Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ask the coach
Q: Our research department gathers intelligence for us about prospects we intend to approach. How much, and what type, info should we seek about prospects' current law firm relationships?
A: What you need depends on what you'll do with it when you get it. If you learn that the company is using firms A, B, C, D, E, F and G, what will you do with that knowledge? Too many lawyers who see a long list of law firms that work with a prospect defeat themselves. They conclude that it's futile to try to do business with that company, creating an excuse for inaction.
I personally don't worry too much about competitors, whether incumbent or potential. Think of incumbency as ownership of the past, with the future still up for grabs. If you're trying to convince a company to displace a longtime law firm in favor of you performing the same service, you're climbing a steep hill against large odds. What would the company get out of that? However, if you're engaging a prospect in a business discussion about emerging issues or problems, no one owns that problem/solution territory yet. If the incumbent were already solving the problem effectively, there would be no reason to talk with you. Let
the buyer decide the question of
territory.
Another problem with excessive data-gathering is that it's easy to confuse data with understanding; more data doesn't necessarily mean better understanding. Lawyers tend to be data-intensive, so it's understandable that they would want all information possible about the prospect. However, it's very easy to suffer analysis paralysis, using it as a delaying tactic to avoid taking sales action.
Sometimes a little information can go
a long way.
Q: Our research department gathers intelligence for us about prospects we intend to approach. How much, and what type, info should we seek about prospects' current law firm relationships?
A: What you need depends on what you'll do with it when you get it. If you learn that the company is using firms A, B, C, D, E, F and G, what will you do with that knowledge? Too many lawyers who see a long list of law firms that work with a prospect defeat themselves. They conclude that it's futile to try to do business with that company, creating an excuse for inaction.
I personally don't worry too much about competitors, whether incumbent or potential. Think of incumbency as ownership of the past, with the future still up for grabs. If you're trying to convince a company to displace a longtime law firm in favor of you performing the same service, you're climbing a steep hill against large odds. What would the company get out of that? However, if you're engaging a prospect in a business discussion about emerging issues or problems, no one owns that problem/solution territory yet. If the incumbent were already solving the problem effectively, there would be no reason to talk with you. Let
the buyer decide the question of
territory.
Another problem with excessive data-gathering is that it's easy to confuse data with understanding; more data doesn't necessarily mean better understanding. Lawyers tend to be data-intensive, so it's understandable that they would want all information possible about the prospect. However, it's very easy to suffer analysis paralysis, using it as a delaying tactic to avoid taking sales action.
Sometimes a little information can go
a long way.
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?