Personal injurymarketing

Not a number we can give you honestly without seeing your market, and anyone who quotes one cold is guessing. What we can tell you is how to arrive at it: pull top of page bids for your real case-type terms in your county, estimate how many clicks it takes you to get an inquiry, and multiply through to a monthly figure that buys enough volume to actually learn something.

A budget that buys a handful of clicks a day cannot tell you whether the channel works. In this practice area that floor is meaningfully higher than in most, which is why the working capital question matters before the media question.

Frequently, and this is where PI economics differ from every other practice area. If a case carries a five-figure fee, the arithmetic tolerates click prices that would be insane in family law or criminal defense.

The failure is not paying $300 for a click. It is paying $300 for a click and then routing the call to a voicemail, or bidding that price on a term that attracts case types you decline. The click price is only ever a problem in combination with something else.

Some firms do both, and bought leads are not automatically a bad idea. The questions that decide it are which tier you are actually buying, whether consent is documented per lead, whether the lead is exclusive to you, and what your own cost per signed case is on that source against your owned channels.

The structural argument for owned acquisition is that it is an asset. A purchased lead flow is rented, and the rent goes up precisely when it starts working. The PI lead costs guide works through the comparison properly.

Inquiries arrive in the first weeks. Signed cases follow within the month. Fee revenue follows whenever your files actually resolve, which is the lag you entered in the calculator above and is measured in months to years rather than weeks.

This is the single most misunderstood thing about scaling a PI practice. The marketing works long before the bank account reflects it, and firms that do not model that gap either lose their nerve and cut spend halfway through, or scale hard into a cash squeeze. Both are avoidable with arithmetic you can do in advance.

Partly, and the differences matter more than the overlap. Mass tort is campaign-based rather than evergreen, claimant leads are sold at several different qualification tiers that all get called leads, and entry timing against the litigation calendar drives the economics more than ad quality does.

It gets its own treatment on the mass tort page rather than being folded in here, because a firm applying single-event PI assumptions to a tort campaign will misprice the whole thing. We also take only one personal injury firm per market cluster, and the regional pages on the hub show which clusters are covered.