| I'm not sure if this is true, at least for corporate law firms. 1. Selling the world: Kind of depends what is meant by selling the world. It is very difficult for a single law firm to provide local legal advice in many jurisdictions. A small number of law firms have global reach, but many of those operate franchise models and none of them, to my knowledge, are truly global (operating in every jurisdiction or even the large majority of jurisdictions). On the other hand, if we are talking about, for example, an English law firm providing English legal advice to clients throughout the world, then yes, that is possible. 3. Minimal labour requirements: I don't think this applies to corporate law firms. Transactional and litigation work is labour-intensive. Advisory work too, to a lesser extent. You can see that play out the last few years where the large corporate firms in New York and London are paying huge salaries to get bodies in the door, while associates were getting burned out from the insane hours demanded of them. 4. Low overhead: This specifically includes "high-priced employees" as an example and I think that would include lawyers. 7. Cash billings: In theory this should apply to law firms. In practice, in my experience, it is more complicated, with lawyers often getting paid only at the end of big deals or cases or offering contingent fees, etc. 8. Free of regulation: Definitely not true for law firms. 9. Portable or easily moveable: Also not true. |