Trending Now
  • Sigma Funding Secures $35,000,000 Credit Facility, Bryant Park Capital Serves as Financial Advisor
Commercial Deals

Turnmill Limited Expands Portfolio with Acquisition of Dealmakers Forums LLC

By Harry Moran |
January 28, 2025

Turnmill Limited Expands Portfolio with Acquisition of Dealmakers Forums LLC

Turnmill Limited, a leading global operator of large-scale events for the financial services sector, is pleased to announce the acquisition of a majority stake in Dealmakers Forums LLC, a premier organizer of high-level events in the legal, finance, and technology industries, based in Brooklyn, New York. This strategic acquisition marks the third company to join Turnmill’s expanding portfolio, which also includes GBM: Global Banking & Markets and Completely Events, reinforcing Turnmill’s commitment to facilitating deal flow and connectivity across complex markets.

Dealmakers Forums is renowned for curating high-impact events that bring together senior executives and thought leaders to foster connections, share insights, and drive deal flow. Their flagship events — LF Dealmakers, the premier conference for litigation finance, and IP Dealmakers, the leading forum for intellectual property transactions — are indispensable to industry insiders and recognized for exceptional content, top-tier speakers, and highly effective one-to-one meetings.

Alex Johnson, Group CEO of Turnmill Limited, commented: “We are thrilled to welcome Dealmakers Forums into the Turnmill family. Their deep sector knowledge and expertise in creating impactful events complements our mission to support deal flow progression by bringing entire market ecosystems together. This acquisition enables us to broaden our reach within financial services to the legal and technology sectors, enhancing the value we provide to our clients and stakeholders.”

“Partnering with Turnmill is a transformative opportunity to amplify our impact and expand our global reach,” said Wendy Chou, founder and CEO of Dealmakers Forums LLC. “By uniting our expertise and shared dedication to excellence, we can elevate our event offerings, enhance the value we deliver to our participants, and create even stronger, more meaningful connections across industries globally.”

Adam Lewis, Partner at Horizon Capital, stated: “We are excited to continue to support Turnmill with this strategic acquisition. We believe this partnership will accelerate Turnmill’s growth trajectory and further establish its position as a leading operator of large-scale marketplace events.”

This acquisition underscores Turnmill’s dedication to expanding its global footprint and diversifying its portfolio to serve a broader range of sectors and geographies within the financial services industry. By integrating Dealmakers Forums’ expertise and established events, Turnmill aims to enhance its ability to facilitate high-level meetings and support deal flow progression across greater sub-sectors within global finance.

About Turnmill Limited: Turnmill Limited is a leading operator of large-scale events and services that support deal flow progression by curating entire market ecosystems and facilitating high-level meetings tailored to the financial services sector. Backed by Horizon Capital, Turnmill is established as a leading player, experiencing strong growth across its events portfolio in London, Dubai, Cape Town, Miami, Istanbul, and Riyadh. Turnmill’s portfolio includes GBM: Global Banking & Markets, which produces finance and investment conferences bringing together corporates, finance professionals, and investors, and Completely Events, known for organizing the UK’s leading retail property events.

About Dealmakers Forums LLC: Dealmakers Forums curates impactful event experiences for senior executives in the legal, finance, and technology industries. Renowned for its unwavering commitment to quality, Dealmakers Forums stand out with a results-driven approach that prioritizes one-to-one meetings and meaningful networking. By combining expertly crafted content, top-tier speakers, and a focus on building valuable connections, Dealmakers Forums delivers actionable insights and drives real business outcomes. Its flagship events include LF Dealmakers and IP Dealmakers.

About Horizon Capital: Horizon Capital is a private equity investor specialising in technology and business services. The firm was established by senior investment professionals who identified a significant market opportunity to invest in businesses in these sectors valued up to £100m. The partnership prides itself on its approach to helping business owners and managers realise their ambitions. Buy and build is at the heart of every Horizon Capital investment and the firm is a market leader in supporting companies pursuing this strategy. Horizon Capital has a proven track record in generating premium returns on investments. The unprecedented growth it delivers in its portfolio companies has been underpinned by deep and long-term investor relationships that span across two decades.

About the author

Harry Moran

Harry Moran

Commercial

View All
Commercial Regulatory Issues

Congress Debates Litigation Funding Bill

By John Freund |

Republican lawmakers have renewed their push to rein in third-party litigation funding, with a House Judiciary Committee debate highlighting how politically charged the issue has become.

