Law Firm Marketing Forum

[utlaw2007]

TL;DR most new lawyers who try to do the hybrid hourly/contingency structure fail

I should have been more clear. Do a hybrid of flat fee and contingency fee. I hate hourly fee structures. They suck. They are highly inefficient. I don't use them unless I'm defending a small corporate client. Your corporate clients are really hard to get, but once you snag one, you better do all litigation for that client because they are going to come to you for everything. You won't get bogged down with hourly litigation work because you won't have that many corporate clients, if any, when starting up.

The retainer is a form of a flat fee. Depending on the laws of your state and depending on whether you comply with those laws, your retainer may actually be a fee advance. Either way, do this at the beginning only. The hourly contingency fee hybrids are dumb because the percentage is too low. Lawyers who use this aren't good. They aren't confident they are going to win. That's why it's so important to be proficient at litigation. You have to win to get paid. If you are not proficient with litigation, you have to resort to having a volume litigation practice where cases are settled often before are right after a lawsuit filing.

And it's a gamble. Your only concern should be the fight. But being proficient allows you to settle cases in the early stage of litigation. The amounts won't be a whole lot. But they will be enough to last you for 6 months or so. Once you get better, you can settle cases in the later stages for more money. Or you can just go to trial. Of course, your client has final say, but they often follow your recommendation.

[utlaw2007]

Do you realize that most contingency cases can drag on for YEARS? and you're seriously suggesting a fresh law grad to take on this business model? what is a new practicing attorney supposed to do for income while waiting on that settlement? he doesn't have a warchest to fall back on like more established bigger firms so is he just supposed to bet it all on black and hope to get that million dollar settlement that he's been working on for free for the past year?

I normally don't like to repeat myself and this board doesn't like people to repeat themselves. But I'll give a highly condensed response. First of all, you won't get any hourly paying clients when you are new or when you are small.

You could charge flat fees, but that only works for a few practice areas.

If you would have read the thread that I instructed you to read in a previous post, you would see that I advocated charging a retainer fee in addition to a contingency fee. That way, you have the best of both worlds of the contingency fee and flat fee. Or, if you cannot meet the legal requirements for your state in regards to true retainers, you can implement a hybrid fee structure that combines the most favorable elements of all three. I can't tell you exactly how to do it since you have to adjust to whatever clients you get.

Oh like the guy did in this article?

http://www.litigationandtrial.com/2012/ ... -practice/.

TL;DR most new lawyers who try to do the hybrid hourly/contingency structure fail, bc they spend all their time doing the hourly work just to stay afloat, forcing them to neglect the contingency work. And yea the big point in that article is that the big guys can afford to do contingency bc of the law of large numbers. If they get 100 contingency cases, they only need to win a few, or something like that. Whereas, the new lawyer does not have a warchest and one drawn out case can bankrupt him.

You completely misunderstand the notion of hybrid fees. While I do not like the hourly fee structure hybrids, they can still be effective. When you do a hybrid, that does not mean that you are employing different fee structures on different cases, it means you are employing a mixture of different fee structures on the same case.

When doing an hourly contingency fee hybrid, you're employing them on the same case. You don't neglect contingency work because you're getting paid by the hour while you work the same case that also has a contingency fee. It is impossible to neglect contingency fee work because it is the same work as it is the same case.

For example, a lawyer will typically charge a 20% contingency fee on case A. That same lawyer is also making his client pay him $100 an hour to work on case A. So His client has to pay him $100 an hour AND a 20% contingency fee if he wins.

I just don't like hourly hybrids like this because they require you to reduce the contingency fee percentage. There is no neglect because it is the same case. Hybrid fees are for the same case.

[utlaw2007]

Oh like the guy did in this article?

http://www.litigationandtrial.com/2012/ ... -practice/.

No. Not like the guy in this article. He misses the boat miserably. This is why you charge RETAINERS on your contingency fee cases. My goodness, this is not a hard concept. I have repeated this a million times. Please read and correctly comprehend what I am saying. I am trying to help you, but you are trying my patience because you don't listen.

Having a mix of criminal and contingency fee cases is not employing a HYBRID FEE. Charging a retainer or flat fee advance on the same contingency fee case you are working is how you get money while you wait for your case to payout. IT'S THE SAME CASE! How are you neglecting contingency fee work when you are working on a contingency fee case where you got paid a retainer or fee advance on that same case?

