that that they could do it and and so that that was able to deal with that issue in advance and very successfully so. But I found, if you look at the example, for example, of the very unfortunate law firm of stroke and stricken Levan in the US, for a couple of years now, there have been discussions in out in the open, about how they're seeking a merger partner, one after the other. And every time one was mentioned as a real likelihood or real possibility, it it just went away. And it happened when Melvin, a Myers, was was. Having a discussion with a with with a magic circle firm. It happened with a with a number of others. It's it's very, very difficult to manage a leak unless you're absolutely prepared, internally and externally, to either have an explanation of what leak is about, or be able truthfully to deny the subject of the leak. So it's the those are often, I think, close to irreparable situations, but, but leaving aside the leak side of it, I think you're absolutely right that you do have to prepare the market, and you have to prepare the rationale and and that part, I found, is often not always that well handled. And I can think of certain examples where large law firms have expanded into countries in a way that really didn't seem to make sense for a lot of people, other than to put to put some flags on the map. And I can say this now, because certainly there was much of that perception about dentin so merging up with Da Chang, which was what the real merger. And of course, now they've pulled back from all that. But certainly in the legal market, it never seemed to make sense, because simply having another 10,000 lawyers or 8000 lawyers distributed all over China. Made no sense at all, but let's talk about China for a second. How. How does one manage, not simply reputation, but political risk or security risk where you have a law firm that does business on the mainland, also does business, perhaps in Hong Kong, but there are, in fact, a lot of geopolitical tensions. There are also data security issues, and I would mention the Latham and Watkins, which recently announced that their Hong Kong staff will no longer have access to to the internet, essentially because of worries about Chinese security laws. Is there a way to handle those kinds of issues and at the same time be able to forestall a negative reaction, a negative political reaction from, say, Mainland China.
Gus Sellitto:It's a tricky one. This one. Robert, yeah, yeah, I know, yeah. I mean, I'm interested to get your views.
Rob Bata:Yeah. Well, I mean, honestly, my view is that in sometimes you have to fall back on technicalities, yeah, and say, well, our operation, well, just, let's stick with China. Again. I don't just want to single them out, but, but let's stick with China for a minute. You fall back on the technicality that says, well, the the operating entity that we have in the country that we are worried about offending is really a separate entity, and it's licensed by the local authorities, and it has a a an affiliate or a partner firm that's that's also mainland Chinese, and of course, they have their own. They are politically pristine, and therefore we've taken this step on that side of the divide, but it really doesn't affect what we do on the other side of the divide, because it's there, are there. It's technically a different operation. But I think it's extremely difficult, and I think it's become very difficult for a number of firms that I'm personally aware of, firms that have been scratching their heads about how to move forward in China and on the mainland. And of course, part of that calculation is a strict business calculation. Most law firms don't have a very profitable presence on the mainland in China, but have been there because their clients need them to be there. They feel that they need to be seen there. And except for those firms that have been there for a long, long time and have developed very, very strong relationships with the regulators and and other law firms, a China presence is tricky. And, and, and you've seen, you've seen. A number of firms, including last year, pulling up stakes from the mainland. Then there are other reasons why some firms have left Hong Kong too, and that that may has a lot to do with the security environment, but it also has to do with the fact that there's much less MNA going on and so forth. I happen to think that Hong Kong is still a very strong place to be, and I actually counsel clients with the appropriate types of practices that it's a good place to stay or still to enter, especially in the sort of FinTech and crypto areas, but also in disputes and so forth. So I'm not writing off Hong Kong at all, but it's a very different environment, and it's not the kind of place where you can expect a lot of M and A activity going on and listings, dual listings, in Hong Kong really don't pay that much for law firms to do that. It's become very commoditized. So that's, that's my perspective. It's, it's, it's extremely difficult. You mentioned earlier, it was very easy for law firms to say, well, we're pulling out of Russia. But of course, that had a lot to do with the fact that you've got a gigantic land war of the sort that we haven't seen since World War Two, where you've got an obvious aggressor, and it's very clear what's what's going on and why US firms can no longer read it, not to mention, of course, actual Danger, physical danger, to to Western lawyers practicing in Russia, it's very different where you're simply where you're simply confronting a very different and perhaps adversarial entity, but with which you're not really in active conflict other than kind of Commercial and in terms of trade wars, and so China really represents that in between is the Saudi situation, where Saudi Arabia, of course, has a reputation that doesn't fly very well with the West And and for for obvious reasons, but where also access, access to that market, and access to the Middle East and the Gulf states generally, has been very, very, very important for law firms and their clients. So it's, it's, it's a somewhat different calculus, and it seems to me that so far, there hasn't been that much backlash against what has been a spate of US and UK law firms opening in Saudi Arabia, in Riyadh. I mean, that's it's now well over a dozen that have opened since the since the liberalization of the regulations in Saudi Arabia. But I suspect that even for those who have have done the work and have opened offices there and so forth, that they've, they've, they've had some access to to a to reputation management and this, we're not talking here about identifying any clients or anything like that. But I would assume that you would agree that in going into a place like Saudi Arabia, you would definitely want to manage your public relations and your reputation in advance.
Gus Sellitto:Absolutely, Robert and there have been a there's been a rush to Riyadh and Saudi and there have been articles that have questioned a law firm positioning in that region, vis a vis its kind of global values and its global statements around human rights and diversity and inclusion, and again, it's a difficult balancing act, I think, going back to your point, you know, if a Law Firm is establishing itself in a region within its existing structure, then, you know, it has to be really clear about why it's there, you know. And yes, if it's really important to his clients, and it's really important to that law firm to be able to service those clients and the kind of work that it carries out to be in that region, then it needs to be firm in why it's there. And then, of course, it needs to balance how that particular region is seen, how it's perceived, that you know, in terms of the West, and how its staff and clients may perceive that, and to be really clear on its communication around that. So, you know, it comes back to having sort of these, these firm, wide values, but but respecting, uh, local laws, but also making sure that you know your people are feel as safe as they possibly can within that particular region. Yeah. To just
Rob Bata:second, just stepping away for a second from from these quite complicated and difficult issues where, which involves, you know, both politics and human rights and so forth. And Murray, I think you have a lot to say on the subject too, the global versus local. And I'm talking more about culture. Can you address that a little bit, and how that would be, how that would be handled when you're when you're dealing with a with a very large and international firm, and, and, and what is the ideal
Unknown:policy? Policy is getting set sort of centrally, but it has to, it has to resonate locally. So what do you what? How are you advising your clients on that? And I have another question, about the, about the about about growth. We'll get back to that in a minute.
Gus Sellitto:So I think, I think a law firm will have you know global values, about how it's it behaves as a law firm and it respects the local laws of a jurisdiction it's in. And I think that that those two don't necessarily need to conflict so respecting the local laws of a country while treating your people in a certain way and respecting their rights and their diversity and having principles that you adhere to as a firm, I think they can stand together. Of course, there are gray areas within that. And then at a local level, I think the way that those local offices interact with their clients and their staff, they have to take those principles of the firm as a whole, but apply them locally, in line with the local laws and customs and the respect for for those local laws and customs. So again, I think it's a difficult balancing act, but the two don't necessarily need to conflict.
Unknown:Do you? Do you see a need for local representation on the reputation management side for for these organizations that are that are growing into new jurisdictions. So they might, thus, they might be working with you at an enterprise wide level, and then they're going into a jurisdiction. How do you counsel? How they're going to localize that. Are you hiring people on the ground there? Is it a partnership? What? What happens then?
Gus Sellitto:Yeah, I think, I think where you again, you know, if you think about corporate communications of a global law firm, they'll, they'll, you know, they'll tend to be set in London or New York. And I think that coordination is, is really, really important when you have sort of local, local on the ground representation, it can be really, really help, helpful to deal with some of those nuances, some of those cultural nuances, having a real feel for the local cultural how the local media reports issues, and Making sure that there's a really constant feedback mechanism between the central PR team and the local PR teams, and again, making sure that what is said at a firm wide global level. How does that fit? How does that filter down to local offices? You know, there's there's there's there. Is often this sort of perception that sort of local offices can be a law onto themselves, and I'll be interested to hear your views on, you know, how, how you manage that perception, is it, is it correct having local people on the ground, as long as there's a really strong centralization of that communication and the feedback mechanism is really, really tight, and there is a knowledge and understanding of what's going on in those local offices and the kind of advice that's being sought locally, and how that chimes and connects back to that kind of central communications. I think is really, really important.
Unknown:We think
Rob Bata:understanding local cultures is very important. And of course, you can't, you can't do that centrally. And it's also difficult for, I think, even for a reputation management consulting firm that is heavily involved in in projecting and helping the firm project a certain image and a certain culture and so forth. It's hard to do that on a country by country basis. I'll give you one example of a lesson that I learned at some point in my career. I set up and ran offices throughout Eastern Europe for a Chicago Law Firm. And one summer, the American holiday, the Fourth of July, came around, and I had announced that we're going to close all the offices and to give everybody a day off. And in Prague, where I was based, at the time, I said to my I sat around a note to my 30 or so lawyers and staff, saying, I'd like you to come to our home for American style Fourth of July. We'll have a backyard barbecue, bring your families and so on and so forth. Never got a response, and Fourth of July was approaching quickly. And finally, I said to one of the partners, so what's going on here? I know that Czech people are a little bit shy sometimes, and so forth, and I know how to deal with that, but how come no one's accepting this? And they said, Well, you don't understand for them to go to your house, it means it's a work day, and if the day is supposed to be off, then they don't understand how they should be off, but at the same time be working. Now that would never have been an issue or a question in America, but I didn't think that through. I just thought, Well, gee, this would be really fun and interesting for people. And of course, we'd love to have them over, and, you know, bring your babies and, you know, hang around in the backyard, and we'll have some, you know, hot dogs and hamburgers and so no one came,
Unknown:although Rob, I will tell you, if you, if you're working with this generation that's coming up right now in even in the US, they would say, No, you know what? Thanks, boss. But if it's a day off, it's a day off.
Rob Bata:So, so Gus, you, you do have, you do have an operation. And I reluctant to characterize in a specific way, because you will tell me exactly what that is, but well, you, you do have an alliance with, with firms, with the reputation management firms in Europe, and which, which really do deal with some of these, I think some of these more cultural type of issues.
Gus Sellitto:Yeah, not just cultural. I think the morovia network. Morovia is now in in many of the European countries, but also Singapore and India. And the whole reason for morovia was because, you know, law firms are expanding internationally or already in European jurisdictions, so where you have a law firm that needs local language in country, PR support, whether it's from a profile raising or defensive reputation management perspective, having experts in those jurisdictions that understand all of the issues we've been discussing, the cultural nuances, the media, the media environment, how things are reported, how the market is developing, what are the key trends taking place? From a business perspective, a regulatory perspective, all of those things are really important to a law firm in terms of its global operations, and making a success of those global operations, and therefore having people on the ground and agencies on the ground that we can work with on joint and campaigns, joint initiatives, or indeed, it may just be a very local issue that needs to be dealt with. Being able to offer that to our clients has been something that has been really important, and we continue to develop that, that that work globally, in those countries where clients have have the most need, I think coming back also to litigation and crisis and class actions, a lot of these actions and A lot of cross border litigation now also requires in countries this support on the ground, and being able to coordinate that from London or from Germany or wherever it might be, and having a number of different agency partners who you work with well on those issues is a real advantage. We're finding.
