Legal is one of the few niches where you genuinely can't do rev share, so price off case value instead. For criminal defence and PI, a signed case is worth thousands to tens of thousands, so a per-qualified-consultation or per-signed-case fee is easy to justify. How I'd structure it: 1. Setup fee, 1,000 to 2,500, covers the build, A2P registration, list clean, prompt and the first campaign. Never do the build free. 2. Then either a flat monthly retainer, or a per-booked-consultation fee. Retainer is simpler to get approved by their compliance and easier for you to forecast. 3. Make them pay the usage directly, or build it in with headroom. A 2,000 lead campaign runs about 130 in SMS, so price well above that. Two practical points. Old PI and criminal leads need consent checking before you text them, and the firm must confirm they have it, in writing. Also keep the AI off anything that reads as legal advice or a case outcome promise, that is a bar rule problem for them, not just a conversion one. Ask them for their average case value on the first call, every number above hangs off it.

Start from what the client pays you for, then build back. For an Android the numbers that actually matter are: 1. Leads entered (how many contacts started the flow) 2. Reply rate (contacts that responded at all) 3. Conversation rate (two or more replies, so the AI is actually engaging) 4. Appointments booked 5. Show rate 6. Closed/sold, if the client will feed it back The good news is the snapshot already gives you most of this for free via the AI Chat Pipeline. Each stage (Message Sent/No Response, Lead Responded, Multiple Responses, Lead Qualified, Send To Client) is a funnel step, so a pipeline-based dashboard widget gives you reply and qualification rates without any extra work. Add a widget for appointments from the calendar, and one for contacts added. Two things people skip and regret: - Tag or use utm_source so you can split results by lead source or batch. Otherwise month two blends into month one and you can't prove anything. - Send the client a short weekly summary rather than CRM access. Three numbers and one screenshot of a real conversation beats a dashboard login they never open. The conversation screenshot is what renews contracts. Keep the dashboard to six tiles max. More than that and nobody reads it, including you.

@John Paule You can get that from GHL if they use it to mark if each appointment showed or not, but usually you'd get that from them

Best way to get takers here is to post the actual numbers rather than the ask. Pay per meeting partners will only bite if they can see the maths works for them, so give: the niche and geography, what counts as a qualified meeting (job title, company size, intent), your show rate expectation, close rate and average contract value, and what you will pay per meeting. Without that, anyone decent assumes it is a fishing expedition and scrolls past. Two other things worth knowing before you sign anyone: insist on a short paid pilot (10 to 20 meetings) before any volume commitment, and agree up front who owns the domains and inboxes. Agencies that burn your main domain are common. Honestly though, pay per meeting is usually worse value than building the outreach yourself, because the margin they need forces them to spray. If you want the in-house route, we run B2B Leads Lab for exactly this, including a novel approach using bottles sent to decision makers (50 bottles, 7 paying clients). https://go.flexxable.com/b2b-leads-lab-g

For speed to lead and DBR, pick the fastest mid-tier model rather than the biggest reasoning one. These are short SMS exchanges with a tight prompt, so latency matters far more than raw intelligence. A lead replying at 9pm wants an answer in seconds, not 30 seconds later. The heavy reasoning models are built for long multi-step tasks and they are slower and dearer for no gain on a two line text. Practical rule: run the same 10 message test conversation through two models, time the replies and read them side by side. Pick the one that stays on script and comes back quickest. Redo that whenever a new model lands rather than chasing release notes. And yes, the same prompt behaves differently across models. Newer ones tend to follow instructions more literally and are less chatty, so a prompt tuned on an older model can come out blunt or over-long. Whenever you switch model, re-test the prompt, especially your qualification rules and the instruction that it must admit it is AI if asked. Watch message length too. A chattier model pushes you into two SMS segments and doubles your send cost.

Easiest route is HighLevel's Google Business Profile integration in the client's sub-account, not Wingman. Connect it under Settings > Integrations and review replies flow through there. I can't tell you what's inside Wingman 2.0 beyond what's published, so check its own setup docs for that side. On access: 1. The owner stays the Profile Owner. They add you (or the client's own login connects it) as a **Manager**. Never ask for Owner, it spooks people and you don't need it. 2. Google doesn't do reply-only permissions. The closest is **Site Manager**, which can respond to reviews but can't add users or remove the listing. Manager gets you more reliable API behaviour, Site Manager gets you tighter scope. Pick based on how nervous the client is. 3. After setup the owner does nothing, until Google forces a reconnect or the owner changes their password. Budget for an occasional reauth. Dan built this exact offer out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-v4y1n1tSU