Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Do You Give Samples?
Will You Settle For References?
Every so often, in a particular area of a professional practice, somebody gets the bright idea to give samples ' to give a half hour of free advice as a way to entice a prospective client to ask for more.
Two questions arise. Is it ethical? Is it good marketing?
The unqualified answer to both is ' it depends.
Lawyers and accountants give free advice all the time. They do it at seminars, in articles, in legal clinics, on television, on commuter train platforms, at dinner parties, and now, even online.
Is it ethical to give free advice in the hope of getting a client? Of course. Why else do professionals give so much free advice? (Except maybe to soothe one's own ego, or as a courtesy to a friend.)
How binding is free advice? Now there's the rub. If a lawyer or an accountant gives free advice that's bad, and gets the advisee into hot water, is the lawyer or the accountant liable? Not our station. We raise it just as a consideration and concern.
Is free advice (assuming a qualified source) worth more than the price of it? Of course. You don't pay for it.
Now for the other question ' is it a good marketing tool?
Yes, I think, if it's a gateway to advice that's really valuable. If it helps people understand why they really do need a professional ' a lawyer or an accountant ' to address the problem in question. If it's not superficial and the problem itself isn't trivial. If it helps define the magnitude of the problem and explain why further consultation is necessary (or maybe not necessary, which is also a service).
This implies, as well, that care is taken not to trivialize serious questions and problems by giving superficial answers.
It should also be realized that one simple action like this doesn't a marketing program make. It may get clients, but it doesn't shape a practice that conforms to the objectives that might be the vision of the partnership. It may get clients that are ephemeral, and give the firm a false security in numbers.
Building a sustaining and satisfying practice, on the other hand, requires a different kind of planning. And planning, for the professional firm of the next decade, begins not with the professional, but with the market.
And so the validity of a program of a free half hour depends upon what you want for the firm. If you want to get clients, this may get clients. If you want to build a practice, make sure the kind of clientele you get from this kind of activity builds the kind of practice you want. Getting clients isn't always the same thing as building a sustaining and satisfying practice.
Either way, do it with your eyes open ' knowing why you're doing it and what you mean to get out of it.
Bruce W. Marcus www.marcusletter.com [email protected]
Will You Settle For References?
Every so often, in a particular area of a professional practice, somebody gets the bright idea to give samples ' to give a half hour of free advice as a way to entice a prospective client to ask for more.
Two questions arise. Is it ethical? Is it good marketing?
The unqualified answer to both is ' it depends.
Lawyers and accountants give free advice all the time. They do it at seminars, in articles, in legal clinics, on television, on commuter train platforms, at dinner parties, and now, even online.
Is it ethical to give free advice in the hope of getting a client? Of course. Why else do professionals give so much free advice? (Except maybe to soothe one's own ego, or as a courtesy to a friend.)
How binding is free advice? Now there's the rub. If a lawyer or an accountant gives free advice that's bad, and gets the advisee into hot water, is the lawyer or the accountant liable? Not our station. We raise it just as a consideration and concern.
Is free advice (assuming a qualified source) worth more than the price of it? Of course. You don't pay for it.
Now for the other question ' is it a good marketing tool?
Yes, I think, if it's a gateway to advice that's really valuable. If it helps people understand why they really do need a professional ' a lawyer or an accountant ' to address the problem in question. If it's not superficial and the problem itself isn't trivial. If it helps define the magnitude of the problem and explain why further consultation is necessary (or maybe not necessary, which is also a service).
This implies, as well, that care is taken not to trivialize serious questions and problems by giving superficial answers.
It should also be realized that one simple action like this doesn't a marketing program make. It may get clients, but it doesn't shape a practice that conforms to the objectives that might be the vision of the partnership. It may get clients that are ephemeral, and give the firm a false security in numbers.
Building a sustaining and satisfying practice, on the other hand, requires a different kind of planning. And planning, for the professional firm of the next decade, begins not with the professional, but with the market.
And so the validity of a program of a free half hour depends upon what you want for the firm. If you want to get clients, this may get clients. If you want to build a practice, make sure the kind of clientele you get from this kind of activity builds the kind of practice you want. Getting clients isn't always the same thing as building a sustaining and satisfying practice.
Either way, do it with your eyes open ' knowing why you're doing it and what you mean to get out of it.
Bruce W. Marcus www.marcusletter.com [email protected]
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.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
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.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.