Choosing a marketing agency for an Australian law firm
Australian legal marketing is a small market — 5 of the 40 suppliers we read in full are Australian — so the same agency can end up holding more than one firm in the same city. Asking whether they work with a competitor is the wrong question. Here is the one that matters.
Last updated: 5 August 2026
Why is choosing an agency different in a small market?
Because depth and separation pull against each other, and in Australia there is less room for both.
Of the 40 legal-marketing suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026, five were Australian. The sample was the top ten organic results for fifteen buying terms across three markets, so those five are what an Australian firm searching for a supplier actually finds on the first page.
That has a consequence nobody puts in a proposal. An agency that has done family law work in a capital city more than once is better at it than one that never has — it knows the questions, the objections, the way the matters run and what a fee earner will and will not agree to say in public. The same experience means it has probably worked for somebody a few streets away.
The damaging admission goes here: we would rather have written twenty family law pages than none, and so would you. Specialisation and separation cannot both be maximised, and a supplier promising both has defined one of them very narrowly.
Does it matter if your agency already works with a competing firm?
In one specific way, yes, and it is smaller and more concrete than the question usually implies.
A marketing supplier is not in the position a firm is in with its own clients, and we are not going to pretend to describe what your obligations are — that is a matter for the firm and its own advisers. What we can describe is the mechanics of search, which are unsentimental.
There is one first position per search. If an agency holds two firms in the same city both targeting family lawyer in that city, one of them is buying second place. That is not a betrayal, it is arithmetic, and it is the only version of the conflict worry that has a real cost attached to it.
The map results are worse. Three listings appear before a person has to press anything, and proximity to the searcher is a factor no supplier can move. Two clients competing for the same three slots is a genuinely zero-sum arrangement.
Templates and tactics travel. If the same structure and the same page inventory is deployed for both firms, the resulting sites read as siblings, and the searcher comparing them sees two versions of one document.
What is usually not a real risk is confidentiality, because a marketing supplier works with published material and firm-supplied facts. If an agency is holding anything that matters commercially, that is a question about your own instructions to them rather than about their client list.
What should you ask instead?
Five questions, each of which is hard to answer vaguely.
| The usual question | Why it gets you nothing | Ask this instead |
|---|---|---|
| Do you work with any of my competitors? | A narrow yes or no, answered by whichever definition suits | Which firms do you work with in this city, and in which practice areas? |
| Will we be exclusive? | Exclusivity defined so tightly it costs the agency nothing | What exactly would exclusivity cover in writing — city, practice area, or search term? |
| Do you specialise in law firms? | Everyone says yes | Show me the last three pages you wrote for a firm, and tell me who supplied the facts in them |
| Who is our account manager? | A name, and often not the person who does the work | Who writes the pages, and are they on this call? |
| What does reporting look like? | A dashboard nobody reads | What do we own if we leave — the site, the content, the accounts? |
The third row is the one that separates suppliers fastest. Legal pages are only good if a fee earner supplied the facts, and a supplier who cannot say who supplied them is describing a process they do not run.
The fifth is the one firms regret not asking. A site the firm cannot take with it is a rental priced as a purchase, and the same applies to a search console property or an advertising account registered in the agency's name.
Which Australian agencies did we read, and which published a price?
Three named here, from the 40 read in full on 3 August 2026.
| Supplier | Published a price on the site |
|---|---|
| rocketagency.com.au | No |
| thecreativecollective.com.au | No |
| liftlegal.com.au | No |
⚠ We recorded whether a price appeared, not what it was, and this is a presence check on one day. The figures our tooling collected mixed genuine fees with case values and fragments, so attributing a number to a named business would be publishing something unverified. None of these three published a figure on the date read, which is a fact about that day and not a criticism.
Across the full 40: twelve published any price, five of those showed only a "from" range, eight claimed a guarantee of some kind, and one offered work with no minimum term. 15 of the 62 questions buyers ask on these searches are price questions, which makes the most-asked question in the market the one most suppliers decline to answer where it is being asked.
How do we handle the same-city question ourselves?
By answering it before it is asked, and by not offering something we cannot keep.
We do not offer territory exclusivity. In a city the size of Brisbane, where 8,800 people a month search for family law at around A$24.29 a click, exclusivity over a whole city and practice area would mean turning away most of the market to serve one firm — which is either a promise defined so narrowly it means nothing, or a fee no firm would want to pay. We would rather say that plainly than dress it up.
We will say who else we work with in your city and practice area before you sign, so the arithmetic above is yours to weigh rather than ours to manage.
Our prices are published: A$1,900 for the sprint, A$4,200 for the build. Fixed, no minimum term. We never charge per enquiry or per matter, and we do not promise a ranking, because nobody controls Google's results and eight of the forty suppliers we read imply otherwise.
Where is another agency the better choice?
Three situations, stated as plainly as the rest of it.
When the firm needs matters this quarter. Organic work shows nothing measurable in month one and cannot be judged fairly before month six. Australian clicks are cheap enough that paid search settles the question faster, and we do not manage ad spend, so this recommendation sends the work elsewhere.
When the firm wants brand, print, events and sponsorship handled with the digital work. Full-service agencies of that shape exist here and coordinate media we do not touch.
When another firm in your city and practice area is already with a supplier you rate. That is the honest reading of everything above: if the agency that knows your market best is taken, the second-best option that is genuinely yours may beat the best option shared three ways. We would say the same about ourselves.
Before you shortlist anyone
We read 40 legal-marketing suppliers in full in August 2026 — including several on this page. Twelve published a price. One offered work with no minimum term.
The free report gives you the full count, named, so you can repeat it rather than take ours. It also shows how many people search for your practice areas in your town, and what those clicks cost to buy at Google's own prices.
Get the report — five questions, about two minutes →
No call required. Our own prices are on that page.
Where should I read next?
For the supplier market counted and priced: lawyer firm marketing names the five Australian suppliers in our sample and sets out the ceiling test on fees.
Shorter answers to the questions that come up in the same meeting: What is the best way to advertise a law firm?, Does a law firm need a website?, What is the ROI for law firm marketing? and How to get ranked in Legal 500?
Frequently asked questions
Does it matter if my marketing agency works with a competing firm?
In one concrete way. There is one first position per search and three map listings, so two clients in the same city and practice area cannot both have them. Confidentiality is rarely the real issue, because the supplier works with published material and facts you supply.
What should I ask an agency instead of asking about conflicts?
Which firms they work with in your city and practice areas, what exclusivity would cover in writing, who actually writes the pages, who supplied the facts in their last three, and what you own if you leave.
Do you offer exclusivity in a city or practice area?
No. In a market where one city and practice area can carry 8,800 searches a month, exclusivity is either defined so narrowly that it means nothing or priced beyond what any firm would want to pay.
How many Australian agencies are in your supplier sample?
Five of the 40 suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026 were Australian. The sample was the top ten organic results for fifteen buying terms, so those five are what a firm searching for a supplier finds first.
Which of the agencies on this page published a price?
None of the three on the date we read them, 3 August 2026. Across the whole sample of 40, twelve published any price and five of those showed only a range.
Who owns the website, the content and the accounts if we leave?
The firm should, and it is worth putting in writing before signing rather than discovering afterwards. A site or an advertising account registered to the agency is a rental priced as a purchase.
What do you charge?
A$1,900 for the sprint and A$4,200 for the build, fixed and published, with no minimum term. We never charge per enquiry or per matter, and we do not promise a ranking.