Branding a law firm through a merger or a rename
Most branding decisions in a UK firm are not chosen, they are forced by a merger. There are 4 naming options when two firms combine and each carries a different search cost. The part nobody budgets for is re-earning the searches the old name already won.
Last updated: 5 August 2026
What happens to a brand when two firms combine?
Two of everything, and a deadline that was set by the deal rather than by anyone thinking about it.
The damaging admission, early: we do not name firms, we do not design identities from scratch, and we cannot advise on whether a trading name is open to a regulated practice — that is a matter for the firm and its own advisers. We do the part that follows the decision: the site the new name lives on, the redirect map from both old ones, and the pages that make the new name findable.
Which of the four naming options costs least in search?
Keeping one existing name outright, and it is not close.
| Option | What it looks like | What it costs in search |
|---|---|---|
| Keep one name | The larger or better-known firm's name continues | Least. One domain keeps its history, the other is redirected into it |
| Join both names | Two surnames, or two firm names, hyphenated or run together | Moderate. The new string has no history, but both old names still resolve to it |
| Shorten to initials | Three or four letters from the combined names | High. Initials are ambiguous, generic in search, and often already taken by another business |
| A new name entirely | Neither predecessor appears | Highest. Nothing that has been earned is carried forward except by redirect |
The row that surprises people is the third. Initials feel like a neutral compromise between two partners who both want their name first, and they are the worst outcome for being found: a three-letter string competes against every other organisation using the same three letters, and a person who half-remembers the firm cannot type it back into a search bar. The second row is the usual honest compromise — clumsy to read for about a year, and it keeps both stocks of recognition.
What is actually worth keeping from either brand?
Not the logo. The things that took years and cannot be redrawn in an afternoon.
| Worth keeping | Not worth keeping |
|---|---|
| The domain with the longer history and the pages that already rank | The old visual identity, which is the cheapest thing to replace |
| Named fee earners and their biographies, which follow the person not the firm | Stock photography of a boardroom neither firm uses |
| Practice-area pages that answer a real question, rewritten under the new name | Duplicate practice-area pages from both sites, competing with each other |
| Published fee and service information, which most firms do not have | A news section that stops on the merger date |
| Referral and directory listings, updated rather than abandoned | Two contact pages with two switchboard numbers |
The duplicate row is where merged firms lose most quietly. Both predecessor sites had a conveyancing page. Kept separate under one brand they compete with each other and the search engine picks one, usually not the better one. Merged into a single page they compound. It takes an afternoon and almost nobody does it.
Which domain should the merged firm keep?
The one with the longer history and the pages people already arrive on, which is often not the senior partner's.
Three questions settle it without argument, and all three are answerable from data the firm already holds:
- Which domain is older, and continuously in use rather than parked or rebuilt.
- Which one already receives search traffic, and for what. Analytics on both sites answers this in ten minutes.
- Which one is written down elsewhere — on referral partners' sites, in directories, in old correspondence, on signage nobody is replacing this year.
The losing domain is not switched off. It is redirected page by page rather than everything to the home page, and it stays registered indefinitely, because clients will use its email addresses for years after anybody expects them to.
What does a name change cost that nobody budgets for?
Re-earning the searches the old name already won, and the time that takes.
People search for firms by name, and a retired name is still the name in their head, on the referral partner's list and in the paperwork from the last matter. Those searches keep arriving at a name that no longer exists. Redirects carry them, provided somebody wrote the map, and every listing the firm does not control is updated by hand.
We do not publish a figure for how much search traffic a rename costs or how long recovery takes. We hold no measurement of it, and the answer depends on how much of the firm's traffic was brand search to begin with — which the firm can see in its own analytics and we cannot. A supplier quoting a recovery percentage is quoting something they did not measure.
