Why Virtual Firms Don't Fret Over Losing 'Brick-and-Mortar' Benefits
A Google Maps presence, event sponsorship and billboards may be advantageous for firms hoping to capitalize on locally based clients. But for those focusing solely on corporate business, there's little incentive to move out of the virtual world.
July 22, 2019 at 09:00 AM
3 minute read
There are times when a brick-and-mortar presence can be useful for a growing law practice, especially if it's hoping to nab clients through location-based—and consumer friendly—platforms such as Google Maps.
But where does that leave virtual law firms? Well, depending on the client base they are hoping to build, the answer might be in pretty good shape.
Kevin Broyles, a managing partner at the virtual firm of FisherBroyles, noted that an assistant general counsel at a major company isn't going to use Google Maps, Bing or the internet in general to find a lawyer.
“They're going to go on word of mouth, who they know and legal resources they have. Usually it's going to be the network they have,” he said.
To be fair, FisherBroyles does maintain physical offices in major cities such as Atlanta, Boston and Chicago. Broyles described them as a “pay as you use the resource” setup.
Those locations weren't chosen less because they would make a splash on Google Maps as because the cities themselves carried a certain amount of prestige and would provide easy access for clients traveling in or out. “We used to say, if [the city has] a professional sports team, we'll be there,” Broyles said.
Like in real estate, location can still be important to ongoing health of a law firm, especially if that firm relies on business from walk-in clients who think their case might benefit from representation with intimate knowledge of the jurisdiction in question.
Of course, if a firm's business model isn't geared toward clients who turn to search engines in their time of legal need, that problem most likely doesn't apply. Like FisherBroyles, the virtual firm Potomac Law Group concentrates primarily on corporate clients who aren't consulting Google for legal services.
Marlene Laro, a partner and COO at Potomac, said that their clients are generally indifferent to where an attorney might be based.
“I think that the way we spread the word and get our name out and have our lawyers become known is very similar to the way it's done in traditional firms, frankly, by our lawyers publishing interesting articles or client alerts, by presenting at various professional conferences,” Laro said.
To be sure, the firm does maintain flex offices in several major U.S. cities, but those locations were selected for their proximity to legal talent pools, not with an eye toward any kind of an online marketing agenda.
In some ways, the business model favored by a virtual firm like Potomac—which Laro said has attempted to divest itself of many of the fixed costs impacting other law firms—seems to suit an approach to marketing that is less dependent upon location-based search optimization, event sponsorship or billboards.
Rather than engage in those practices, Broyles has distilled the formula down to relationships and warm referrals.
“I keep telling people you're wasting your money. You're better off becoming an expert in a field and writing about it. That may be how you get hired by someone who doesn't know who you are,” Broyles said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Paul Hastings, Recruiting From Davis Polk, Continues Finance Practice Build
- 2Chancery: Common Stock Worthless in 'Jacobson v. Akademos' and Transaction Was Entirely Fair
- 3'We Neither Like Nor Dislike the Fifth Circuit'
- 4Local Boutique Expands Significantly, Hiring Litigator Who Won $63M Verdict Against City of Miami Commissioner
- 5Senior Associates' Billing Rates See The Biggest Jump
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250