<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Avg Cost per &#8216;Lawyer&#8217; Search in Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/</link>
	<description>by Steve Matthews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:11:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Matthews</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/comment-page-1/#comment-502</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Matthews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:28:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/#comment-502</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the comments Lawrence. Yes, mesothelioma is still a monster CPC phrase, with the current average for &#039;mesothelioma law firm&#039; sitting at $43 per click range. And that&#039;s average, not the top placement.

Now where I will disagree, is whether this is a worthy ROI on a firm&#039;s advertising dollar. There&#039;s a lot involved here, so I&#039;ll have to comment in more detail within my Slaw article, but the economics of $40,000/month per 1,000 visitors - remember that&#039;s visitors and not clients - is very poor. With a 1-2% conversion rate of visitors to leads, and then only a portion of those leads turning into actual files, it&#039;s simply a tough argument.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comments Lawrence. Yes, mesothelioma is still a monster CPC phrase, with the current average for &#8216;mesothelioma law firm&#8217; sitting at $43 per click range. And that&#8217;s average, not the top placement.</p>
<p>Now where I will disagree, is whether this is a worthy ROI on a firm&#8217;s advertising dollar. There&#8217;s a lot involved here, so I&#8217;ll have to comment in more detail within my Slaw article, but the economics of $40,000/month per 1,000 visitors &#8211; remember that&#8217;s visitors and not clients &#8211; is very poor. With a 1-2% conversion rate of visitors to leads, and then only a portion of those leads turning into actual files, it&#8217;s simply a tough argument.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lawrence Gridin</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/comment-page-1/#comment-500</link>
		<dc:creator>Lawrence Gridin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:51:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/#comment-500</guid>
		<description>Cool post!

With sufficiently specific/targeted keywords, $10 per click would not be unreasonable. 

I remember a long time ago (long before getting into law school) looking up the top CPC keyword. I was surprised to discover it was &quot;mesothelioma.&quot;  I had no clue what the word meant. It&#039;s a form of cancer resulting from asbestos exposure.

Apparently there were a number of websites representing class action lawsuits all bidding top dollar for the keyword. The law firms running these websites were paying well into the $70/click range!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool post!</p>
<p>With sufficiently specific/targeted keywords, $10 per click would not be unreasonable. </p>
<p>I remember a long time ago (long before getting into law school) looking up the top CPC keyword. I was surprised to discover it was &#8220;mesothelioma.&#8221;  I had no clue what the word meant. It&#8217;s a form of cancer resulting from asbestos exposure.</p>
<p>Apparently there were a number of websites representing class action lawsuits all bidding top dollar for the keyword. The law firms running these websites were paying well into the $70/click range!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Matthews</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/comment-page-1/#comment-499</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Matthews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/#comment-499</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Clarification: I took ALL the search phrases that contained the word &#039;lawyer&#039;. There were 150-something different combinations, each with their own average bidding price.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clarification: I took ALL the search phrases that contained the word &#8216;lawyer&#8217;. There were 150-something different combinations, each with their own average bidding price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Webster</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/comment-page-1/#comment-498</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Webster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:29:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/avg-cost-per-lawyer-search-in-google/#comment-498</guid>
		<description>Do you really want to rank for &quot;lawyer&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you really want to rank for &#8220;lawyer&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
