11–20 of 85 posts
tech tools it developed for lawyers and law firm clients, and for new areas it will expand into.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies who raise $75mm don't lay off massive chunks of their workforce because they found product-market fit. Justin raised $75mm because he's Justin, and for all VCs posture like they're contrarian risk-takers, they're absolutely not and would have invested in shit in a box if Justin said it was his.
Being willing to back a founder primarily based on who they are is absolutely a viable form of risk-taking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies who raise $75mm don't lay off massive chunks of their workforce because they found product-market fit. Justin raised $75mm because he's Justin, and for all VCs posture like they're contrarian risk-takers, they're absolutely not and would have invested in shit in a box if Justin said it was his.
Being willing to back a founder primarily based on who they are is absolutely a viable form of risk-taking.
>Its goal was to improve on the traditional law firm model, by developing software to improve efficiency for both its attorneys and clients. Any word on what they actually were doing to gain these efficiencies?
If I had to guess based on parsing these articles, Atrium went up against incentives in the legal industry and lost. [0,1] Legal firms bill hourly. Efficiency means less billable hours. (warning: moving into personal experience and conjecture) Yes, boilerplate forms for repetitive use cases seems like it should be a thing, but in my experience building businesses, every lawyer I have dealt with has found any reason p…
"Thank goodness my law firm is saving me money by generating these documents for cheap!"
And
"You know this is kinda important but I'm not sure I want discount lawyer's on this who automate paperwork...."
I worked at a company that experimented with them. We had a lot of legal spend to white shoe firms (multiple) and wanted to give Atrium a try. They had a flat monthly rate, and then a la carte billing if you needed extra things, IIRC. The real problem was, when we needed something reviewed or worked on, they couldn't deliver on time or promise any guaranteed deadline. My CEO was very frustrated.
Did they prove or felt like they proved product market fit before they hired loads of lawyers? I wonder how that worked. (Serious question, not trying to be critical).
All in all, I actually feel I overpaid for subpar legal services.
I will credit them with a smooth and enlightening (albeit overpriced) corporation formation, and maybe they are pearing down the product to just that - because that was the only thing that worked, IMO.
I felt as if they were taking advantage of early stage startups preparing to raise capital. You can’t bill their rates and then ghost them, those are precious dollars and precious time.
“I have been trying to cancel for over a week, and more of the same. NO ONE RESPONDS FOR WEEKS! These are ATTORNEYS! Waste of money.
I’ve dealt with many lawyers coming from my last startup which was in a highly regulated space.
Atrium is like an expensive legal zoom, but overpriced. Understand it’s cheaper to use a lawyer at any other law firm because your retainer is a deposit on future services.
With Atrium your paying $6k a year in subscription fees for “legal advice” which is otherwise baked into any other law firm, and they don’t provide much advice.
They really specialize in financing, using ycombinator docs. These docs are publicly available templates. All other services are limited to their “al la crate menu”... again all templates. It takes days to get a email back from them. It takes a week to get a call setup, if they have the time, and if they will even discuss the matter.
Litigation? Find someone else
Overseas? Find someone else
Doing something outside of California like an asset purchase? Find someone else
So you basically need other lawyers anyways if you use atrium, The rest of their menu is boiler employment agreements, NDAs, and terminations - all of which are 2x local rates.
They custom quote TOS and privacy policies - and again it’s all template based - and 2x local rates.
I asked them about the impact of California’s new AB5 and yep, ask someone else! Save your money - don’t buy the hype.
All your doing is helping VCs cover their recurring legal expenses by paying Atrium to overcharge you and build valuation based on their “tech” which is just a drop box and bad customer service, and no legal support.”
These founder raise pre product market fit because they can, and often raise too much money. Having too much money when you don’t really have a viable product that people want can easily turn your company into a zombie, where people are just sort of going through the motions because there’s nothing else to do but chug along.
I’ve seen it many times. Some end up eventually finding the market after a few pivots but it’s really not a fun place to be as an employee with little decision making power. And the founders are usually wealthy enough at that point independent of the success of this current company that it isn’t “do or die” for them which creates another layer of zombie-esque behavior.
> Even lawyers aren't immune to the unpredictability of working for a startup—and the appeal of generating high margins from selling software instead of human services. Companies tend to do the opposite, though, right? Apple could increase its margins by selling iOS and the Ax processor IP. But it makes more “boatloads of money” selling hardware, even at lower margins. Instead of selling IP, Apple uses its superior I…