Comments on: WestlawNext Preview: Product and Pricing

By: D. Todd Smith

D. Todd Smith — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:08:53 +0000

I meet with my West rep on Friday and will follow up on how it goes.

By: Lisa Solomon

Lisa Solomon — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:13:33 +0000

Scott, thanks so much for sharing your experience with us. It’s exactly what I expected, in light of both West’s responses to questioning (described above) and my own contract negotiations (described in many of my recent posts).

I look forward to hearing about the ultimate result of your negotiation.

By: H. Scott Leviant

H. Scott Leviant — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 07:14:20 +0000

We just met with our Westlaw rep today. When pressed on pricing, she was very evasive. When “deposed” for an answer, she finally said that WestlawNext was running “about 20%” above the Westlaw.com price for similar content. She suggested, but did not exactly state, that we would have no choice but to increase the databases covered in our subscription to have the upgrade. This appears to me to be an attempt to bury the price increase under a service expansion. What is the marginal cost of access to an extra database from Westlaw’s point of view? I assume it is nearly zero. Any dollars they get from us are almost pure gravy, other than some bandwidth expense, which isn’t that high.

I am going to suggest to our office manager that she give Westlaw a take-it-or-leave-it offer of 0% price increase and move to WestlawNext or we abandon Westlaw entirely at the end of our contract. I suspect that they want the account (about $2,500 a month) more than they want the small price bump for WestlawNext.

By: WestlawNext: Legal Research Goes Human « Technology at Albany Law School

WestlawNext: Legal Research Goes Human « Technology at Albany Law School — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:34:30 +0000

[...] Lisa Solomon discusses product and pricing. [...]

By: Amy Kleinpeter

Amy Kleinpeter — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:56:32 +0000

I was quoted about $70 increase for WestlawNEXT, I changed my plan though to get ALLSTATE and ALLFED instead of just California so now I can research to my heart’s content for $100 increase. I do think it is worth it (obviously, I signed the contract) both to not have to deal with database selection in search and also to save research in folders and also to have the ability to see a portion of documents that are out of plan before choosing to click or not.
However, I did have to wonder “How did they just figure out how to make a clean and pretty interface now? Nice of them to keep the cheaper version ugly!!”

By: Lisa Solomon

Lisa Solomon — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:37:22 +0000

Fantastic news, Robert! I’m still waiting to get full database information from my rep’s sales manager.

By: Greg Lambert

Greg Lambert — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:45:25 +0000

Robert… reminds me of that seen in Fargo where they try to sell you undercoat protection for your car:

Jerry Lundegaard: Well, we’ve never done this before. But seeing as it’s special circumstances and all, he says I can knock a hundred dollars off that Trucoat.

Throw in two or three additional things to make the initial product seem like a bargain. It will be interesting to see what they try when you come up for your renewal on this contract.

By: Robert Brooks

Robert Brooks — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:34:37 +0000

Well, I got the rep to cut the price in half (334 as opposed to 285 now. Initial offer was 385.), and throw in 3 specific databases a la carte , in addition to the several additional databases I’m getting that I want. So, I’m getting all the databases I want. No extension in my contract. Along with the new interface, it’s worth it to me.

By: Lisa Solomon

Lisa Solomon — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:39:33 +0000

Thanks for your feedback, Robert. Was that based on an identical subscription to your current one, or did they insist that you subscribe to new content as well?

By: Robert Brooks

Robert Brooks — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:27:45 +0000

I have a $285/mon. subscription and was quoted an extra $100/mon. for Next.