The broadcast is now starting. All attendees are in listen only mode. Good afternoon, everyone. This is Eric with Elma. Welcome to today’s webinar. We have with us today, Steve Smith, who will be talking about mass tort investments in Q four. But before I turn it over to Steve, uh, just a couple quick housekeeping notes. Everyone is in listen only mode.
If you have a question, leave some time at the end of the presentation to answer questions, you may submit those questions through the questions tab, to the right of your screen. If anyone is having any audio problems, please let me know. And you can communicate with me directly through the chat function. Also, finally, a replay of this webinar will be available to PIL my members in the members toolkit,
and that usually appears some 24 hours after the close of the webinar. Was that taken care of? I’m going to turn it over to Steve. It’s all yours. Hello everybody. This is Steve Smith with Broughton partners. Uh, it’s a pleasure to be on here, um, on this today, as we’re at the end of 2019, you know,
I know I’ve been getting a lot of phone calls from clients, different firms that are looking at their finances for the year. They’re closing their hair out. They’re also looking at their 2020 budgets for advertising and you know, something that’s really common is, you know, uh, firms that have had real successful years this year. And they’re looking to put a lot of their extra money into advertising,
um, early on before the close out of the year. And with a lot of recent things that have been going on in mass torts, different litigations that have settled, some that are settling or in the process of possibly settling has made it very attractive and brought a lot of attention on it. I’ve always specialized in working with firms that look to kind of take a more passive role and acquire mass tort cases and have them teamed up with leading firms that have seats at the table with these litigations,
um, as kind of like an investment model. So some of the things that I want to cover today are some of the most common asks questions, things that firms are looking to know about, uh, which are, you know, what are some of the newest merging mass torts? Um, what are some of the mature mass torts, what the difference of that means and why it’s beneficial to him,
um, you know, strategic plans, uh, diversifying and different ones, uh, putting together a budget and then also what to look for when you’re acquiring cases through different marketing companies, some questions to ask. And then also most importantly, to choosing a firm that you’re going to co-counsel with, that’s going to handle the litigation. So these are some of the things that I’m going to cover today on this call.
Mmm, there we go. Um, so some of the emerging mass torts that are brand new, um, the, you have the most attention. I want to kind of go over briefly just to kind of give like a general review on it. Some things that make them attractive and some things you should know, um, as you’re looking at some of these ports.
So Zantec is something that I’m very personally heavily involved in. And then following this one really closely, um, as you probably know, the Antech is a prescription and over the counter drug been in the market for about 35 years, uh, for heartburn. Mmm. They have been able to kind of dominate the market as being the safest alternative for, you know,
women and children, um, beating out proton pump inhibitors. Uh, recently a study came out where, what they did was they were testing Uranus people that took Zantac and found very high levels of in DMA. Um, so issued a huge recall on the product and kind of started the litigation here. Um, just some quick notes. And again, if anyone has any further questions of outside of what I’m asking you,
I’m always available to kind of go in more detail, but the kind of the smoking gun here is a fairly widely used drug, very safe you test Antech by itself. No MBMA um, this new study came out showing that high lows have in DMA in urine issues, a recall, um, where was their fault in this? Well, there was also a doctor released a paper,
Mmm, early in the eighties stating that he believed there was a link between Zantec and, uh, in DMA and causing cancer well causing cancer. Um, the manufacturers did communicate back to them on this. So they were completely aware of this and yet further testings or studies weren’t done. It was still, you know, sold over the counter. Um,
so that’s, that’s kinda where the, the blame is or the fault there. Mmm. As we’re speaking right now, there’s a JPL hearing to happen and we’re getting ready to figure out exactly when or where the MDL is gonna be. Um, it could be in New Jersey, could be in Florida. It could be your possibility for California. We will find out soon.
Um, I think what makes us really, really attractive and what people should look at is that this is so widely used Mmm. In DMA is the number one. It is the carcinogenic, what you would use if you’re looking to induce pardon a cancer on somebody. Mmm. And if you test Nantec by itself, you’re not going to see in DMA in it.
What happens is when it a very, very unstable molecule, when it goes into the body, uh, the molecule makes us with our enzymes and it kind of brings support, comes back, is in DMA and very high levels. Um, it is absorbed through the body in a very rapid, quick rate. And if you’re taking this on a regular basis,
obviously it’s going to create some sorts of cancers. Um, what’s really attractive. Is there an epidemiology or ology report that’s going to be coming out here shortly. It should be very favorable for us. Mmm. That mixed with what we already have kind of makes the science very good on this. And there’s not much the defense could do to really disprove that.
Mmm. So those are the main facts of it. There’s some great, great affirms. Think kindness, your leaders in the mass torts space, bomb Headland who got the $2 billion verdict on Roundup, Amy Wagstaff, Jennifer Moore, what’s Carerra I’ll stop. Uh, Cory Watson, 11 pap. I mean, the list is incredible. The firms that are a Hollis law firm that are getting involved in this litigation looking to take a leadership role.
