Martindale-Hubbell the next LinkedIn or Facebook?
Believe it or not I'm not trying to pick on Martindale-Hubbell. I just find some of the things they do or say amusing enough to share with you.
Read today on a listserv that Martindale-Hubbell, in trying to keep a 100-lawyer client in their directory, told the law firm that Martindale would be the new Facebook or LinkedIn for lawyers in due time.
Martindale is saying they will be the next LinkedIn? If that's true, it seems to be totally irresponsible statement.
LinkedIn:
- As of March 2008, LinkedIn had more than 20 million registered users, spanning 150 industries.
- As of December 2007, its site traffic was 3.2 million visitors per month, growing at an annual growth rate of about 485%.
- Founded by co-founder of Socialnet.com & leading exec at PayPal and funded by Greylock, Sequoia Capital, Bessemer Venture Partners, and the European Founders Fund, all tier one VC's funding Silicon Valley companies.
- Reached profitability two years ago.
Martindale:
- No management team that I know of that has experience with building social networking sites.
- Unique visitors to Martindale.com down 13.4% over last year per Compete.com.
- Struggling with the launch of a corporate blog, something much simpler than software infrastructure and management team needed for successful social networking site.
As far as becoming the next Facebook? Seems rather silly. Makes as much sense as Martindale saying we'll become the next place where all young lawyers will hang out to socialize online. Does anyone really believe that will happen?
Martindale has been a great company as a lawyer directory. But to try and create something that's vogue today by boasting that we're a new company that's introducing Web 2.0 solutions is irresponsible and is only going to damage to reputation of the company.
One more question: who needs a LinkedIn for lawyers? One of the great things about LinkedIn is that it is not just for lawyers.
Agree wholeheartedly Dan. First rule of Internet marketing (I learned 12 years ago) go where the people are and interact with them in their environment responding to their needs.
There are a couple of concerns here - mostly around misinformation. I am aware of the information that has been told to the 100-attorney law firm because it was also told to me - but it was considered private so I will responsibly not relate an NDA discussion in a blog...but, having said that, I can assure you that Martindale is not telling people that they will "be the next LinkedIN and/or Facebook" but instead will be recognizing the value of those two very popular services and working with it to help lawfirms and corporate counsel to merge what they like about Martindale with what they like about LinkedIN - essentially bringing together the breadth of the Lawyer directory with the information on how to connect with them.
And on another note, I'm not sure why it is "irresponsible" to talk about bringing web2.0 solutions to market within the Martindale framework. Web 2.0 is a broad subject and there is a lot of room for all companies to try to make sure that collaborative mechanisms are available wherever it makes sense. I'm sure that the market will tell Martindale if they are getting it wrong but it's a worthwhile effort to work in that direction.
One final note - your negative bias toward Martindale shows through your otherwise very valuable posts - especially by taking mis-information and blogging about it as in this case. I am sure that there are a number of people at Martindale who would gladly give you background info to make sure you heard the info correctly and if you did not trust Martindale, they would gladly point you to law firms to get another point of view.
Martindale is free to comment here if there is misinformation. They're heavy readers of my blog and have commented in the past.
I'm aware MH is developing a community/social networking arena, but I declined signing an NDA to hear of more. Frankly, it would be wise to have wide open discussion on the subject so MH can get input on all sides, as opposed to the NDA approach.
On a MH bias, I do talk a lot about them. One of the reasons I do, and I'll blog about it when I get a chance, is that they have a legacy product that meant a lot to me when I practiced law. With that history and brand they could have done much more with the net than they've done over the last 10 years.
When I started working on the net, even before leaving the practice, I regularly exchanged ideas with the Publisher and Senior Vice president of Martindale-Hubbell - all looking at ways for allowing the consumers of legal services to make the informed decision of legal counsel. That exchange continued after I left the practice. I cared a lot about MH, and frankly part of me still does.
As to the Web 2.0 solutions, that's a term being thrown around to cover just about anthing. In MH's case - video, side by side comparison's of law firms on the web, and now a social networking site. Making assertions that MH is reinventing itself ala Web 2.0 in a way that's going to bring real value to the legal community seems irresponsible to me.
I agree - overselling is irresponsible and always a bad idea. It leads to a large group of people who fundamentally doubt Martindale instead of give them the benefit of the doubt. I am sure that Martindale has earned the skepticism that you express in your blog and I am sure you speak for many but I wanted to add in what I had heard and it didn't come across to me that it was just a story but instead there were some definite and positive steps forward. In the final analysis, it will be up to Martindale to convince the market that they are on the right track. From this viewpoint, there seems to be signs of positive progress.
Keep up your posts! They are good.