[utlaw2007]

And no, you do not have to have a warchest. Any lawyer that tells you that doesn't know much.If you are doing products liability or engineering or medical intensive cases for individual clients, then yeah. But corporate clients can pay for their own sh&^%$ in terms of expenses. And there are plenty of contingency fee case types that don't require a lot of expenses. So many solos are so personal injury crazed that they think they have to have this big warchest. Personal injury is not the only fu&^%$ing practice area for solos. It's easy as sh^%$# and that is why so many solos practice it. They can't do sh&^%$ else. There are a host of contingency fee type cases that do not require a warchest. This is the misinformation that I alluded to earlier, misinformation that comes from other solo practitioners. It drives me crazy! Look, you can either follow his advice or follow mine. But I will tell you this, a lawyer that is unaware of retainer fees on contingency fee cases is pretty fu&^%$ing dumb.

[utlaw2007]

Please reread my posts because I already talk about what some of these areas are. You can also kind of figure them out, too. Do some work. Look at several law firms and see what they do. Cold call some lawyers to ask questions about expenses.

[utlaw2007]

And for most personal injury cases, you don't have to have a big warchest anyway. For one, you try to settle the case before trial and before you hire experts if you need expensive experts. All kinds of lawyers do it. But if you can't be creative and savvy, you shouldn't be in litigation.

[Lawdork]

Sorry didn't mean to test your patience. utlaw, do you think the PPC high volume strategy would work well for DUI cases? I think I remember you saying that DUI can be very lucrative if you can drive the volume and you work efficiently with a flat fee. Idk I may be putting too much faith in PPC but I feel like as soon someone needs an atty for something like DUi and they don't know any attys personally or through friends, they're gonna google for them. PPC would be just one way to drive business, other ways would be through traditional networking. I just think the high volume route is more feasible that the big contingency cases which I think clients will press more for attys with extensive experience.

And are you more of the rule or the exception when it comes to bagging big contingent cases for someone with not a whole lot of experience (since you stated straight out of law school). I would think with criminal, family, pi cases, the clients would be less sophisticated and wouldn't do research on your experience. However, some one or a business with a lot on the line will either go with a solo who has been around or with a bigger firm.

[lacrossebrother]

how much do you invest in technology/legal management/automation solutions?

[utlaw2007]

Sorry didn't mean to test your patience. utlaw, do you think the PPC high volume strategy would work well for DUI cases? I think I remember you saying that DUI can be very lucrative if you can drive the volume and you work efficiently with a flat fee. Idk I may be putting too much faith in PPC but I feel like as soon someone needs an atty for something like DUi and they don't know any attys personally or through friends, they're gonna google for them. PPC would be just one way to drive business, other ways would be through traditional networking. I just think the high volume route is more feasible that the big contingency cases which I think clients will press more for attys with extensive experience.

And are you more of the rule or the exception when it comes to bagging big contingent cases for someone with not a whole lot of experience (since you stated straight out of law school). I would think with criminal, family, pi cases, the clients would be less sophisticated and wouldn't do research on your experience. However, some one or a business with a lot on the line will either go with a solo who has been around or with a bigger firm.

Apology accepted. And my apologies for getting testy.

PPC is a great way to go if you want volume. It's probably required nowadays. You have to use some form of online advertising if you want volume. I'm mainly saying that you may have to supplement PPC advertising with some other form of advertising. I don't know much about volume practices because I have not tried to get volume.

PPC for DWI/DUI sounds really good, actually. And PPC for any criminal matter sounds good. PPC for Guardianship cases also sounds pretty good. But once you get into much lower paying areas, like divorces for clients who have little money or bankruptcies or occupational licenses, then PPC may not yeild the volume you need to make a decent amount of money. But I'm speculating, though. I have no experience with PPC. It's just that none of the experienced lawyers I know used it. Perhaps, they didn't understand it. But I hear that it's a great tool for obtaining volume. But you also have to consider the competition of what you are doing and whether you can still get volume. Because DWI's can net you a decent amount of upfront money, volume doesn't have to be crazy. Volume is just needed if you want to be rich or almost rich.