Um, so those are things that I look at because everyone’s reviewing these. So when you see the powerhouses like that, do an evaluation on it and they love it and they invest in it and look to take a leadership role. That’s something that always makes it attractive for me. Juul is a, you know, an alternative to smoking cigarettes, the vape,
um, that it’s been widely, widely used. Uh, it’s taken over the schools. Um, it’s become a norm now for kids. There’s a lot of peer pressure with it. Um, I know personally at my nieces and nephews, a very young age, you know, caught with vapes schools are taken away less than right. Um, it’s been recently linked to some serious injuries.
It’s been kind of identified earlier on as a safer alternative than smoking cigarettes. Um, they have been accused of targeting children with some of their flavored cartridges. And now there are kids under the age of 18 that are getting hospitalized from using jewels. So recently the CEO has stepped down, he’s come out and said that it was absolutely not a of alternatives.
Um, this litigation does have an MBL. It’s also been split. Um, there’s a difference. It’s, it’s a mass tort and then it’s also a class action. Mmm. One of the things is, you know, who you’re going up against, um, it’s big tobacco invested in this, so they own a portion of it. So you’ve got a lot of financial backing behind this kind of handle these lawsuits.
Um, when you’re going after these cases, you’ve got to kind of split them into two categories, no matter how your marketing forum, you’re going to have your addiction cases, where it’s, you know, people that were young that were targeted and marketed to started using jewels and became addicted to them. And then you’ve got your injury cases and your injury cases or someone that was using Joe on a regular basis.
Um, as a result of that, got some sort of injury and, or is hospitalized. Mmm. Some of the things to know about this case or questions that are most commonly asked, if you look at the headline news and you see these stories of people that were hospitalized from it, what you’ll find out is they weren’t actually hospitalized from using Juul and the Juul cartridges.
Um, they were using black market cartridges in the Juul product container, um, that most commonly we’re carrying, uh, marijuana in them or, um, black markets flavors and things like that. Uh, talking with the leading firms that the physician themselves wellness during this litigation, uh, they still believe that if the original marketing done by Juul got these kids addicted to it,
they basically gave them the vessel. So they’re still on the hook as if got them hooked and using the Juul product, then taking a third party or using any other cartridge in it. There’s still liability there. Um, something to know about Juul is, um, if you are going after these cases and marketing for them, um, the percentages and the difference between the class action cases and the actual injury cases.
So when it comes to the Juul, going off of like say a hundred contracts, um, you’re most likely going to see anywhere from about 70 to 80 on an average 70, if you’re doing really good, um, eighties, when was the norm of injury or of addiction cases and typically about, I’m say 20% actual injury cases, um, this litigation,
what does make it attractive as again, it’s got some great firms behind it, um, and there’s big tobacco money. And then another driving force is all the headlines. There’s so much attention on this. And the fact that it’s targeting kids similar to tobacco and the impact that it has, but in the sense of picking mass torts does make it attractive.
Some of the obstacles that this case does have, or the fact that you have class action attorneys handling it, then you have mass tort attorneys handling it. Um, if you’re getting in on the mass tort side, which is most beneficial, acquiring yourself, good mass tort cases. And then the arguments of being able to prove that the injury sustained or as a direct result in liability is with the jewel and the manufacturers of fuel.
Now with Val Sarton, that was sorry, just going to be very similar but different. I’m going to point those things out. Choose Antech. Um, bowel Sargent is a heart medication for blood pressure and what transpired there with this one, it was a result of the largest FDA recall in history. Um, they had some compounding companies that were making the drug and all different types of countries.
And as a result to make more profits, they were using, um, different chemical compounds to make it up cheaper. And during this process, are you using the cheaper alternatives? Um, during the process of making the truck in DMA was formed? Um, so about certain was recalled due to high levels. Oh, indeed. May actually be in the pill.
No India may be in similar to Advantech. The difference is, is that if you’ve got the right batch of Al Sarton, you can actually take the pill in a courtroom and test it right there. And in BMA itself, it’s in the pill with the exact high levels. Where was Dan tech? If you took a Zantac pill and tested it, it’s going to show lower levels of DNA,
then you’d even find it, bake it because the MBMA doesn’t come out and it to actually mixed in with the system and the molecule breaks apart, and it comes back now. So what makes all start and attractive is the fact that if you have the right batches to have the high levels of Indian Mae, it’s very cut and dry. You can test it,
you can show it and you can tie it into the cancers that the patient has your claim. Um, the downside is when you’re marketing for these cases, and let’s say you market get yourself 100 cases. You’ve got to wait in order medical records and find out exactly which compound factory produced, that particular sets of pills. She determined the levels of NVMA.
