@Lar Profile Views = 388 And now, an open invitation for comment by TT: This is where I get concerned and a bit queasy on the information we have been given by TT. @Lar has done a really nice and thorough job analyzing the statistics we have to work with, and has done so with many of the other pros here. The results he finds here is consistent from one review to the next and the conclusions always in line with each other. They do, however, I believe,  contradict the data that TT proposes to be the situation we should be experiencing. I say proposes because, to my knowledge, they have only reported survey findings and not reported emperical data to back it up. We have no idea on sample size, who was surveyed, how the survey was performed, etc. There is nothing provided to help give us confidence in the conclusions. What is concerning to me is that, after repeated posted reviews by @Lar , unless I have missed something, TT has never responded in a way to either refute, agree with or show @Lar where he is missing something. I can only believe, because of this, that his conclusions are sound. TT is clearly under pressure by its customers right now. If they truly stand behind what they want us to believe to be the case, It would seem that @Lar has many times given them an open net to support their cause. So far I have not seen a single shot taken at that open net. It seems that there is no rhyme or reason as to why one post here gets a response, and another does not receive even an acknowledgment from the moderators. The purpose of my post is to draw attention to this issue and invite TT to reply and let us know where @Lar is falling short, or support his findings.     ... View more

@jcp Thanks so much.   and in my area of law, as bad as it is to say, converting a lead can be as easy as fishing in a barrel. In many cases I am the one turning away the family cases because the lead is whacked or doesn't have a case (like the one who wanted alimony from a woman he had a 1-night stand with and wanted to get back at her) or has no money. Many of them are desparate, was served 25 days ago and have 5 days to answer or face default... so they will hire the first lawyer that they talk to. Really, all you have to do is get them on the phone and if they have a case you want to take, there is a high chance of signing them up. In my other lead generation plans, if you weed out the ones I rejected or could not take because of case load, I sometimes can have a conversion rate of 35 - 50% with no real effort at all. and I agree - the 7-8-9 pro thing is ridiculous - no reason not to limit that to 3 with no opportunity to come back and post to 3 more.  That would be a big win for pros if that change were implemented. ... View more

@jcp @Lar  Here are my results for the period April 1 - 29 per the insights screen: 3766 views 28 leads $385 spent I would say 25 of the 28 leads ghosted me (plus/minus 1 or 2). 1 lead converted. 1 lead has a consultation set so I don't know if they will convert or not yet. It will not be a high revenue case. 1 lead responded back once, then told me they hired another lawyer. so.. my conversion rate as of now is 1/28 = 3.6% which is bad by any standard. The overall ROI will be positive because this is a custody matter worth more tha $385, but that is only half of the puzzle as lead conversion rate matters as it goes to the quality of the lead. Also, this is only my 2nd TT hire in 2019. The first was for a low end estate plan that likely did not turn a positive overall ROI for the period it was booked in. Stats in 2019 have been consistent. TT is just one of many lead sources I use so I am covered elsewhere. In the "old days" of a year or so ago, my firm ran on TT fuel with no need for other lead generation.   ... View more