Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup • Hacker News Board

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#71

Post by rayiner » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 8:56 PM UTC

pnmahoney wrote: post #51

rayiner wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "spend less time [billing] on research" is not, and never will be, an effective value proposition; and which would be obvious to anyone in anything but the most niche putt-putt fields of practice. I'll note that for many cases these days, there is an incentive to enhance efficiency. Alternative fee arrangements, e.g. fixed monthly fee irrespective of hours, are getting more and more common, particularly with regard…

Really?? The move away from standard billing had always felt like it would "always be in the future"; but I take that back if that's now A Thing in lit heavy on case research. Still assuming that ^ research is better facilitated by pagerank+semantic centrality, as opposed to the boolean features that the attorneys who do the most motion drafting work are already most well-versed in. The most valuable usage I'd heard…

Yes. Even in the context of billable-hour matters, it is typical for firms to write off hours that exceed certain targets per sub-unit of the matter. That is, in effect, a shift towards pricing based on unit of work (e.g. a motion to dismiss) rather than pure hours.

I disagree about pagerank being appropriate for legal research. Pagerank-type algorithms will help you find the seminal, widely-cited cases in an area. But if you want background law, it is easier to just consult a relevant treatise or other reference book that has those pre-digisted and laid out for you. What really takes time when doing legal research is finding cases that have features in common with yours: similar procedural posture, similar factual wrinkles, etc. Usually, you're looking for a way to argue the opposite of the general rule set forth in the seminal cases. Pagerank-type algorithms won't help you find that; boolean searches on specific phrases will.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#72

Post by rayiner » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:03 PM UTC

PatentTroll wrote: post #54

dragonwriter wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > "spend less time [billing] on research" > is not, and never will be, an effective value proposition It will be if it means you provide better value for the cost, attracting more and more valuable business. Or, if you can just deliver the same results at the same cost, with fewer associates and paralegals. Sure, the firm won't make more money, but everyone still in it will. And firms don't have interests, individu…

The legal services industry is not a free market. There, I said it. First, the value (i.e. "provide better value") is opaque. That's why the legal industry relies so much on the proxy of prestige, because it's really hard to know if you are getting good representation, and then it's even harder to know if the cost is "fair" or whatever. The pricing structure is obfuscated and hidden, comparison shopping is hindered b…

The legal industry is tremendously competitive. Even if you limit yourself to the most "prestigious" firms, there's dozens of potential choices. Even the largest firms have only a couple of percent market share. How many other industries can you say that about? The information asymmetry issues you mention may be true to the extent you're a small company that needs counsel for one matter. But the vast majority of corporate work is done for big corps who are repeat players. They have extremely detailed data at their fingertips about how much their dozens of previous representations cost, outcomes, etc.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#73

Post by redler » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:19 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #50

justin wrote: post #7

Hello HN! We are excited to be building in the legal space. Raising money is a necessary step, but Atrium LTS' biggest accomplishment so far is the great team of experts we have assembled here. My cofounders are Augie Rakow (former partner at Orrick, where he worked on over 100 financings and represented Cruise through their acquisition to GM), BeBe Chueh (lawyer turned founder who sold her last company to LegalZoom)…

Last year I sold my interest in a startup with a patent application for SLAP (Statutory Litigation Automated Pricing) we partnered with law firms and were consumer facing automating law firm fee calculation and hiring online. After that I worked with Walmart to develop a "self serve legal kiosk" for use in Walmart stores with another vendor. At some point with the former project I was in talks with both legalzoom and…

I'm a workhorse, having ran 27 half marathons last month.

Sorry for the off topic question, but... whoa. Can you talk briefly about how this works?

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#74

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:25 PM UTC

justin wrote: post #40

downandout wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. I was speaking generally. In the case of this specific venture, you may very well turn out to be correct. Good luck with your new business!

Thank you! To expand on my point further: the same logic could be used to say entrepreneurs with the means to do so should only pay employees in cash and not equity (because you can afford to do so and believe the equity will have higher economic value ultimately). However, pretty much all seasoned founders I know want to compensate employees with some equity, under the theory that those employees will be more motiva…

> However, pretty much all seasoned founders I know want to compensate employees with some equity, under the theory that those employees will be more motivated to see the business be successful.

AKA Golden Handcuffs of the lesser variety.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#75

Post by redler » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:29 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #32

chrome-style wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am wondering - why did you decide to raise outside money at all? I assume you would have been able to do the round yourself, save time / effort around the fundraising process and concentrate on product instead?

