Legal value

From The Jolly Contrarian
Revision as of 08:56, 13 June 2019 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{a|negotiation|}}The dilemma for professional services providers is how to show your positive contribution without actively destroying value<ref>other than the value destruct...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Negotiation Anatomy™


Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

The dilemma for professional services providers is how to show your positive contribution without actively destroying value[1].

For, if I send my lawyer a 90-page indenture and it comes back unmarked, “all fine”, but accompanied by a hefty note of costs, do I feel I am getting value for money?

Generally, I do not. So lawyers have developed techniques for making formal changes which do not alter the substance, but give comfort that the document has indeed been pored over, forensically considered, and buffed and polished. These parenthetical statements we call flannel in these pages, and can usually be identified by tells like “for the avoidance of doubt”, “without limitation...”, “whether or not...”, or “notwithstanding the foregoing...”.

  1. other than the value destruction that inevitably follows from your engagement in the first place — your professional fees, that is.