Law firm contest exchanges gift cards for clicks

November 21, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Here’s one way to drive traffic to your website and social media: Pay people to visit it.

A Milwaukee-based personal injury firm is giving away 10 $100 VISA gift cards in a contest. All you have to do, according to the firm, is be at least 18 years old and enter basic contact information on its website. If you’d like even more chances to win, then tweet the contest page or “like” the firm on Facebook and share their contest page.

As of this afternoon, 946 people have liked the firm on Facebook.

According to a news release from the firm touting this contest, the firm – which has offices in Illinois, Wisconsin and Iowa – has collected hundreds of millions of dollars for clients since 1969. A $1,000 contest isn’t going to break the bank, and likely a cheaper way of getting your name out to the general public than buying an ad on the cover of the phone book or side of a city bus.

Drawings will be held on Nov. 31 and Dec. 31, with the winners announced through social media and on hupy.com on Dec. 5 and Jan. 5, so you’ve still got time to enter.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT