3 ms·

This reminds me of the legal marketing field, which is one in which I have some experience. Just look at the billboards along the highways in major US cities an

This reminds me of the legal marketing field, which is one in which I have some experience. Just look at the billboards along the highways in major US cities and you'll be reminded how horrendously competitive law is in the US (and it's becoming more and more competitive by the year - lawyers are everywhere and covid encouraged a bunch of college students to consider law school). I believe the vast majority of marketing businesses for lawyers are legit, but if there are scams then the bad actors could be encouraged by the idea that lawyers are the last people in the world who want to be outed as having fallen for a scam. Lawyers must put forth an image of being intelligent, informed, and aggressive; being the victim of a shady business doesn't fit this model.

cowthulhu 3y ago
My (very naive) thinking would be that lawyers are the worst demographic to con, since they have the skills and resources to try and make themselves whole again (at the expense of the conman), maybe with a few NDAs throw in for good measure. Is this not the case?
- eschulz 3y ago
  My take is that lawyers will have to compare the damages they suffered to the potential harm their reputation will sustain if they become well known for being victims. Did they pay $1,000 for a subpar product? If so, they might not act beyond issuing some threats. However, if they lost $100,000 to a thief then they probably will act. I have spoken with many lawyers who have threatened marketers with lawsuits, and in many cases the threat will help the lawyer. I have had a few lawyers tell me they WILL NOT file a lawsuit (why sue for $500 considering the time and court fees), but that it only costs about 60 cents to send a verbose letter using their firm's letterhead. They understand the old warning "if you sue for a cow, you may end up losing a cow". Just as with a successful con against esteemed scientists, any skilled conman will know his target well and understand how he can fly just below the radar and probably avoid getting called out and destroyed.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  My naive thinking would be that a given lawyer would be either impossible to con, or ripe for the taking because they believe they’re impossible to con. I’d also guess that if you could manage to con a lawyer, they’d rather fall on a sword than admit they were swindled.

cowthulhu 3y ago

My (very naive) thinking would be that lawyers are the worst demographic to con, since they have the skills and resources to try and make themselves whole again (at the expense of the conman), maybe with a few NDAs throw in for good measure. Is this not the case?

eschulz 3y ago
My take is that lawyers will have to compare the damages they suffered to the potential harm their reputation will sustain if they become well known for being victims. Did they pay $1,000 for a subpar product? If so, they might not act beyond issuing some threats. However, if they lost $100,000 to a thief then they probably will act. I have spoken with many lawyers who have threatened marketers with lawsuits, and in many cases the threat will help the lawyer. I have had a few lawyers tell me they WILL NOT file a lawsuit (why sue for $500 considering the time and court fees), but that it only costs about 60 cents to send a verbose letter using their firm's letterhead. They understand the old warning "if you sue for a cow, you may end up losing a cow". Just as with a successful con against esteemed scientists, any skilled conman will know his target well and understand how he can fly just below the radar and probably avoid getting called out and destroyed.
kstrauser 3y ago
My naive thinking would be that a given lawyer would be either impossible to con, or ripe for the taking because they believe they’re impossible to con. I’d also guess that if you could manage to con a lawyer, they’d rather fall on a sword than admit they were swindled.