Rob Bata:Yeah, I think it's become essential, actually, to have that, that ability. And of course, it's clearly not just about culture, but, but, but that ability also does address culture and local customs and so forth, and and I think that's key now, sorry, Murray, go ahead,
Unknown:and this was my question. It kind of all ties back into itself. You're we're seeing, you know, as firms are growing into other jurisdictions, Gus is your experience that you're getting called in earlier in the strategic discussions about the growth into a jurisdiction. Are the firms, uh, taking a more. More proactive, like you're very, very proactive, and integrated thinking about reputation along with their strategic growth. So rather than saying we're going to move into X jurisdiction, oh, let's call Gus and see what's up with that. Is it? Hey, let's call Gus and talk about our thoughts. We're going to be moving into these jurisdictions. We're thinking about moving into these jurisdictions. Let's talk to us about the reputation management, the way we would approach that particular market. So is it? Are we? Are we? Are we finding them thinking about it more integrated? My sense from doing this for a long time is that firms would make the decision and then and then, and then, sort of bring in, you know, bring in the other considerations, and sort of hammer everything into place. May not work, may not be the right way to do it, but that's what they were doing. I feel like there's a change, but you obviously are seeing this firsthand. I do
Gus Sellitto:think there's a change. Murray, I don't think you know our advice is going to impact whether a firm opens there or not? I think that decision is pretty advanced, right? But we are being called in much sooner rather than, Oh, we're now here. Can you help us with some proactive PR and you know, we're going to be dealing with a few issues along the way. So what we want you, we want you to be able to advise there that's changed. We have clients who are who are opening in the Middle East, but they're bringing us in a lot earlier to discuss a lot of the issues we've talked about. The you know, how that opening might impact them on a global level, reputationally, how to deal with the local markets, the local media. You know, is there a partner that we we could be speaking to the to on their behalf, to then help them on a local level. So I think yes, absolutely we are. There is more thought going into that in relation to, okay, this is a jurisdiction we're going to, a region we're going to we may have some issues around the sort of the reputation that we need to address. But also, then, from a business development and marketing and BD perspective, how can PR support that locally? And having that on the grounds PR support in local language can be really, really helpful and an important part of the overall strategy in how that firm develops a presence in that region and jurisdiction. And it's, it's really interesting advice to be giving, because you're, you know, you're coming in as an agency that's kind of got the global perspective, but then you're collaborating with a local specialist. And I think that kind of joint approach gives the gives that, that that perspective that the client is looking for and the client needs.
Rob Bata:Yeah, I think that's, that's, that's very helpful. It's, it's interesting where you talk about bringing in your expertise sooner than before, that that that I think has been true for outside consultants generally, I find in in my business, where I was, when I started out this consultancy, there was Usually some decision about we should be doing something in X jurisdiction, and then they'd say, Well, do you think you can help us with that? I now find myself being asked about, well, what do you think would be an interesting or an important jurisdiction for us, or should we do anything at all? And it's, it's just the the timing has shifted, and I think it's going to, it's, it's, it's going to kind of continue to constrict the timeline even more in the future. I think, I think outside consultants bring a perspective, as you and I know, as all three of us know, that is, you know, it's just, it's just a simple idea of having an extra pair of eyes, and also of having an objective perspective, but also One that's an objective perspective that's designed to promote the the interests of the client that where you come in already with the attitude, I want to make sure that the advice that I provide makes commercial sense and makes cultural sense and political sense, and will ultimately result in something that's, we can call a success. And so that's, it seems. It seems very simple to summarize it like that, but, but ultimately, that's what it's all about. There's one of we've we've gone on for a bit and, and I really appreciate. The time that you're taking, and I think we should be winding down a little bit, but I do want to raise one other thing, which is we talked a little about this in preparation US UK, more and more firms in the UK are interested now, especially after a and l Sherman in what is still the world's largest economy, the US. It's my perception that the other so called Magic Circle firms have not done a fantastic job of getting themselves known and recognized and understood in the US the way they have elsewhere in the globe. I think Anna Sherman will will change that. Many years ago, UK firms, and certainly European firms, are very reluctant to go into the US because of fears clients, fears about them being a very litigious kind of environment. That's no longer the case. And of course, many law firms now, in fact, thrive on their disputes practices and and, and for that too, the US is very important. Is it? Is it your perception, that the interest in the you us from where you sit in the UK and from, from your clients perspective, that the interest in the US will will continue to grow. And ways of getting into that market and growing into in that market will will continue to grow. Or do you think that again, from sitting from where you are, I may have a different perspective. There's now what you might call a sort of a saturation point that UK firms have done everything that they can do to be in the US, and not much to do beyond that.
