It was the wrong thread

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
cite please. firm name and describe "discount. "80% of our normal rate?" If I read the article would i be able to answer these questions?

I can't say -- it's confidential. They don't like people to know.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I can't say -- it's confidential. They don't like people to know.

put it this way, if you bought into "we'll cut our rate to 80%" and actually directed work based upon the promise, let me know before our first date.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
put it this way, if you bought into "we'll cut our rate to 80%" and actually directed work based upon the promise, let me know before our first date.

We did RFPs and compared the rates each firm would charge us, and I never have had the authority to direct work. I have been involved in pulling firms/individuals off an account, but never had the say in hiring.

And, yeah, I know it's bs. But I think some clients do pay the published rates.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
put it this way, if you bought into "we'll cut our rate to 80%" and actually directed work based upon the promise, let me know.

Indeed, it would precedent in this Republic for a large consumer of a product or services to utilize their value (read: the necessity of their continued consumption to the seller) to the service/goods provider to demand a discount based on the volume at which they purchase those goods/services. It is unheard of. Mr. Cisco Lawtalkinguy is unsane.

Your logic is compelling and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter, including the expose about my torrid affair with Bridget Moynihan.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Indeed, it would precedent in this Republic for a large consumer of a product or services to utilize their value (read: the necessity of their continued consumption to the seller) to the service/goods provider to demand a discount based on the volume at which they purchase those goods/services. It is unheard of. Mr. Cisco Lawtalkinguy is unsane.

Your logic is compelling and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter, including the expose about my torrid affair with Bridget Moynihan.

first of all, I haven't read the article because the link seems to merge into comments after a paragraph.

second, I am one big ass shot lawyer. i know what I'm talking about. absent some fixed total or at least a cap, you are buying an empty promise. but you rock on. some people like Kool Aid.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
first of all, I haven't read the article because the link seems to merge into comments after a paragraph.

second, I am one big ass shot lawyer. i know what I'm talking about. absent some fixed total or at least a cap, you are buying an empty promise. but you rock on. some people like Kool Aid.

I think we're talking past one anothere here. I count a "fixed total" or "cap" as a discount. Why else would a client demand one? I've never ben capped or had a total (though oddly, I once had a monthly minumum "suggested" quite stridently to me), but from people I know who have, its usually burned through quickly and causes the firm to eat a lot of hours toward the tail end of whatever service its providing or the agreement's duration.

I agree with you that cutting hourly rates is just silliness. That just changes the billing dynamic from occassionally honest to a variety the outright fraud classic insurance defense shops perpetrate under the justification that it's ok because the rates are so low.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I think we're talking past one anothere here. I count a "fixed total" or "cap" as a discount. Why else would a client demand one? .

Certainty. I suspect clients don't see it as a discount but more of what they "should" be paying. They know that lawyers overbill (even if honestly) because those are teh incentives. A cap or fixed sum gives them certainty and cost containment.

As for going over, I suspect firms would figure it out the more they have these arrangements. E.g., make sure we leave at least 20% of the budget for finalizing the settlement agreement.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Certainty. I suspect clients don't see it as a discount but more of what they "should" be paying. They know that lawyers overbill (even if honestly) because those are teh incentives. A cap or fixed sum gives them certainty and cost containment.

How's that different from a discount? If it costs X with an industry "pad" of 20% tacked on, and you knock off that padding, then you've got a discount, no? That the thing discounted off the cost was fraudulent means nothing.* I'd say certainty is part of it, but cost cutting's the biggest part, as that cat from Cisco admitted.

*I used to bill. "Honest padding" is maybe 10% of padding.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
How's that different from a discount? If it costs X with an industry "pad" of 20% tacked on, and you knock off that padding, then you've got a discount, no? That the thing discounted off the cost was fraudulent means nothing.* I'd say certainty is part of it, but cost cutting's the biggest part, as that cat from Cisco admitted.

*I used to bill. "Honest padding" is maybe 10% of padding.

I guess it depends on what you consider the baseline. If you go into a car dealer and they try to charge you more than MSRP, but you insist on MSRP, are you getting a "discount"?

My point was this--the costs of defending a case are to some degree affected by a law firm's choice of how much time to put towards it. One way to control that is to tell the firm to keep the hours down. Another way is to tell the firm after they send the bill "this is too high". A third way is to tell them in advance you'll pay X amount and nothing more. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, but I'm not sure any one of those constitutes a "discount" so much as it's a method of cost control.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I guess it depends on what you consider the baseline. If you go into a car dealer and they try to charge you more than MSRP, but you insist on MSRP, are you getting a "discount"?

My point was this--the costs of defending a case are to some degree affected by a law firm's choice of how much time to put towards it. One way to control that is to tell the firm to keep the hours down. Another way is to tell the firm after they send the bill "this is too high". A third way is to tell them in advance you'll pay X amount and nothing more. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, but I'm not sure any one of those constitutes a "discount" so much as it's a method of cost control.

I think we're parsing semantics, but I see your point (I think). I guess you'd call my discount a "discount off traditional billing" or something like that. I view a discount as the difference between what you pay after you've negotiated and what you'd otherwise pay in the marketplace. If ACME MonsterCorp can demand a cap on legal fees for a certain type of case where it would otherwise be charged a higher fee, ACME's getting a discount.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I think we're parsing semantics, but I see your point (I think). I guess you'd call my discount a "discount off traditional billing" or something like that. I view a discount as the difference between what you pay after you've negotiated and what you'd otherwise pay in the marketplace. If ACME MonsterCorp can demand a cap on legal fees for a certain type of case where it would otherwise be charged a higher fee, ACME's getting a discount.

Yeah, cost savings or discount. I was focused on the law firm getting paid less to do less, and omitting the low-value added work they use to drive up hours. I suppose that's like getting a discount for not taking the underbody rustproofing the care dealer offers.

[Penske_Account]

This thread depresses me. I am quitting the law, there has to be a better way......

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
This thread depresses me. I am quitting the law, there has to be a better way......

Become a Referral Lawyer for PI and class action firms. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Minimum risk; maximim potential upside.

You have any buddies in institutional investing or who work in unions?

Become a regular at the kind of bar where people who get injured and would be quickest to sue for it would drink. There are guys who don't do shit and get paid $300k a year doing nothing more than pimping clients to trial counsel. All you need to get there is one or two big monster cases a year. Move to the ex-burbs and sell cases to trial lawyers in the cities.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Become a Referral Lawyer for PI and class action firms. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Minimum risk; maximim potential upside.

You have any buddies in institutional investing or who work in unions?

Become a regular at the kind of bar where people who get injured and would be quickest to sue for it would drink. There are guys who don't do shit and get paid $300k a year doing nothing more than pimping clients to trial counsel. All you need to get there is one or two big monster cases a year. Move to the ex-burbs and sell cases to trial lawyers in the cities.

Hhhmmm, do chicks dig guys who do this? It sounds promising but I want to keep sexual desirability at a maximum.......

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Hhhmmm, do chicks dig guys who do this? It sounds promising but I want to keep sexual desirability at a maximum.......

No.