Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Boosting Receivables: One Large Firm's Approach
Cash flow is the lifeblood of any business. In law firms, where so much is dependent upon maintaining good relationships, getting clients to pay on time can be a delicate, sometimes frustrating, exercise. Smart firms are using everything from technology tools to psychological savvy to improve their realization rates. The efforts are paying off. Firms are getting paid almost 30% faster than in 1995, says Citigroup Private Bank. The challenge today is maintaining that momentum at a time when operations are increasingly dispersed and complex. As chief financial officer at Frost Brown Todd, I manage our collections. We have about 370 lawyers, and offices in Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Although we do not publicly disclose our financials, The American Lawyer (an A&FP sibling publication) ranked us as #161 on its most recent AmLaw 200 roster, with 2002 gross revenues at $105 million and our revenue-per-lawyer at $310 thousand.
During the past 2 years, we've added people, processes and technology to enhance our collection speed and realization rates. We currently have six staff in the finance department who are mainly focused on collections. Our primary financial system is Elite Enterprise from Thomson Elite. We are using a combination of Minisoft Inc.'s Accounts Receivable Collection Systems (ARCS) and internally developed reporting systems and customizations. (Note to shoppers: Collect, from Select Associates, is a competing A/R system.)
Over the past year we have seen a 7-day improvement in average collections ' from 48 to 41 days ' and a 6.4% improvement in the percent collected by 90 days.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?