Some of them had higher levels than others. And as a result, just kind of changes your overall projection of what the case could potentially be worth, um, and proofing the cancers that are linked in with it. Um, so with bowel Sarton, you’ve got some, some great first behind this one, too. Um, the two that come to mind and I’ll tell you why,
what I like about them or what I like about, Oh, start the Hollis ball from, and you’ve got Stewart Goldenberg, and both of them are very what I would call conservative and science driven. So before getting involved in this litigation, they really, really dove into the science of it and thoroughly looked at it. And, um, there are now in leadership on this litigation,
along with Antech. Um, but those are something that I think makes it really attractive. Mmm. So that’s, those are some of your newer ones right there that I believe should be on everybody’s radar. Mmm. And those are your new merging torts. Now, before I get into the more matured, when you’re thinking about getting into mass towards diversification is very important.
Okay. And people have a different approach with picking cases, obviously with something brand new coming out, you’ve got a lot more to risk because of it’s brand new. You don’t know which firms are going to take the leadership. You don’t know where the MDL is going to be. And under what judge, um, you don’t know discovery, um, you know,
there’s a lot of different factors that come in there hasn’t been any bellwether cases to determine, you know, Hey, look, we’re getting wind. So we know this is solid and it’s to result in a settlement at some point. So those are your risk factors. What I will say, though, what is attractive about merging towards is this is where all the,
the big, big mass tort firms go after their cases. There’s a saying that whoever strikes will first wins. And when you go after marketing for cases in the earlier stages, not only does it cost you less to generate the cases, but you’re generating a much better quality teas as well. Um, because it hasn’t been so saturated yet. Mmm. You know,
you hear about these bellwether cases with these multimillion or billion dollar verdicts. All of those cases were marketed for and signed up early, early on in the litigation. Once you get a couple of years into it, those will never be built with a case for the most part. So, um, those are some things that make picking newer, emerging towards very attractive.
And then, but again, diversification is very important. So some of the more matured litigations, um, but that we really, we really like and are attractive for a firm looking to get involved in mass torts would be hernia, mesh, talcum powder, and three of your plugs. And I want to kind of go into these a little bit, but I want to say what makes these attractive,
um, he’s, litigation’s are a lot more matured, you know, exactly who your leadership is, you know, where the MDLs are. Um, you probably got some verdicts already that have happened. Uh, so we know what’s happening in the courtroom and sometimes they can be in discussions of, so, so with hernia mesh, this is a medical device.
Mmm. What’s really nice about medical devices is called simpler to prove than say a pharmaceutical drugs. You have a device in planning, the device was faulty. Didn’t do its job and Andrea was resulted. So it’s a lot more kind of cut and dry. So it makes it attractive for a lot of firms that I prefer to stick with medical devices. Okay.
Mmm. Hernia mesh has been going on for some years now, um, with the medical device, just like majority of them, you have a bunch of different manufacturers. So between all the different manufacturers, what’s nice about hernia meshes eight, it’s similar to trans vaginal mesh. Mmm. We, I would say that the teams that led this litigation learn from trans-vaginal mesh,
you made some really good moves in her image by making sure that each medical device was put under a different judge and its own NBL. Um, when you’re talking to the sheer size and magnitude number of cases, I think this cleaned it up very well and it was a great move. Um, so if you’re looking to acquire hernia mesh cases, um,
this is something to where some of these MDLs, some of the manufacturers are proceeding forward to a point where we could actually possibly see settlements happening as soon as 2020. Um, so that’s something that makes it really attractive. And what you’re looking for is somebody that had a hernia mesh implant. And after the implant, they have resulted in meeting your revision surgery and they had to go in there and replace it in a lot of cases,
you have multiple revisions. Um, so you’re looking for these revision cases. Um, so with hernia mesh, there’s a whole percentage which I can go into individually with any firm that’s interested on, you know, market shares and who has the biggest portion of what type of cases you should see. Um, it’s pretty universal, but for the most part,
when running a medical device campaign, Oh, you can do is really screening for the injuries and then a way to get product. And then getting product idea will identify exactly which manufacturer you have. So on that individual patient, how to proceed forward talcum powder. It has been in the headlines a lot. Uh, this is Johnson and Johnson, baby powder and shower to shower.
Mmm. This litigation has blossomed into something big and recent news. I believe it’s really massive on this. And 2020, it could be a really great year for Johnson and Johnson are for this litigation. And what this is, is, uh, it’s a baby powder that women are putting in their private regions after they get out of the shower. Um,
and it has been linked to causing ovarian cancer. The gray one that doesn’t know where that went comes from, is there baby powder is made from talcum powder and talcum powder. It was a natural substance. That’s mine from the earth. And there’s a direct link between talcum powder and having a specimen in it. Now, the thing that makes talcum powder unique and why it works as a baby powder,
or do you use out of the shower in the first place? Is it absorbs any moisture completely? So just a little kind of visual here’s if you’re okay putting it in your private area or really anywhere if you’re inhaling it, cause there’s potential cases like that as well. If you’re taking the substance and you’re applying it and it enters into the body, the body cannot reject it.