[utlaw2007]

And are you more of the rule or the exception when it comes to bagging big contingent cases for someone with not a whole lot of experience (since you stated straight out of law school). I would think with criminal, family, pi cases, the clients would be less sophisticated and wouldn't do research on your experience. However, some one or a business with a lot on the line will either go with a solo who has been around or with a bigger firm.

Good question. I'm kind of an exception, but not as much as you think. The reason why I got into plaintiff's work to begin with is because a law school classmate of mine settled a huge case within two years of our graduation. he made 1.7 MILLION DOLLARS OFF THAT ONE CASE. It was a total bluff because he didn't knoww hat he was doing. Contingency fee work is a giant game of poker. When you are just starting out, you want to settle cases as quickly as you can. The expenses are much lower and you get paid faster, even if the amounts are lower. The amounts are still good.

You can still get great employment cases or even catastrophic personal injury cases with little to no experience. I have more employment cases than anything. They cost very little to work and the payouts can be pretty substantial.

The key to getting around the experience question is self studying to the point you can ramble off stuff that sounds good. Think aloud in front of potential clients. When you do that, you sound like you know what you are doing and you can avoid the questions on experience altogether.

[AVBucks4239]

Sorry didn't mean to test your patience. utlaw, do you think the PPC high volume strategy would work well for DUI cases? I think I remember you saying that DUI can be very lucrative if you can drive the volume and you work efficiently with a flat fee. Idk I may be putting too much faith in PPC but I feel like as soon someone needs an atty for something like DUi and they don't know any attys personally or through friends, they're gonna google for them. PPC would be just one way to drive business, other ways would be through traditional networking. I just think the high volume route is more feasible that the big contingency cases which I think clients will press more for attys with extensive experience.

And are you more of the rule or the exception when it comes to bagging big contingent cases for someone with not a whole lot of experience (since you stated straight out of law school). I would think with criminal, family, pi cases, the clients would be less sophisticated and wouldn't do research on your experience. However, some one or a business with a lot on the line will either go with a solo who has been around or with a bigger firm.

Apology accepted. And my apologies for getting testy.

PPC is a great way to go if you want volume. It's probably required nowadays. You have to use some form of online advertising if you want volume. I'm mainly saying that you may have to supplement PPC advertising with some other form of advertising. I don't know much about volume practices because I have not tried to get volume.

PPC for DWI/DUI sounds really good, actually. And PPC for any criminal matter sounds good. PPC for Guardianship cases also sounds pretty good. But once you get into much lower paying areas, like divorces for clients who have little money or bankruptcies or occupational licenses, then PPC may not yeild the volume you need to make a decent amount of money. But I'm speculating, though. I have no experience with PPC. It's just that none of the experienced lawyers I know used it. Perhaps, they didn't understand it. But I hear that it's a great tool for obtaining volume. But you also have to consider the competition of what you are doing and whether you can still get volume. Because DWI's can net you a decent amount of upfront money, volume doesn't have to be crazy. Volume is just needed if you want to be rich or almost rich.

Don't have close to the experience of UTlaw, but just to add to this:

I answer the cold calls at my firm, which has been around since the 1870s and has a lot of reputable attorneys. I ask every single cold call where they heard from us or how they found us, and I'd say less than 10% are from online searches. It's almost always, "Oh, you guys represent my friend's business," or "I heard you guys had the best corporate practice in town," or "I know Partner A from years ago."

Maybe that's just my market, but it almost always seems to me that people get referrals first and then go online only to find your contact information/website.

[utlaw2007]

Sorry didn't mean to test your patience. utlaw, do you think the PPC high volume strategy would work well for DUI cases? I think I remember you saying that DUI can be very lucrative if you can drive the volume and you work efficiently with a flat fee. Idk I may be putting too much faith in PPC but I feel like as soon someone needs an atty for something like DUi and they don't know any attys personally or through friends, they're gonna google for them. PPC would be just one way to drive business, other ways would be through traditional networking. I just think the high volume route is more feasible that the big contingency cases which I think clients will press more for attys with extensive experience.

