Adventures In Legal Marketing Blasphemy

Print This Post

You may also like...

14 Responses

  1. Mark says:

    I agree with you on the marketing; however, I must confess that I myself am appalled (though not enraged) by the placeholder website. Maybe it's a generation gap, but it seems like a Thanksgiving without turkey. Why….why don't you have a turkey? You're supposed to have turkey! It doesn't matter if you don't like turkey!

    But that's just my neurosis.

  2. Ken says:

    Well, Mark, there might be just a tinge of "fuck you, we're so awesome that it's 2010 and we don't need a website," like those tiresome hipster clubs without a sign.

  3. Mark says:

    Ah. Understood. The PBR Gambit.

  4. SPQR says:

    SEO is just a shakedown.

  5. Scott Jacobs says:

    Ken, you don't have an unmarried sister, do you?

  6. Turk says:

    I once had a client dump his current lawyer for me shortly after hiring lawyer #1. Why? Because when the client tried to get info on lawyer #1 there was nothing to be found on the web.

    So yeah, you really do need a website, because those that are looking to hire you (and perhaps considering another firm or two) want some info.

    There are about a billion or so web developers that would love to build you a nice site, at a modest $30 – 80/hr. Hire one of them and get something up.

    And get that restraining order against Mr. Annoying Twat.

  7. Erich Martell says:

    AWESOME post. All snark directed at legitimate targets – and wonderfully done!

  8. Bryan C says:

    Forget the SEO scammers and tell the hard-sell marketers where to go. I hate those guys.

    It's not something I get "outraged" about, but I'd personally think twice about doing business with any professional service provider that doesn't have a web presence of some kind. Sadly, most placeholder sites are the online equivalent of a sign that consists of a torn piece of paper with your name written in Sharpie. An accurate Google Places page, for example, is much more appealing to me than a half-assed placeholder.

  9. Steve Cook says:

    My personal favorite are the seemingly reputable social media/blog "evangelists." In particular, those who charge outrageous sums of money to teach law firms "how to blog" and who advocate an inefficient course of action solely because it fits their business models.

  10. Valerie says:

    As a legal television producer and very low key creative services person, I bump into GOCTEPOF on occasion. As a competitor, I too find them obnoxious and condescending, while I get clients that wouldn't dream of speaking to them.

    There's a lot to be said for building genuine, no pressure relationships in the appropriate, non-invasive manner. Besides, most of my clients come from referrals.

  11. Bruce Colwin says:

    I'm sure you've inspired many other firms to now take their websites offline.

  12. Ken says:

    If I can get them to cancel their malpractice insurance, it will be time to implement MY MASTER PLAN.

  13. Joni Mueller says:

    I am a legal secretary and a web designer and I know lawyers don't respond well to those tactics. They know what they want and when they want it, and then they go get it. All of my lawfirm related web design business has been strictly word of mouth, and in this industry, that's what matters. That email was basically a cold call and it will be a cold day in (you know where) before I ever do something like that. It depends on the kind of law you practice whether you really need a web site and whether that web site will garner a substantial amount of business. But it is nice to have. It helps when clients or corporate counsel are checking you out. Because like it or not, most people when choosing lawyers these days (who aren't fortunate enough to have a referral) will open their browser rather than the yellow pages. Just my two.

  1. November 23, 2010

    […] Please, law firm marketers, don't assume we're in need of your services [Popehat] […]