Comments on: The Shpoonkle-ization of a Legal Profession w/o Doc Review Jobs

By: Marc M. Meyer

Marc M. Meyer — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:24:21 +0000

Honestly, I don’t think this will work for most of my clients. In my areas of practice, specialized knowledge carries a bit of a premium and I am the low cost provider relative to most lawyers I know. The problem on my end is more one of convincing the PC that they need a lawyer when they can handle it themselves “for free”. But what they often don’t think about is the cost of not hiring an attorney with the specialized knowledge that I am developing (this goes both for the nursing clients dealing with the Nursing Board AND my ambulance business clients dealing with Medicare/Medicaid/every other payor out there). The key, in my opinion (I am sure this is shared by Chuck), is occupying a niche practice where specialized knowledge is valuable and can be leveraged.

However, this type of practice will affect those more “optional” services, like Estate Planning and Probate, Bankruptcy (not specialty niches, like Chuck’s) and other consumer oriented legal areas. These already are subject to substantial price pressures and a development like Shpoonkle will only serve to further depress a market that is already pressured by the likes of LegalZoom and other non-attorney providers of legal services. I also think that Stephanie may have the right vision – although I think that these branded networks will lead to a similar type of situation as HMO’s – what if your Legal brand provider doesn’t’ provide you with the right attorney, especially in a niche area where the insider knowledge is important?

By: Ross Keeling

Ross Keeling — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:14:09 +0000

Letting projects for bid is not a new thing, and from what I can tell it is not well suited for everything. Doing condemnation and eminent domain work for the Department of Transportation might be pretty well suited for letting, but services of a more personal nature would probably not be. Looking at other industries that rely on bidding might be helpful. Hiring the lowest bidder is common in commercial construction, but generally not in residential remodeling, for example, because the nature of the service is more personal and the client wants to hire a more qualified contractor, and perhaps one that can more likely be trusted entering their home and setting up equipment on their patio. Internet marketing hubs, have had very little success in that environment because private clients are sometimes unwilling to even solicit bids from somebody they have never met. Sometimes they won’t hire you if they don’t like the truck you drive. And even in commercial contracts the Design-Build method of delivery is more common now than ever, and partly because customers believe that they will get better service, and that contractors are more responsive, in a single source contract than through the traditional bidding method of delivery. I think that the legal profession, or those parts of the profession that are seen as personal services, has very little to worry about from a work distribution hub based on an e-bay style bidding process.

By: Bruce Cameron

Bruce Cameron — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:55:09 +0000

I’ll give it a pass, I’m just not ready to compete on price (experience taught me a hard lesson about Foonberg rule #1, so I’ll pass on seeing what ignoring rule #2 gets me).

Do I think lawyers will try it – sure. Based on the press release and what information there is one the site, there appears to be little risk and, potentially, high gain, so it seems a sweet deal for the newly graduated/unemployed lawyer.

Now, perhaps I’ve got my skepticism set way too high, or I just can’t wrap my mind completely around the economy of free, but I have my doubts that this is really a WYSIWYG deal – its sounds a little too good. Then there is the “no one knows if you’re a dog on the internet” question – while the site states that it will verify lawyers, there is no client verification, so how do I know that the “client” is really located in a state I’m licensed to practice in, really goes by that name, is not running a scam, etc.

I have no doubt that the internet, virtual law practices, social networks, the economics of free, alternative fee structures, and informed clients are rapidly and evolutionarily changing the practice of law, I just don’t see shpookle as a paradigm shifter – its more like bit-torrents a, perhaps useful technology that readily lends itself to lawsuits.

By: reuter

reuter — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 16:38:23 +0000

My criminal law & family law clients, relatively poor as they are, will not be comfortable entrusting their liberty or their children’s care to a lawyer they hire blind. I am really not worried.

-Dan Reuter

By: Susan Cartier Liebel

Susan Cartier Liebel — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:56:25 +0000

Stephanie, I agree with you. The real benefit, if this flies, is once an attorney and client are connected, the attorney as the opportunity to cultivate a long-term relationship with the client which takes the client out of the ‘auction’ site and into a permanent lawyer/client relationship. If there is nothing to lose and potential to gain…..