It doesn’t break down. So it stays there. And if there’s a specified in the talcum powder itself, and let’s say you’re using it in your private area, it will attach itself. So the ovaries and can’t be rejected and you have a specialist right there, which is creating it and causing a cancer, um, litigation. The MDL is in New Jersey.
There’s been some really great verdicts in st. Louis on this throughout the years. Um, not so far away, it was overturned. And about 10,000 cases were taken out of st. Louis and put into the MDL currently, um, during these trials with the amazing job that the plaintiff’s attorneys had been doing on this, um, with all these birds that we have,
one, the defense we’ll have an argument saying that they’d have these experts test the baby powder and show no traces of asbestos. But the testing that they were doing was tying to rig, and recently some of the plaintiff attorneys did something amazing, which was, they got them to agree that there’s one particular test would absolutely show them, you know, what would be needed.
So I got them to agree that one test would be great to do, had them use their experts that they’ve already had run the other tests, but doing this new test. So they took random talcum powder for baby powder and, uh, tested it with the new test, but they’re experts. And guess what asbestos showed up. So with the asbestos showing up and issued a big recall on that particular batch,
and they were like, Oh my God, I don’t know how this happened. Well, instantly defense made a move have that restricted. Mmm. And now there’s an Albert hearing over it, which we can hear the results of hearing moment now, hopefully shortly, um, which could really catapult this litigation and open it up in so many ways. This could potentially result in those 10,000 cases going back in st.
Louis. But as we’re speaking, there’s also a case going on in California, a trial is taking place right now. And what a lot of firms has done. It’s made a strategy of being able to file the cases, not all, but an individual state court spread out all throughout the United States kind of turn this into a huge, like a specifies litigation like Nisa.
Um, so there’s a lot of trials that are set to take place in 2020, which have now has a lot of attention and a lot of demand, a lot of people going after these taco powder cases again, and then last but not least, you have the 3m earplugs. Um, this is a military device. Uh, the DOJ contracted, uh,
from 3m to build out an earplug. It was dual ended to where all the officers kind of put it in and have a cavity in it so they could hear commands or they could flip it around and it would make it completely soundproof sector ears from explosions and firing guns. Um, there was, uh, a whistleblower by the competitor. It said that the earplug was faulty that resulted and the DOJ receiving their 11.
It was $11 million, uh, back, which they originally used to fund this operation and get earplugs. Um, the earplugs themselves are absolutely faulting. They’re resulting in hearing loss and what’s called tinnitus, which is a constant ringing in the years. Mmm. This litigation is steered by some phenomenal again, great firms. I’m Mark Lynn years behind this Randy Gories office Al stock 11 paths I having the list is very strong on this one.
Okay. Mmm. What personally like about it is it’s men and women that fought for our country and our freedoms, um, that were targeted by three M and the name of makeup profits made a faulty device in which they knew was no good in the name of making profits that resulted in are soldiers getting injured. Mmm. And we have an MDL that is in Florida.
That’s I forget the name of the judge, but what’s really attractive issues. Very plaintiff friendly. She’s known for running a fast litigation, not dragging her feet and best of all. She’s ex-military. Um, so these are some things that make 3m really attractive. Um, also the fact that from my understanding, the only argument that 3m could have to get themselves out of this litigation would be to straight up point the fingers and say,
Hey, we’re not the blame. The DOJ knew it was faulty, and they still order them anyways. And if that was proved, that could cause a litigation to go down. Um, but in order for that to happen right now, the DOJ is three M’s absolute largest client. Um, so it would be like a business suicide for them to have,
say into the media and point the fingers saying, Hey, there’s a bad guys here. Uh, we’re not going well for them. So that’s just a, a quick briefing. Typically when firms call and there’s, you’re, you’re really looking for some more information. I don’t want to take all the time up going into too much detail, but these are the different tours that,
you know, I think that anyone should be looking at if they’re attracted and looking to get into some mass tours, um, and looking for diversification. Now, when you’re looking right now and you’re saying yourself, I’d like to get more mass tort cases, whether you’re involved or I’d like to get started. I have firms call me all the time asking,
like, what’s a good starting budget. Can I get 10 of these cases really like this one? And I always give the same thing is, and mass torts in my 12 years of doing it and being involved in this, okay. Positioning myself as much as I can be in an expert. Um, you’ve got to diversify and you’ve got to create yourself almost like a five year plan.
Um, the best you can and what you choose to go after. Um, also depends on funds. So the very first step for successfully diversifying in the mass torts would be creating yourself Mmm. A strategic investment plan of how you’re going to do this. And what that typically looks like for, for general is as you’re looking at the end of 2019,
and you’re seeing how your, your was, and if you had a really good profitable year, some good settlement check came in, you know, it’s a good strategy now to put that money in the marketing to get it off the books of 2019, and then your roll that over, right. Um, moving forward as you’re projecting your 2020, I’m sure everyone looks and puts a,
an estimated growth revenue, what their profits should look like for 2020, a really good plan would look like figuring out what your profits are and taking 20% of that second, a number like 20%. And you’re saying here’s going to be my budget to diversify in the mass torts in the year 2020 and 2122, what it looks like over five years, um,
you can put money aside monthly. Um, however that looks and works for you. Um, I would say, never start a campaign just to acquire yourself five or 10 cases and every mass toward there’s a critical mass of what’s needed each one’s different. So when you’re talking with somebody marketing specialists, finding out what the potential fall-off is with the percentages of certain injuries are the percentages of certain products.