I have often wondered the same thing when similarly successful people raise money for startups. With $X00 million in the bank, it would be better to self-finance for $10.5MM that if they truly believe in the business . However, if they believe that the probability of success is very low, I suppose it would make sense for them to use their name to get others to take the financial risk for them. For this reason, as an…

There's great value in showing that people other than yourself — people who have found other market-validated successes — have enough confidence to put skin in your game.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#76

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:38 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #72

PatentTroll wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legal services industry is not a free market. There, I said it. First, the value (i.e. "provide better value") is opaque. That's why the legal industry relies so much on the proxy of prestige, because it's really hard to know if you are getting good representation, and then it's even harder to know if the cost is "fair" or whatever. The pricing structure is obfuscated and hidden, comparison shopping is hindered b…

The legal industry is tremendously competitive. Even if you limit yourself to the most "prestigious" firms, there's dozens of potential choices. Even the largest firms have only a couple of percent market share. How many other industries can you say that about? The information asymmetry issues you mention may be true to the extent you're a small company that needs counsel for one matter. But the vast majority of corp…

> The legal industry is tremendously competitive.

That's got to be one of the funniest things on HN ever.

The hell it is. The fact that dozens of potential choices exist does not mean a market is competitive, you are missing the possibility of price fixing on an industry wide scale.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#77

Post by twakefield » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 9:39 PM UTC

justin wrote: post #7

Hello HN! We are excited to be building in the legal space. Raising money is a necessary step, but Atrium LTS' biggest accomplishment so far is the great team of experts we have assembled here. My cofounders are Augie Rakow (former partner at Orrick, where he worked on over 100 financings and represented Cruise through their acquisition to GM), BeBe Chueh (lawyer turned founder who sold her last company to LegalZoom)…

This is exciting...godspeed. In almost every big company I have either worked at or done business with, the legal team (in-house and external) was a bottleneck when trying to get something significant done in a reasonable time frame.

In most cases it wasn't because they objected to what was trying to be done or that they were lazy (they always seemed to work the longest hours). They just never seem to have the cycles to focus on what needed to be reviewed.

I hope these efforts can help make that part of my world a little more efficient.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#78

Post by rayiner » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 10:04 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #76

rayiner wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legal industry is tremendously competitive. Even if you limit yourself to the most "prestigious" firms, there's dozens of potential choices. Even the largest firms have only a couple of percent market share. How many other industries can you say that about? The information asymmetry issues you mention may be true to the extent you're a small company that needs counsel for one matter. But the vast majority of corp…

> The legal industry is tremendously competitive. That's got to be one of the funniest things on HN ever. The hell it is. The fact that dozens of potential choices exist does not mean a market is competitive, you are missing the possibility of price fixing on an industry wide scale.

The existence of dozens of competitors is the #1 marker of a highly competitive market. I'm not sure what basis you have for raising "the possibility of price fixing on an industry wide scale" (other than that is theoretically possible in any market). In my experience pitching big companies for legal matters, the process is quite formalized. When presented with a new matter, a company will interview several firms to give presentations on how they would handle the matter and how they would price the engagement. That is just how the process works even at the largest, most reputable corporate firms. (A partner I used to work for at one of the big New York firms told me that when he started at the firm, "business development" meant a partner checking his voice mails when he got back from lunch. That's not how the industry works anymore.)

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#79

Post by coryrc » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 10:10 PM UTC

redler wrote: post #73

will_brown wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year I sold my interest in a startup with a patent application for SLAP (Statutory Litigation Automated Pricing) we partnered with law firms and were consumer facing automating law firm fee calculation and hiring online. After that I worked with Walmart to develop a "self serve legal kiosk" for use in Walmart stores with another vendor. At some point with the former project I was in talks with both legalzoom and…

I'm a workhorse, having ran 27 half marathons last month. Sorry for the off topic question, but... whoa. Can you talk briefly about how this works?

I have a friend who runs marathons and practice runs are generally 10-20 miles a day, most days of the week. So a 13 mile run is just a regular workout but with friends.

Re: Justin Kan Raises $10M for New Legal Startup

#80

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 10:18 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #78

jacquesm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The legal industry is tremendously competitive. That's got to be one of the funniest things on HN ever. The hell it is. The fact that dozens of potential choices exist does not mean a market is competitive, you are missing the possibility of price fixing on an industry wide scale.

The existence of dozens of competitors is the #1 marker of a highly competitive market. I'm not sure what basis you have for raising "the possibility of price fixing on an industry wide scale" (other than that is theoretically possible in any market). In my experience pitching big companies for legal matters, the process is quite formalized. When presented with a new matter, a company will interview several firms to…

Even the worst lawyers still charge 100's of $/E per hour and to get certain services performed you have to go through a lawyer.

Now, I've met some - very few - lawyers that were worth their rates (one of which is commenting in this thread) but for the most part it is simply a title that in and of itself seems to make a mediocre performer suddenly worth a very large amount of money on an hourly basis.

The funny thing is that I suspect the rest of the world probably looks at IT people in much the same way (only we don't have the equivalent of a bar association, and if we did I suspect the minimum rate for a programmer would shoot up).