By: Jonathan Whetsell

Jonathan Whetsell — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:38:08 +0000

in this day and age, the paradigms are shifting in reference to typical business. musicians are forced to find new ways to monetize their talents since the online distribution of media and information has officially taken over. online media outlets are more profitable than print outlets, online shopping has taken more business in the past few years then stores themselves. this whole shift is slowly being applied to every facet of life. even medicine has had webMD for quite some time now. why not spread this all the way to the law office?
many recording artists banded together to try to prevent online distribution and downloading of music and failed. shpoonkle will be the “kazaa” or “limewire” to the law community- legally this time. instead of ducking away from the client with “meetings all day” and not returning phone calls, emails etc, shpoonkle seems to offer the client a 24-hour access to an entire community of legal correspondence.
if you are a lawyer and you say “i will not do this shpoonkle thing”, thats fine. but dont be too surprised if all of a sudden the lifestyle of huge expense accounts and 5-star hotels dwindles to a few bounced checks and stays at a motel. shpoonkle just like torrents will be the people’s choice for legal matters. its free for cryin out loud. how would you ever dream to compete with that? all the lawyers who are saying “no self respecting lawyer would do that”, are all lying to themselves about how scared they are.
the truth is, everyone knows who ebay is. everyone knows who google is. everyone knows who facebook is, and guess what all of these services have in common with shpoonkle? they are all free. it would be more beneficial for these lawyers to figure out how to embrace and or manipulate this shift instead of trying to fight the forerunner of what will become the future.

By: Stephanie Kimbro

Stephanie Kimbro — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:06:59 +0000

I think attorneys will try it especially those just starting out with massive law school debt and no established client base. Do I think it’s great? No. But I also know that you get work where you can take it when you have bills to pay and a family to support.

More than this type of bidding site, I think we will see a growth in the number of branded network concepts. This is where attorneys pay to be part of the network and a larger company is paying to advertise services to the public. They pull in the consumer with the offer of free to very low cost legal document automation services and then offer to refer them to an attorney in their jurisdiction if they are willing to pay for that extra service. There are a few companies out there doing this now. In some cases the consumer can continue to work with the attorney online, but typically it gets sent to an attorney in the network that is within their zipcode so it switches from online delivery to in-person. Still, the attorney is paying for those leads and then probably lowering their prices for the legal work because the consumer is coming to them with a portion of the drafting already completed. Attorneys who can’t afford to be a part of one of these branded networks might very well consider a bidding site to pull in online clients.

By: William Massimo Mercer

William Massimo Mercer — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:06:27 +0000

You’re right- sometimes I feel like Vinnie without a big firm behind me.. Anyway- Exactly! I am signing up today. How else can I get clients with all the attorneys fighting for market share in Miami- there’s only so many to go around. If there are clients then I can get my real fee without trying to look like a big baller and keep working.

By: Susan Cartier Liebel

Susan Cartier Liebel — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 11:15:25 +0000

Carolyn, with enough traffic, enough lawyers listed there, enough potential clients with some form of a legal matter – it will attract advertisers who want that legal audience and that consumer. And since everything is done fairly anonymously, probably quite a few lawyers will try it out because the premise is there are so many new lawyers or dislocated lawyers who ‘can’t get work’ and still carry significant student loan they will try it.

Or, for all we know, this site is funded by a much larger company who was not ready to lend their name to it in case it failed and they be villified by the very audience they sought. The only reason this thought popped into my head…I received a notice about Shpoonkle through a press release as its launch date is later this month

By: Carolyn Elefant

Carolyn Elefant — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 10:48:56 +0000

True, no lawyers want to do that work. But that’s not to say that lawyers wouldn’t set up a practice, low-bid on matters and offshore the work to India or put it into a form and spit it out or have a paralegal do it.
I’ve looked at t the site and I can’t figure out how it’s going to make money, though.