These key factors, we’ll let you know what to expect and making sure that you leverage yourself because not all cases are created equal. And typically these breakdown in the tier systems or point systems at settlement. So you’re going to have your tier one cases, tier two cases that are going to have your higher value, and then your more common, lower tier cases that are going to have lower amounts.
So if you go after a campaign, when you’re starting with a very small budget and you say, I want to get into this, I’m just going to get 10 cases, you’re have your likelihood and your percentages of that. Not giving you the best return are much more higher. So it’s almost better to sideline and build your money on to pick the right ones and making sure that you’re doing everything in your ability,
uh, to keep your margins as good as possible. Um, strategy is everything also putting together a good plan. And I’m going to go into some examples of what this looks like, but, um, like a plan of what your mass tort inventory is going to look like. So I just went over some brand new mass torts and some more matured.
Litigation’s your more matured litigations are definitely going to be more stable style and a shorter time span have given you a return, but your cost per quality case, it’s obviously going to be higher, uh, because of those same reasons, it’s, it’s attracting a lot more firms to go after them and market it. And they’ve been marketed for, for in most cases years now.
So we’re getting a quality cases now, much harder. Um, so you pay more for the case, which, you know, returned kind of hurt your margin, but if you diversify well and you put yourself into some good strategies of more matured cases that create your portfolio and then get into some earlier newer mass torts, uh, where you can get them cheaper and get a really good quality case and get in early,
um, that leverages that. So when one of those it’s you get, you’re getting a really, really good return out. Um, so now by this point, yeah, kind of a general idea, which masks towards they’re out there, um, options to kind of choose from there’s a couple more out there that are attractive, but that’s a good kind of starting point.
Um, you put together yourself a plan and a marketing book budget for this is what’s attractive. I’d like to start with, you know, 50 of these cases or whatever the case may be. This is how I want to start and get involved in. You’ve consulted that, uh, you know, what your budget is, there’s a, now you’ve got to go to marketing.
No, obviously I believe that our product is the best and what we do in our services. Um, and I’m always going to stand by that, but there’s may different options. And everybody, you know, there’s a lot of different options in the space and there was a lot of other justices, good options, maybe not just as good, but,
um, but what I want to disclose is a checklist for acquiring cases and some questions that you should absolutely ask anybody that you’re looking to do marketing for you. And some of these questions are what is the company doing to acquire these cases? Mmm, not everybody. It does everything on the up and up. There’s all different types of marketing techniques. Um,
you’ve got people who specialize in just social media and you’ve got people that specialized in TV. You’ve got it. People that do ad spends where you can give them $50,000 and you get no guarantee on what you’re going to get returned. They just throw some ads up there, or they spend it on Google and see what leads you generate and how they return.
Um, you have people to do a cost per case model like us. The key driving factor in that is not your cost because contracts don’t equal contracts. The key factor is your criteria. And what insurance is that you have. So here’s some, like I would call it traps in the space that you should be aware of is when you’re talking with different marketing companies and you’re asking them to acquire cases for you.
Mmm. Find out as best as you can, what your end result cost is kind of, um, everything starts with marketing, right? So if you’re doing advertising, okay, do you have any insurance? Are they doing an ad spend? So if you’re hiring someone because they’re really good at running campaigns, um, but they’re not giving you any insurance on what your cost per contract’s going to be.
You want it detailed out and find out where that money’s being spent, that they’re not pocketing 50% of it, or 75% of it and saying it was a failure. Mmm. Then there’s people that do a cost per contract rate. Well, on that cost per contract, what is the criteria that there’ll be signing these cases so far? What insurances do you have that they’re not giving someone else a better quality case?
If somebody that’s doing a cost per contract model offers different criteria’s for the same product that can be problematic. And you want to dive in a little bit more and look under the hood of why and how they’re operating that way. And I’ll give you an example. Zantec, I’ve seen criteria outright now for people that are saying took Zantac for three months, diagnosed with cancer,
and that would get signed up. Why is that problematic? Well, I think anybody that has cancer almost qualifies for that, um, heartburn is very common, extremely high for people who have cancer. Um, so the science did more in depth. Some of the earlier stages of the cancers are the earliest forming cancers typically still take about six months to form.
So by that criteria, if someone took Zantec in January and then in April, got it diagnosed with stomach cancer, that case would be signed up. So at this $700 a contract, you just paid $700 for a case, we signed up, you can’t do anything with, um, so criteria is everything like ours. We use different forms of latency.
