2 ms·
Yes but it’s easier for people to justify in their minds “this lawyer costs $600 an hour but is going to save me tens of thousands from getting sued” vs a lot o
by atonse 5y ago
Yes but it’s easier for people to justify in their minds “this lawyer costs $600 an hour but is going to save me tens of thousands from getting sued” vs a lot of stuff on the tech side that’s often harder to make a connection as to WHY hiring this expert on database multi-threading will result in higher revenues.
Also it’s just what people are used to. People are used to paying lawyers $300+ an hour so it’s slightly less shocking.
Not arguing against, just saying what I feel is why it’s different.
- omarhaneef 5y agoI do think there is a process that happens before you can charge a particular fee. You could imagine how this process might happen: -- Nobody gets fired for hiring IBM, so having a brand that the decision maker can point to will help. -- You can find an area that people are price insensitive. I think security is probably an area on par with law in terms of avoided costs but all of this is really a form of agreement with your premise: charging "high" fees is an extended process that mixes negotiation, price discovery, and value discovery. You may find you can add a lot more value in a certain way than you did before. Sometimes its something silly: perhaps their internal billing code charges less for a consultant than a new hire or something.