And are you more of the rule or the exception when it comes to bagging big contingent cases for someone with not a whole lot of experience (since you stated straight out of law school). I would think with criminal, family, pi cases, the clients would be less sophisticated and wouldn't do research on your experience. However, some one or a business with a lot on the line will either go with a solo who has been around or with a bigger firm.

Apology accepted. And my apologies for getting testy.

PPC is a great way to go if you want volume. It's probably required nowadays. You have to use some form of online advertising if you want volume. I'm mainly saying that you may have to supplement PPC advertising with some other form of advertising. I don't know much about volume practices because I have not tried to get volume.

PPC for DWI/DUI sounds really good, actually. And PPC for any criminal matter sounds good. PPC for Guardianship cases also sounds pretty good. But once you get into much lower paying areas, like divorces for clients who have little money or bankruptcies or occupational licenses, then PPC may not yeild the volume you need to make a decent amount of money. But I'm speculating, though. I have no experience with PPC. It's just that none of the experienced lawyers I know used it. Perhaps, they didn't understand it. But I hear that it's a great tool for obtaining volume. But you also have to consider the competition of what you are doing and whether you can still get volume. Because DWI's can net you a decent amount of upfront money, volume doesn't have to be crazy. Volume is just needed if you want to be rich or almost rich.

Don't have close to the experience of UTlaw, but just to add to this:

I answer the cold calls at my firm, which has been around since the 1870s and has a lot of reputable attorneys. I ask every single cold call where they heard from us or how they found us, and I'd say less than 10% are from online searches. It's almost always, "Oh, you guys represent my friend's business," or "I heard you guys had the best corporate practice in town," or "I know Partner A from years ago."

Maybe that's just my market, but it almost always seems to me that people get referrals first and then go online only to find your contact information/website.

I totally agree. When I was first starting out, the experienced but young practitioners told me the same thing. They all said online searches didn't yield that many cases for them.

[utlaw2007]

how much do you invest in technology/legal management/automation solutions?

I don't invest a dime in these things. But my practice doesn't require that I do. It wouldn't even be helpful for me to do it. I think these things are needed for volume practices. Or practices that have a few+ associates. Right now, it's just me. But I'm operating a bit over maximum capacity and I will be hiring my first associate in the fairly near future.

[utlaw2007]

Because PPC is pay per click, it ought to pay for itself and not hurt you.

[smallfirmassociate]

Most small shops I know do some print advertising, sponsor some events, and maybe take out a few radio spots.

I have done hourly billing as my primary form for my entire career. I find nothing wrong with it. I also have several civil lit cases, primarily on contingency (although some are defendant side work and thus hourly). Those cases don't get neglected. I mean, you're a lawyer, you have ethical duties and deadlines--you'll get it done.

My general approach is to knock out my hourly and flat-fee stuff like criminal law and transactional work first. I know that sounds fraught with peril, but I block off about 2 slow times (usually afternoons in the middle of the week) each week on my calendar with a reminder to work on certain civil case issues. If it gets that bad and I have a deadline approaching, I'll tell my secretary to hold my calls for a few hours and lock myself in the conference room away from my other files. Or I'll take a case home and work on it after dinner, which I do probably twice every three months.

You definitely have to stay organized, but my practice has always gone fine as a combination of hourly, contingency, and flat fee. I made partner and have revenue about $325k in low COL area with spikes for lit wins and large estates.

ETA: I don't think pay-per-click would be worth it. It'd probably be the worst of the worst in terms of volume cases. I do maintain a web presence just for credibility, but I see it more as a reputation tool than as business generation. Those are related, but the latter is a result of the former. In other words, your practice results in your reputation. Your web presence merely confirms your reputation. Then work comes in the door. Thus, web presence without reputation might not be a great combo.

[wwwcol]

Because PPC is pay per click, it ought to pay for itself and not hurt you.

It depends on your conversion rate though. It's not as easy as 1 click = 1 call from a prospective client. If you have 10 frivolous clicks/day (which happens all the time) or people who are just browsing, then suddenly your AdWords budget blows up.

Plus PPC becomes expensive as hell once you get into easy practice areas, like DUI and other simple criminal defense charges that will likely be pled out. This is everyone's bread and butter because it's so easy, so they are willing to pay a lot in advertising. For example, in my county (large, suburban, think ~500k residents), there are about 30 solos/small firms whose ads regularly come up in searching for DUI. Adwords estimates the bid to get an ad on the first page is about $30/click.