They had to have taken the drug for at least six months, at least a year. It has to transpire before a cancerous formed a we don’t take Michigan cases cause you can’t proceed forward with anybody from the state of Michigan. There’s a lot of different factors in their preexisting conditions. All of these things are what drives filtering from our marketing to our cost per contract.
So always find out what you’re getting for your costs. What is the return policy? If they send you over a contract and you can’t make contact because they assist, they replaced that if you get a contract and you get a hold of them and you find out that what they’re saying to you is different than what your criteria was. Will that be replaced all of these things factor in to creating your end result for a member you’re not in this to get contracts you’re in this to get cases that can be,
you know, go to court or settled at some point. Um, so some really key, important questions to ask and always, I mean, always ask any marketing company you’re doing business with for at least three references and try to get references that are close to wherever you’re at. If you’re in California, say, can you send me three references of people you work with in California?
Mmm. And start from there and then absolutely do your due diligence. Right? Um, make sure that you’re vetting the people out. A lot of people in this space will try to sell based off of price and not be able to fulfill the order. We’re not so good of cases. The last part in this, you teamed up with somebody. Good.
Do you know your cases and your budgets, your random marketing campaign. Now you partner up with, there are show me different options. And I’ll tell you some of the things that I’ve seen that I think our faulty is taking one mass tort from to send all your cases. Mmm. Each mass torts firm, no matter how amazing they are, are going to specialize in certain things and have seat at the table at different litigations.
So what you want to do is find out which one’s going to be best for your needs. And as a passive firm, you’re going to get let’s call say four different tiers of cases, your tier one cases with the best injuries, where are your tier four cases are your minimal entries, the lower value. Whenever you’re picking a firm that you’re teaming up with,
you want to know exactly what’s involved and have the right expectations. All right. Um, what are they going to be doing? If you’re saying the case is over, how quick are they going to be reaching out to those claimants and identifying themselves as now, something that’s happening very commonly in the mass tort space is still down to the sheer volume of cases.
If cases are followed up with quickly, or they’re not continuously updated at some fashion and identified that they’re represented by a firm, they’ll just go out online and sign up with another firm and we’re having higher and higher issues with what’s called dual reps. Um, so you want to make sure that if you’re going to partner up with a firm, how quick are they responding back and reaching out to that claimant?
Are they issuing your reports? Um, don’t get too crazy with it. Cause remember these firms deal with very large volumes. So they cannot send a report to you once a week or, you know, something like that, but just find out and set the expectations for updates that you can get on the cases you’ll be sending over what your fleet fee splits will be.
See, um, medical records, are they ordering them on all cases, how long it will be taking. And what I would say is most important, their criteria for accepting cases. Um, I’ve seen firms that have the highest of standards and some of them have a business model. So where they will only accept tier one cases as referrals, because they want to build a very strong inventory.
Mmm. I understand that model for them, for an investing firm. It can be very costly for you because if you’re getting a bunch of cases signed up and all they’re taking is the cure. One cases, your tier two, tier three, tier four, all get rejected. Even if you can get in front of that and reengage them and get another JV retainer to send them over to another firm,
you’re going to have a drop off some of those claimants. You’re not going to be able to get back on the phone, trust me from experience so it can hurt your whole investment. And you’re helping each one of these potential claimants that you have in the market. So you want to make sure that who you’re marketing up with aligns with the criteria that you’re working off of for signing the cases.
Mmm. And, and then also what that first position is. So what is their strategy and plan in that particular litigation? Do they have a seat at the table? Um, are they working something out for local council cases? Are they teamed up with somebody, um, settlement councils, you know, just finding out those factors because each litigation is unique.
Mmm. So those are some key things when choosing a litigating partner, you absolutely want to look into now that sums it up really quick, as quick as that for everybody. Um, if you look, I’ve got my email and phone number here, if anybody has anything offline that they’d like to ask, always available to go into a lot more detail and answer individual questions.
But I did leave some time on this. If anybody has any questions right now that you’d like to ask, Okay, Steve, we’ve got a couple questions, actually. We’ve got several questions that have come in. Um, first one is, um, can you give us a breakdown of what this might cost per case? So what you would have to be more clear on what,
which tort and let me can answer this really quickly, but marketing our cost per case is identified by a major, you run an advertising budget, you generate so many leads. So the leads get filter by a criteria and how many cases you sign every single tort, even at it, what time of year and what happened with it all determined what that cost per contract is.
It’s not like, Hey, we’re just going to start at a thousand and the more demand where to start raising the price. So I can, you know, that’s the best answer I can give off of that question. But if there’s a particular tort, I can absolutely at least let you know what the cost is right now. Okay. Uh, and the,
uh, the same listener asks, what’s the best marketing approach to get qualified clients for these types of cases. Can you repeat that? I’m sorry. Sure. Uh, the GRI, a listener asks what’s the best marketing approach to get qualified clients for these types of cases. So that’s a very good question and it’s, there’s a multiple answers to it.