An article in The Daily Signal reports that members of the House Judiciary Committee clashed this week over legislation that would require disclosure of third-party litigation funding arrangements in federal courts. Supporters of the bill framed it as a transparency measure aimed at exposing the financial interests behind major lawsuits, while opponents warned that the proposal risks limiting access to justice and unfairly targeting a growing segment of the legal finance market.

During the committee debate, Republican lawmakers argued that outside investors are increasingly influencing litigation in ways that can distort outcomes and inflate settlement values. Several speakers characterized litigation funders as profit-driven actors operating in the shadows, asserting that judges and defendants deserve to know who stands to benefit financially from a case. Proponents also linked litigation funding to broader concerns about rising legal costs and what they describe as abusive litigation practices.

Democratic members pushed back, questioning whether the bill was designed to solve an actual problem or simply to deter plaintiffs from bringing legitimate claims. Critics of the proposal argued that disclosure requirements could chill funding for complex and expensive cases, particularly those involving individual plaintiffs or smaller businesses facing well-capitalized defendants. They also raised concerns about confidentiality and whether revealing funding arrangements could give defendants a tactical advantage.

The debate reflects a broader national conversation about the role of litigation finance in the civil justice system. While disclosure requirements have already been adopted in certain courts and jurisdictions, the proposed legislation would impose a uniform federal standard. Supporters say this consistency is overdue, while opponents argue it could undermine carefully negotiated funding structures that allow cases to proceed at all.

Commercial

APCIA Supports Federal Litigation Funding Disclosure Bill

By John Freund |

The insurance industry has intensified its campaign for greater scrutiny of third-party litigation funding, with one of its most influential trade groups backing new federal legislation aimed squarely at disclosure.

An article in Insurance Journal reports that the American Property Casualty Insurance Association has thrown its support behind a proposed federal bill that would require parties in civil litigation to disclose the existence of litigation funding agreements. The legislation, which is currently being considered by the House Judiciary Committee, would mandate that courts be informed when a third party has a financial stake in the outcome of a lawsuit. Proponents argue that this information is essential for judges to understand who stands behind a claim and whether outside financial interests may be influencing litigation strategy.

APCIA framed its endorsement around long-standing concerns about rising litigation costs and what insurers describe as “social inflation.” According to the group, undisclosed litigation funding arrangements can drive up claim severity, prolong disputes, and ultimately increase costs for insurers and policyholders alike. By requiring transparency, APCIA believes courts would be better positioned to manage conflicts of interest, assess discovery disputes, and evaluate settlement dynamics.

The association has been an active voice in the national debate over litigation finance for several years, often aligning with other insurance and business groups calling for disclosure regimes at both the state and federal level. APCIA leadership emphasized that the proposed legislation is not intended to ban or restrict litigation funding outright, but rather to ensure that judges and opposing parties have visibility into financial relationships that could bear on a case.

The bill would apply broadly in federal courts and could have significant implications for how funded cases are litigated, particularly in complex commercial disputes and class actions where third-party capital is more common. Insurers view federal action as a way to establish consistency across jurisdictions, rather than relying on a patchwork of state rules and local practices.

Commercial Regulatory Issues

Why Big Law Is Walking Away From Suits Against Governments

Elite global law firms are increasingly declining to pursue massive claims against sovereign states, even when potential recoveries run into the billions. The trend reflects a reassessment inside Big Law of the risk, cost, and strategic value of investor state and public law disputes that can take years to resolve and often carry significant political and reputational complications.

An article in Law.com International reports that top-tier firms which once dominated investor state arbitration and other government facing disputes are now far more selective about taking on such matters. Lawyers interviewed for the piece point to a combination of commercial pressure, client demands, and internal firm dynamics that make these cases less attractive than they once were. Although headline damages can be enormous, the cases typically require years of work, large multidisciplinary teams, and significant upfront investment with no guarantee of recovery.

Another key factor is reputational risk. Firms are increasingly cautious about being seen as adversaries of governments, particularly in sensitive jurisdictions or disputes involving public policy, natural resources, or infrastructure. Partners noted that political backlash, enforcement uncertainty, and the potential impact on other client relationships all weigh heavily when firms decide whether to proceed.

The article also highlights that many corporate clients are less willing to bankroll these disputes directly. Budget scrutiny has intensified, and companies facing disputes with states are often reluctant to commit tens of millions in legal fees over a long time horizon. This dynamic has contributed to a rise in alternative fee arrangements and third party litigation funding, though even those tools do not fully offset the burden for law firms carrying significant work in progress.

As a result, specialist boutiques and arbitration focused firms are increasingly stepping into the space once dominated by global giants. These smaller players often have lower overhead, deeper niche expertise, and a greater tolerance for the long timelines associated with sovereign disputes.