This isn't to say it's not worth it, but you need to be very smart about which keywords/practice areas you choose to compete on. You also need to monitor your statistics like a hawk and build your campaigns in a way that maximizes chances of getting someone to call you while minimizing the number of BS clicks from people who have no intention of hiring a lawyer.

Disclaimer: This is my experience w/r/t crim defense, no idea about civil practice areas.

[utlaw2007]

Because PPC is pay per click, it ought to pay for itself and not hurt you.

It depends on your conversion rate though. It's not as easy as 1 click = 1 call from a prospective client. If you have 10 frivolous clicks/day (which happens all the time) or people who are just browsing, then suddenly your AdWords budget blows up.

Plus PPC becomes expensive as hell once you get into easy practice areas, like DUI and other simple criminal defense charges that will likely be pled out. This is everyone's bread and butter because it's so easy, so they are willing to pay a lot in advertising. For example, in my county (large, suburban, think ~500k residents), there are about 30 solos/small firms whose ads regularly come up in searching for DUI. Adwords estimates the bid to get an ad on the first page is about $30/click.

This isn't to say it's not worth it, but you need to be very smart about which keywords/practice areas you choose to compete on. You also need to monitor your statistics like a hawk and build your campaigns in a way that maximizes chances of getting someone to call you while minimizing the number of BS clicks from people who have no intention of hiring a lawyer.

Disclaimer: This is my experience w/r/t crim defense, no idea about civil practice areas.

I have no experience with PPC or any other form of online advertising outside of my website. So I was just speculating. But I also think it is not wise to go for a volume practice when just starting because there is so much advertising that needs to be done. And you still may get a horrible return on your investment. And when you are just starting, you simply cannot afford to waste money that you just do not have much of.

[utlaw2007]

Thus, web presence without reputation might not be a great combo.

I have to disagree with this. As a start up, you have to do everything you can to introduce yourself to the world. I do agree that a website confirms a rep. But it also introduces you to people who do not know you. A website is essential to establishing trust. You can establish trust without a website. But having a website makes it way easier.

[utlaw2007]

I took longer than I should to get a website. A website should be an early investment when starting up. You don't have to pay a lot of money for one. Just get something inexpensive and good. You still want a site that is pretty clean. But you don't need to spend a lot of money for the best site. You just need to get something that introduces you to people or something that verifies to people that you are who you say you are when you meet people.

Remember, unlike a small firm that has been around for a few years, absolutely no one knows who you are. So you have to do what you can to be noticed and do what you can to inform people who you are. And a website, even if it is a cheap website, will do that. My website is very cheap. But I spent tons of time on it and it looks good. It looks dated, but it looks good. Remember this, too, your verbal content is what is most important. Sure, you want to have a site that is visibly pleasing to the eye, but you don't need the shiniest site to do that.

If you want to get better quality cases, your verbal content has to be really good. That's where most of your focus should be. That's how you can separate yourself from the pack. Explain, explain, explain or else get saddled with cheap a$$ cases. You don't have a rep. You're establishing one. And you can do so much quicker than you think.

[utlaw2007]

I should add that most small law firms would disagree as to what I say about verbal content because they don't focus on verbal content. The problem with that is that they have been around for a few years. But who needs advice on solo practice if you already have a rep to work with? I'm trying to help you establish that rep when you are brand spanking new. And to do that, you need to focus on your verbal content. You have to show people and small businesses that you know what you are doing and are proficient at it. No one else really does and that is why you should. It sets you apart from everyone else.

[utlaw2007]

And I'm not talking about blogs. You want to blog. But who the hell reads blogs? They are long. Most people don't care or have time for them. You need to work on your descriptions of your practice areas. Remember, you are trying to sell your services. And you need to work on your introduction to your firm on the first page. And you need to have a tag line. You need to work on your attorney profile and your about the firm section, too. You're trying to sell yourself and build trust. You want to paint a picture of what you can bring to the table and how your personality and past life experiences can help you do that. And you have to revise, revise, and then revise some more.

By the way, it will take a few months after you publish your website before it is perfectly written. You'll think it's all good, but as you continuously read it from time to time, you'll see things you want to rewrite.