So if there’s a particular tort, let’s say use Dan Peck. Cause it’s something I’m very passionate about right now. Right? So if you’re looking to acquire as the Antech case, there’s a lot of different approaches in getting these cases. If you’re currently have a great presence in your market, you’ve got a good SEO company or someone internally that’s handling your website.
Let’s say you’re running local TV commercials. I would suggest any my consulting or friends or clients or anything like that too. You can throw a commercial in the rotation for Zantec branded under your firm. You’re still going to get your auto accident, slip and fall cases. You’re branding yourself. Your firm is now a bigger firm, and you’re also going to open the funnel up to getting some local Lantech.
So that’s good. Your website build the content up there to get organic cases. Um, social media is always a great platform. Um, you can take a much more conservative approach if you’re looking to just trickle some cases in and keep your bidding as low as possible, not trying to capture volume. Um, these are good approaches, but at the same time,
these are all depended on the infrastructure that you already currently have. So without me diving into an exact firm saying here, this is where you can benefit the most. Those are some options with us. What I can say speaking about our business model is we’ve created a one stop shop for the entire process and make it very streamlined, easy and efficient for a firm.
So instead of having to worry about your intake, making sure none of the leads are falling through the cracks, the proper cases are signed up. There’s no Sol issues. We’re retaining them. Marketing is premium, optimal your marketing in the right places. You can say, Hey, listen, I want to get some Advantech cases. Um, how much does it cost per contract?
And we give you the cost based off of the size of the number of cases you’re looking for. We landscape the entire thing for you. We give you a timeframe, their sign on your retainer. We have relationships with the leading firms with special fee splits. Are you set in place? Do the only thing that we do, we do assign them all on a JV or Tanner.
Once we have them sign and retain, we send investing from a case, but we also send it directly to the leading firm so that they can follow up with that claim and get the medical records and proceed forward with it beginning to end. So it’s really all done for you. Um, so those are some of the different options. Okay. Uh,
we’ve got a couple other questions and, uh, hopefully, um, you haven’t answered these already. Um, listener wants to know what the typical fee split is and is there an expected ROI? So a typically if you’re outsourcing yourself, if you were to go to your local mass or firm and say, Hey, listen, I’ve got five M three M cases I like to refer to that day could start from them,
giving you just a third of the back end, um, all the way up to, you know, a straight 50, 50 fee split. Now, when you get up to your higher level firms that have a seat at the table or on the steering committee, they typically do not get 50, 50 fee splits to anybody. Um, when working with us,
we work with leading firms on the steering committee that spearhead these litigations and the fee split arrangement turns out to be 40% of the legal fee to the investing firm, uh, 10% of us and 50% to the leading firms. So the leading firms give us special 50 fifties because of just our relationships marketing forum and the volume that we do. Uh, so that,
that still leaves us 60 40 for the investing firm. Um, and then what was the second part of that question? Oh, what is the typical ROI? Right. Um, so, Okay. And I hope everyone understands every force difference. There’s timeframe factors in it. Um, you can exceed, you can see anything from a two time returns I’d say is,
you know, five or six time return. Um, I think that your overall approach to this depends on your timing and what happens in the space. If anyone else gives you another answer, I don’t know what to say, but what I’m going to say is this, in my 12 years of doing everything, I can to be an expert on this and surrounding myself with the smartest people,
you can just make approximates towards that you think should wrap up quickly, get prolonged and ended up lasting forever, uh, like kind of vaginal mesh, a torch that you could easily pass on and think nothing will ever happen with subtle, for big, you know, like Ben a quarter. Um, you know, so no matter how much due diligence you do,
that’s why you want to diversify. But if you diversify and you put together a five year plan, you don’t just try to get rich quick by a hammer to get some Roundup pieces. You know, now go after a campaign now and because it looks attractive and I hope I make a five-time return on it. Um, that’s not going to happen. What you want to do is,
you know, have a good consultant, somebody that’s in the space that can not only give you an opinion, but show you where it’s coming from, but diversifying different torts and spread it out over years. And if you do it that way, kind of how I broken down on this, on this webinar, you should easily see yourself an average of about three to five time return.
Um, you know, which is again, look at what the typical stock market or investments or things like that return. You know, you got like seven years to double your money. So because your lawyers can get to participate in this on a passive and, you know, expand your practice and still see yourself a nice return. Okay. We’ve got another question.
And, um, Do you have any thoughts on the advent of autonomous driving product defect cases? So autonomous driving is a legal question. It’s, it’s a little bit outside of the mass tort market. Um, I do know people that are already putting it marketing and trying to get there. The marketing geniuses are trying to get in front of that one.
Um, it’s not something I could speak to intelligently on, except say that people I have respect for that are mentors to me. I have seen some of them expressed interest in it, getting in front of the marketing already. So I think that’s the best answer I can give on that one. Yes. Well folks, we’re about out of time. Um,
let me see if I can harvest a couple more of these questions here. Uh, we have a question. Are there other special qualifications to participate on the steering committees? Absolutely. So let me break down how it works. So whenever Zantec is a prime example, because we’re now just now forming an MBL. So recall happens grabs attention. There’s always something that grabs the attention.
