Free Is An Offer Customers Can't Refuse—But Should Legal Tech Companies?
Free offerings can help legal tech companies maintain relationships with customers old and new during COVID-19's economy slowdown. But not all businesses can afford to go that direction.
April 23, 2020 at 11:30 AM
4 minute read
Some legal tech providers are releasing free products as they look for ways to remain relevant in the eyes of clients grappling COVID-19 disruption and a volatile economy. But as other legal tech companies undertake lay-offs or furloughs in order to stay afloat, can legal tech afford to keep the free offerings flowing?
The truth is it may depend on both the company and the industry niche it occupies. For example, signature and closing management tool provider SimplyAgree announced in March that its platform would be available free of charge through the end of June to assist law firms making the transition to remote working environments. Three months free is a long time, but the company has a certain degree of delayed gratification regularly built into its sales projections.
SimplyAgree CEO Will Norton said it's not unusual for attorneys to request a free trial period even after seeing a demo of a product. Even law firms that are interested in adopting the platform often have to postpone taking formal action until the next budgeting cycle.
"This is maybe just a little bit more of an extended period, where we know that we might not have any new sales coming in but we have a large customer base already that are happy with our tool and are continuing to pay us for our tool," Norton said.
In some ways, SimplyAgree is making a sort of educated gamble. By granting prospective customers access to their platform for free, the company is banking on the hope that those same folks will stick around after the COVID-19 pandemic has ended and regular rates once more apply.
Norton is confident that lawyers who adopted electronic signature tech to support clients working remotely won't revert to pen and paper now that they've become accustomed to the process. "One thing I don't expect to go back to the way it was before COVID is the adoption of electronic signatures. We saw that was really the main reason that firms took us up on the offer initially," Norton said.
Enterprise application software provider Onit may have even less to lose. The company is offering a variety of free business continuity apps geared towards helping users manage issues such as COVID-19 exposure reporting and financial impact tracking.
Eric Elfman, co-founder and CEO of Onit, said that the apps were originally built for internal use to help the company address some of its own pandemic-related needs. The apps cost nothing to release commercially and therefore making them available to the public free of charge seemed like a no-lose proposition that could ultimately help boost the Onit's exposure inside the legal industry.
"I want our customers to think that we're leaning into this current situation and thinking about their needs too and not thinking solely about the dollar," Elfman said.
But not every legal tech company's business model blends seamlessly with the offering of free goods or services. Elfman believes that there's a relatively small slice of the legal tech market that can make those types of deals available.
"It would cost a lot of money for most e-discovery providers to offer something for free, because they are not a workflow app. They are a solution for a very specific problem," he said.
Also, just because a company drops a product onto the market for free doesn't mean that it will grab the public's attention. Gretchen Bakhshai, senior vice president of sales at contract intelligence and analysis platform Knowable, pointed to the glut of COVID-19 related materials occupying people's inboxes, which may require legal tech providers to think long and hard about the problems their clients are currently attempting to solve.
For instance, Knowable's Portfolio Visibility interface—which is available free through the end of 2020—allows users to search across their entire contract portfolio to find specific provisions or map customer and supplier relationships. The thinking was to provide the first step for users struggling to organize or peruse their contracts for clauses like force majeure in the wake of COVID-19.
At the very least, it could help Knowable maintain its connection to customers as the economy continues to move at a slower clip. "I think for us it's such a natural, easy thing. Relationships are important," Bakhshai 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
© 2024 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
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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