What can be said with a figure is what the underlying searches are worth to buy. Measured 3 August 2026:
| City | Practice area | Searches/mo | Cost per click |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liverpool | Residential conveyancing | 1,760 | £15.41 |
| Edinburgh | Family and divorce | 1,440 | £30.17 |
| Cardiff | Family and divorce | 890 | £17.21 |
Those are practice-area searches rather than brand searches, and they are the ones a merged firm can still win while its own name is being re-learned. A firm that treats the rebrand as identity work alone spends the year invisible on both.
What does this cost, and what is not included?
Published and fixed: £2,400 for the Firm Site, £4,200 for Firm Site+, £6,900 for the Authority Build, £890 for the Price Transparency Pack on its own.
Retainers are £600, £1,200 or £2,400 a month with no minimum term, and £700 comes off the build when it is taken with six months of retainer. We never charge per enquiry, per matter or per client: LASPO 2012 section 56 prohibits referral fees in prescribed legal business including personal injury, and it binds the paying firm as well as the recipient.
What is not included, stated plainly. Naming. Trademark searching or registration. Logo design as a standalone piece. Printed collateral, signage and stationery. Any view on whether a trading name is open to a regulated practice. Those belong with a naming or design practice and with the firm's own advisers.
What is included is the site the decision lands on, the page-by-page redirect map from both predecessor domains, the merging of duplicate practice-area pages, and the fee and service information under the new name. That last item is the one that makes a new name credible to somebody who has never heard it: the SRA Transparency Rules, in force since 6 December 2018 and checked 3 August 2026, ask for price and service information to be published for specified work types. We build the pages the rules ask for. Whether a firm meets its obligations is a judgement for the firm and its COLP, and no supplier can certify it.
Of the 40 legal-marketing suppliers we read in full on 3 August 2026, 12 published a price at all, 5 of those showed only a range, 8 claimed a guarantee of some kind, and 1 offered work with no minimum term. Four a firm researching legal branding is likely to encounter:
| Supplier | Published a price |
|---|---|
| idr.legal | Yes |
| legal500.com | No |
| deckerdesign.com | No |
| contra.agency | No |
We record whether a price appeared on the page, never what it was. 15 of the 62 questions buyers ask on these searches are price questions, and branding is where that gap is widest, because identity work is the easiest thing in this market to quote by feel.
What this is worth where you are
In London, 2,900 people a month search for immigration, and Google charges around £18.75 for one of those clicks. We hold the same figures for 52 cities.
The free report gives you yours, plus which of the pages the rules ask for are missing from your site, and what 40 suppliers charge.
No call required. Our own prices are on that page.
Where should I read next?
If the firm is starting from nothing rather than merging, marketing for a law firm puts the first ninety days in order.
On making the new name findable: lawyer web marketing and online marketing for lawyer cover the channels, and lawyer internet marketing covers how they fit together.
For the wider picture rather than the identity question alone, marketing for lawyer.
Frequently asked questions
What are the naming options when two law firms merge?
Four: keep one existing name, join both names, shorten to initials, or adopt an entirely new name. Keeping one name costs least in search because one domain keeps its history and the other is redirected into it. Initials cost most relative to how neutral they feel.
What does a rebrand cost a firm in search?
We do not publish a figure, because we have not measured one and it depends on how much of the firm's traffic was brand search to begin with. A supplier quoting a recovery percentage is quoting something they did not measure. The firm's own analytics shows its brand share.
Is a logo the same as a brand for a law firm?
No. A person choosing a solicitor cannot assess legal work before buying it, so what they evaluate is whether the firm named the person doing the work, said what it costs, and answered the question they arrived with. The typeface is downstream of all three, and the logo is the cheapest item in a rebrand to replace.
Do you design logos or name firms?
No. We do not name firms, design identities from scratch, or advise on whether a trading name is open to a regulated practice, which is a matter for the firm and its own advisers. We build the site the decision lands on, the redirect map from both old domains, and the pages under the new name.
What does the work cost?
The Firm Site is £2,400, Firm Site+ £4,200 and the Authority Build £6,900, with the Price Transparency Pack at £890 on its own. Retainers are £600, £1,200 or £2,400 a month with no minimum term, and £700 comes off the build with six months of retainer.