Someone puts a link between drug or medical device with injury from gets Cole, signed up piece, starts marketing. Um, then you didn’t claim it. These cases there’s no federal court yet. So they typically get filed and on state courts across the country, um, as cases start getting filed, a lot of these leading firms that have been in this a long time,
a lot of the ones I named, they meet regularly to identify these things and get in front of them early on to make sure that we’re prepared for any twists and turn that can happen. These torts are like a fight of David and Goliath. And, you know, luckily we have some really, really great attorneys behind us. So as cases are getting filed in individual state court,
that grabs the attention and for all purposes of making this streamline effective and not get chaotic, there’s, what’s called a J P and L hearing. And the JPL hearing it’s from the pharmaceutical company or medical device and plaintiff’s attorneys that have filed cases. And it gives them an opportunity to go in and pledge for where they think that a multidistrict litigation federal court should be assembled for this tort.
Um, most of the time it goes off the basis of where cases are filed, where the defenses, where the plaintiff’s attorneys are and tries to pick a location that’s most friendly with the plaintiffs. Cause that’s, that’s the victims and that’s what everyone needs. Once an MDL is determined and they know where it’s at, then a steering committee is built. And right now on Zantec,
we’re in, what’s called a rat race where all these different firms or building your dockets, because ultimately one of the biggest arguments is I have the most cases, so I should lead this litigation. Um, so it’s determined. Who’s going to be kind of in the leadership, steering me in the deal. And then you assemble a plaintiff’s steering committee. If you’ve never had any involvement at all in mass torts,
your odds of getting involved in that are very slim. Um, if you start as a passive investor, like we’re just referring cases, you start building your practice where you’re, you’re working cases up and filing them in the MDL. And you get relationships with these firms that are leading these litigations. Then you can put in petition and say, I’d like to really,
it’s kind of like who, you know, I’d really like to be a part of this, and this is what I can offer it, like to work on the discovery team. I’d like to work on this and then you can be like, and get it. So that’s kind of how, how that whole proceeding works out as far as the, or the plaintiff steering committee.
Okay. We’ve got, uh, one more question. Um, listener asks, what would an average range of settlement value be Again, every towards different. So it really depends what you’ve got to look at. And I think the best answer for here is all the things that can ship and change. So what are your damages? It’s similar, a car accident.
What are your damages? What are your losses? Right. Put a value on that. So, um, you know, if something is just causing you your rotation or minimal pain or something like that, you know, your damages are going to be smaller where there’s a drug called taxi tier, where it creates hair loss in women fighting cancer. So how much is hair worth?
Well, no one knows until the jury decides, but one of the other big key factors in this is also what can you settle? So you can’t always get caught up in Walt dam, this causes cancer. And these types of damages, this case, it easily works this well. Yeah, it was one case. What we’re seeing right now happen when Roundup is Roundup by all intensive purposes,
should have already been settled. Um, and what’s transpired is the MDL was completely broken apart and you have all these different settlement groups and they’re all in discussion of settlement. And it’s not that they’re not it’s falling apart or anything like that. But at one point settlement value was rumored to be as high as $250,000 a case. But over the last four months,
thousands and thousands and thousands of additional cases keep getting added to the mix. So every single time they sit down and they talk with Paris, settle this litigation. It’s just getting so enormous that if bear only has so much money that they’re bringing to the table, and that number has been the same for two or three months, but more and more cases are getting filed.
What ultimately happens is that dilutes the average case value. So this is a census of everything since it was an open ended question and not directed at a single mass tort, but again, as kind of how it’s determined, no one has a crystal ball, um, to give you some examples, you know, like three a year plug, this is all speculating,
you know, hearing loss. And tonight is a very large number of cases. So some people think it could be worth 40 to 60,000 on an average. Some people think they’ll get as much as a hundred thousand dollars, but until settlement happens and you sit down and it’s actually a rule of thumb, it’s just speculating, right? And you can just use your best,
your best judgment on it. Hernia mesh. I hear speculated, you know, 75 to 100,000 orders. Um, if we look at Fantech and Valsartan the only thing you can kind of concur to us a little bit, roundups, let’s throw some Aptos in there. Let’s speculate and say that, okay, let’s put a value of between two to $300,000 a case.
Well, potentially if they’re thinking that 15,000 of these cases can be filed in the next two years. Um, so there’s a lot of factors that go into how long they drag their feet, which could start doing All right, folks. We are out of time, but I want to thank Steve for a very informative webinar. If there are any questions that have gone on answered,
or if you think of anything later, I’d encourage you to contact you directly. You see his contact information there, Steve, at get cases.com or his phone number. Steve, thank you. Once again. And folks, this replay of this will be posted to a toolkit on<inaudible> dot org within the next 24 hours. Thanks everyone for joining us and we’ll see you next time.
And thanks, Steve. Thank you. You guys have a great day.