“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” the philosopher George Santayana once remarked.

With its launch today, will Shpoonkle, the latest reverse-auction site for legal services, find itself suffering the same fate as its forerunners? Or is the time finally right for such a site?

Shpoonkle’s shtick is to provide a forum where potential clients can post requests for legal work and lawyers can bid against each other to get the work. The site is being launched by a New York Law School student, Robert Grant Niznik.

Niznik has retained a high-tech PR consultant to position Shpoonkle as the next new thing. “Shpoonkle.com is the brainchild of a 21 year old New York Law School student about to graduate who is on a mission to make justice affordable,” wrote the PR consultant in a recent e-mail.

If it were, in fact, the next new thing, then it is not one that bodes well for the future of the legal profession, at least judging by the comments of other legal bloggers. “Here you have a race to the bottom,” writes Susan Cartier Liebel, “as lawyers bid against one another to pay the lowest fee to anonymous clients with legal problems.” “The concept is a perfectly reasonable next step to the de-professionalism of legal services, where the purchase of legal services is no different than buying a widget at the big box store for the lowest available price,” says Scott Greenfield.

The Next New Thing – Not!

The fact of the matter, however, is that the reverse-auction sites for legal services is not Niznik’s brainchild. Several such sites have been launched in the past. If we have forgotten them, it is because they failed.

Way back in 2006, I wrote a post here about the launch of just such a site. Called Tip-Mart, it promised that its reverse-auction system “eliminates extraordinary market inefficiencies, drives down prices, increases sales, and provides new value to both buyers and sellers.” Coincidentally, it too was created by a college student who believed he had the next new thing. Today, the site no longer exists.

Another such site went by the name LawyerQuotesFast.com (and also by the name LawyersForLess.com). This one, too, is no longer to be found.

As a matter of fact, there was even once a law review article written about reverse-auction sites for legal services. At the time, the author noted that there were six such sites when she finished her first draft of the article, but that two had already shut down by the time the article was ready for publication and a third had abandoned its auction component.

Will Shpoonkle prove itself to be successful where its predecessors could not? Is the time finally right for a reverse-auction site such as this?

At the outset of this post, I quoted Santayana. Perhaps the appropriate quote to close with is one from writer Kurt Vonnegut, “In this world, you get what you pay for.”

  • Pingback: Online Bidding for Clients « Virtual Law Practice()

  • Claudia Johnson

    One of the key factors that will lead to failure in this model is the fact that the site does not triage or assist the “client” in posting a factually correct or verified story. Of course such pre-screening requires skill and time, which equal resources. The person posting the case can post any type of story without any verification. They may overstate or understate material issues in the case. The lawyer that bids for the case will be at huge risk of underestimating the costs of the case, in particular the costs of discovery. The site does however highlight the need to find a way to collectively lower the average cost of retaining an attorney or to find new pricing models. Are there any good online examples of sites that promote unbundled legal services from states where that is now allowed?

    • We just launched our site in similar fashion however our focus is to give the client ultimate control over their legal costs by placing the amount they would like to pay or better yet offering a flat fee to the attorneys that would like to provide the service to the client. We are backed several attorneys that have wanted to offer flat fee rates to customers. The recent demands of the economy have also provided for this opportunity. We don’t intend to review posting however our intention is to offer guidelines of costs dependent on the region and the work the client intends to do. Thus if a client has a simple contract then the average cost will be posted.

      We believe that this is the only way to give the client ultimate control and expectation for the legal work he desires to receive.

      We encourage folks to try the site and send us any comments or questions.


  • Pingback: Semi-Annual Virtual Law Practice in the News Roundup « Virtual Law Practice()

  • Pingback: eBay of legal services: clients can seek lawyers’ lowest bids | SmartPlanet()

  • Pingback: Auction Site Lets Lawyers Bid on Contingency Cases · Robert Ambrogi's LawSites()

  • I have been running, moderating and administering legal sites for over 5 years. The idea is good at the conceptual level, however, in my experience both clients as well as legal professionals are reluctant to engage in such a service. Lack of adequate tools, inadequate clientele, lack of update and inadequate advertising, all play a role in its failure.
    I am trying another site at http://allgoodlawyers.net, with a host of features, also including an area where clients can hire legal professionals. Lets see which way the results go. Any suggestions are more than welcome.