[utlaw2007]

. Made a mistake

[utlaw2007]

I should add that most small law firms would disagree as to what I say about verbal content because they don't focus on verbal content. The problem with that is that they have been around for a few years. But who needs advice on solo practice if you already have a rep to work with? I'm trying to help you establish that rep when you are brand spanking new. And to do that, you need to focus on your verbal content. You have to show people and small businesses that you know what you are doing and are proficient at it. No one else really seems to focus on verbal content and that is why you should. It sets you apart from everyone else.

[wwwcol]

I took longer than I should to get a website. A website should be an early investment when starting up. You don't have to pay a lot of money for one. Just get something inexpensive and good. You still want a site that is pretty clean. But you don't need to spend a lot of money for the best site. You just need to get something that introduces you to people or something that verifies to people that you are who you say you are when you meet people.

Remember, unlike a small firm that has been around for a few years, absolutely no one knows who you are. So you have to do what you can to be noticed and do what you can to inform people who you are. And a website, even if it is a cheap website, will do that. My website is very cheap. But I spent tons of time on it and it looks good. It looks dated, but it looks good. Remember this, too, your verbal content is what is most important. Sure, you want to have a site that is visibly pleasing to the eye, but you don't need the shiniest site to do that.

If you want to get better quality cases, your verbal content has to be really good. That's where most of your focus should be. That's how you can separate yourself from the pack. Explain, explain, explain or else get saddled with cheap a$$ cases. You don't have a rep. You're establishing one. And you can do so much quicker than you think.

Website is critical. And y'all might be surprised how far a simple, concise website will go. But w/r/t "explain, explain, explain," just be careful that you're not too verbose in your content. Most people don't want to waste their time reading treatises on practice area X and why you're the best to handle matter Y. They just want enough to assess whether you're competent and legitimate. Remember, the purpose of your website is not to lock down the client-- rather, you want them to call you so you can lock them down over the phone/arrange an in-person meeting (which is where you make your full pitch).

Also, depending on whether you're technically inclined, consider building a website yourself. I spent a few months getting into the weeds of HTML/SEO, and as a result feel like I have a much better grasp on online advertising than the competition. My website consistently appears on page 1 of Google organically, whereas I would be paying $10-12/click to get an equivalent paid placement.

[utlaw2007]

I took longer than I should to get a website. A website should be an early investment when starting up. You don't have to pay a lot of money for one. Just get something inexpensive and good. You still want a site that is pretty clean. But you don't need to spend a lot of money for the best site. You just need to get something that introduces you to people or something that verifies to people that you are who you say you are when you meet people.

Remember, unlike a small firm that has been around for a few years, absolutely no one knows who you are. So you have to do what you can to be noticed and do what you can to inform people who you are. And a website, even if it is a cheap website, will do that. My website is very cheap. But I spent tons of time on it and it looks good. It looks dated, but it looks good. Remember this, too, your verbal content is what is most important. Sure, you want to have a site that is visibly pleasing to the eye, but you don't need the shiniest site to do that.

If you want to get better quality cases, your verbal content has to be really good. That's where most of your focus should be. That's how you can separate yourself from the pack. Explain, explain, explain or else get saddled with cheap a$$ cases. You don't have a rep. You're establishing one. And you can do so much quicker than you think.

Website is critical. And y'all might be surprised how far a simple, concise website will go. But w/r/t "explain, explain, explain," just be careful that you're not too verbose in your content. Most people don't want to waste their time reading treatises on practice area X and why you're the best to handle matter Y. They just want enough to assess whether you're competent and legitimate. Remember, the purpose of your website is not to lock down the client-- rather, you want them to call you so you can lock them down over the phone/arrange an in-person meeting (which is where you make your full pitch).

Also, depending on whether you're technically inclined, consider building a website yourself. I spent a few months getting into the weeds of HTML/SEO, and as a result feel like I have a much better grasp on online advertising than the competition. My website consistently appears on page 1 of Google organically, whereas I would be paying $10-12/click to get an equivalent paid placement.

Very true. When you' re explaining, you don't want to explain too much about the substantive area of law. But you do need to convince people why they need your services. You have to let people know the types of jams you can get them out of in terms of disputes they may encounter.