Gus Sellitto:No, I think the US remains a very important market for UK law firms, and there is a keen eye on how to penetrate that market effectively. You're absolutely right. We've, we've seen lots of examples of large UK law firms, not not making it in the US. I think an obvious point is just such a big market, and there's almost a shock element when you get there, as to how big the market is, and therefore how difficult it is to penetrate that market. Effectively. I think the ano Sherman merger is a seminal moment for other firms looking at transatlantic deals and making them work. It was interesting. Murray, in our in our prep for this, you said that there's been some really good PR around that merger, but now there are a few question marks coming, and that's inevitable, you know, that's in terms of how is it going to work in practice? Now that you know, we've got this in place. What are the mechanics going to look like? What's the culture going to look like? But in terms of a deal, I do think it's a seminal moment for a transatlantic merger of that size. And I think other big UK law firms will be looking at that very closely, and US law firms in relation to making a success of that kind of transAtlantic merger. It's really interesting. You mentioned the Magic Circle, Robert world, where there's this whole question mark, does the magic circle exist in the right
Rob Bata:so I put it in quotes.
Gus Sellitto:That's a really interesting conversation for us to have. I think if we look at the magic circle, and they look at the success that the US law firms have had in London, then that also is a signal of needing to have a really strong presence in the US, because there are a number of big US law firms, as you know, who have made a real success in the London market. And when it comes to remuneration and pay for trainees. And in the private equity space, for example, where they've been able to pay rain makers huge amounts of money to switch from a magic circle law firm to a US law firm. Then there is a threat there. There's a potential threat there. And so I think the UK magic circle law firms and other large law firms are looking at the ano Sherman deal and how it will work in practice. Very, very closely. I'd be really interested to hear, as an expert, Robert, whether you think we're going to see similar, similar announcements in the next 24 months,
Rob Bata:we will and I can say that with a good deal of confidence. I think the interesting thing, and O Sherman may nevertheless remain a kind of an outlier, for one important reason which also had in the past held back US UK or UK firms expanding in the States, which is the financial disconnect, the profitability, the revenue per lawyer, even the hours per lawyer, are very. Difficult to match when you've got law firms here and say that the top 50 of the am law 100 by and large, most of them being more profitable than most UK firms on a whether it's whether it's revenue per lawyer, whether it's profits per lawyer, whether it's profits per equity partner, which is very often a misleading statistic, having the financial match, I think, is is difficult. So I think I think what you're more likely to see is mergers with not necessarily with peers. If you've got say, top 10 UK firms and their peers, in terms of what they do and their reputation and so forth, are basically the Wall Street firms. They're not financial peers. Sherman was, as I think we all know and and it's been pretty clear in the press too, they were having a difficulty. I won't call it a rescue, but, but they definitely reached the point where they could align their profitability with with ano reasonably well. I don't think you're going to see that with other Wall Street firms on unless there's something I'm missing. So I think it'll be more creative approaches than simply that kind of peer to peer type of approach. I think it might, it might focus on particular practice strengths or particular regions at least, at least as an initial or as a developing strategy
Unknown:that emerging, maybe with a super, super regional firm in the US, yeah, perhaps,
Rob Bata:yeah. Perhaps it's those. Those kinds of, those kinds of possibilities are very much alive and open. And I think there is a better chance of having the financial fit and and, and not having to do a tremendous amount of reorganization, not to mention compensation, difficult compensation questions when it comes to aligning the firm globally. But But definitely, my perspective is, and I agree with you guys, so you know this, this process will continue. You can't write off you can't write off the US and you certainly you need to be there. I think it's interesting that even the very, very cautious Japanese firms, which certainly will not be merging with any US firms, but even they have begun to open offices in the US and in New York and San Francisco and Chicago, and when you think of how conscious they are and and how conservative they are, it will tell you that there's that there's more afoot going on. I don't see major European firms coming in or doing a big merger. I just that's just not in their DNA, but it's just it's just very different for these large UK firms and firms that have a fantastic global presence but are not really meaningfully situated in the US so far.
Unknown:GMT would like to thank Gus Alito for his time and wisdom on our podcast until next time. Thank you. Bye.