Thanks for your reply, Matthew.
If you need that much information to spend $195 for the legal service, then I say keep your money and start hitting the ELI resources and online forums and do lots of homework as I did.
A big part of what makes this so coercive is that they apparently often choose to demand amounts in a "sweet spot" that is exorbitant, yet would quickly be burned through getting legal advice / representation (even letters written), and that is considerably less than the cost of defending a lawsuit, which would be prohibitive for many targets of the campaign. The demand amounts can be a very significant, perhaps even unbearable, financial burden for the targets.
For a target for whom the cost of the letter program is something like 15-25% of the demand amount, and especially when the demand amount represents a considerable financial burden for the target, I think it's pretty significant whether using the letter program may result in a greater total financial burden if the target will be forced to settle anyway, or if additional fees will be required to achieve a desirable outcome. That's why I'm so interested in whether the goal of the program is to settle, or if it's not, what happens after the 2 letters have been sent.
As for the amount of information I've asked for, I understand that you have good reasons for not providing it all, but at this point I have only a very vague idea of what to expect from the letter program and therefore it's hard to tell if it makes financial sense. I know that it will cover sending a couple of letters and prevent Getty from contacting the client, but I don't know if that's temporary and what happens then (e.g. do they realize the "case" is a loser and go away?, are you forced to settle?, do you begin incurring additional cost to have attorney Michelen continue representing you?, does attorney Michelen discontinue representing you and you're back to square one on your own?, etc.)
1. You get legal representation for a very reasonable price from a lawyer that is well-known in his niche. However, there are limits to how that representation will go.
Yes, that's part of what I'm wondering, how far the representation will go. Even in the "simpler" (e.g. 1 image) cases, if Getty is willing to harass the target for 3 years I wonder if they would just do the same to attorney Michelen and if that requires more response than 2 letters, or if they realize the "case" is a loser because the target will not be easy to coerce and quit the harassment sooner.
2. Oscar is very good at what he does but you aren't going to get a lot of phone time. That is not what the DLP it was designed for.
Understood. I'm really more concerned with what results / costs to expect.
5. The goal is to help the client achieve what he/she wants. If differs from client to client.
I'm sure it does, but I imagine the goal of many is to avoid, to the greatest possible degree, being extorted and rewarding this behavior, and I wonder how they make out with that.
6. We do not hard-sell the program or engage in fear-mongering. It is a soft-sell resource and not mandatory. It is made available for those who want to take advantage of it. WE don't try to "convince" people. Our track record and reputations speak for itself.
I don't question anyone's reputation or personal track record, I'm just curious about the track record of the defense letter program. I appreciate that you don't hard-sell the program, I'm just not sure how informed of a decision can be made with the limited information available about what to expect from the program. Maybe the program is very effective and that level of secrecy is necessary to accomplish that -- I don't know.
7. There have been almost no complaints about it out of the hundreds of clients Oscar has represented. That says a lot. If someone wanted to trash us, the DLP, or Oscar Michelen, it could be easily found on Google.
Yes, that's certainly a good thing. And there's nothing restraining those people from speaking their mind, like confidentiality agreements or anything?
(The few complaints have related to when Oscar was handling all the administrative and clerical aspects and he got backed up while being in court. But part of this occurred also because of people keep trying to get free time from him by clogging up his email account. These issues has since been corrected. I work with his Office Manager on this. She takes care of many of the clerical aspects which allows Oscar to focus on the case, client, and representation as it should be.)
I've seen those kinds of issues mentioned, and it's great that it's been streamlined like that.
7. I am a big believer of learning how to self-represent but most people don't have the time, inclination, or personality to do so. Hence, people appreciate that we have the DLP available at a reasonable price.
I could write my own letters, but I don't have any particular interest in doing so. I'm certainly interested in the DLP if I'm able to conclude that there's a likelihood of achieving a desirable outcome, I'm just not sure I can tell based on the available information.
8. We are transparent for the most part. But I will tell you there are "secrets" and things that never get published or discussed publicly because the stock photo agencies, their employees, and their lawyers are reading ELI. It is stupid to reveal all our tactics, strategies, mindset, and everything we know to the public. It is our competitive edge.
Understood and agreed.
9. There is a certain amount of trust you need to have in us. I am biased, but I think the work Oscar and I do is high quality and high credibility. Our business reputations are very good. We aren't going to put out crap just to earn $195. I don't get commissions from the letters. Oscar doesn't need his reputation tarnished on the Internet over $195 letters when he charges $400-$500/hour in New York.
I don't question your credibility or reputations or the quality of the letters, I just wonder how ultimately effective it is at achieving a desirable outcome. I fully understand that offering this program for this fee is not about profit for attorney Michelen, and that you don't profit from it financially.
I certainly trust your motives and intentions, and I understand that there are things that you can't reveal. It's just too bad it's not possible to know more about what the goals / results of the program are without compromising it.
10. If you are a micro-manager and need tedious updates and details, don't enroll in the program. The program works best without micro-management. You will and can ask for periodic updates but if you try to micro-manage this, it won't be good for anyone.
If a favorable outcome will be achieved, I'd prefer to waste as little time and energy as possible dealing with it. I don't know what you'd consider micro-managing, or even what would be possible to micro-manage in this situation. I guess I wouldn't want a settlement agreed on without me or something like that.
However, hopefully the statements I made will help clarify whether the DLP is suitable for you and anyone else that have similar questions.
Well, I'm not sure how much it clarifies it. I had hoped it would be possible to find out some more specifics to evaluate it. It sounds like the decision would have to be based mostly on trust, without much specifics about what to expect.
Show Posts