You know how this goes. An RFP lands at six in the evening. You pull the three most comparable matters, adjust for staffing, model a few scenarios and build a careful, defensible estimate.
Then the partner trims it in a hallway conversation, on instinct, because the client “won’t go for that.” Six months later, the matter runs over, the write-off lands, and someone asks how pricing got it so wrong.
Now add AI. The comparable matters you rely on were delivered before anyone used it. The hours inside them are no longer the hours the work will take. The ground you build every estimate on has moved, and nobody has told the spreadsheet. Consider five facts.
1. Your history is out of date.
BigHand’s 2026 research found that 63 percent of firms default to standard rates or historical matter pricing. Historical pricing was always a blunt instrument. Applied to AI-assisted work, it is pricing today’s delivery with yesterday’s effort.
2. Once a matter starts, most firms fly blind.
The same study found that only 23 percent of firms continuously monitor budgets against actuals during a matter. The rest find out how the estimate performed when the matter closes, which is the one moment nothing can be done about it.
89%
of firms reported increasing write-offs. Every one of them started life as an estimate.BigHand, 2026
3. The write-offs are telling you something.
A write-off is an estimate that was wrong, discovered too late. As AI changes how much effort the work takes, and how much checking that work needs, the distance between the estimate and reality is likely to grow, not shrink.
4. Clients expect the efficiency to show up in the price.
BigHand found that 56 percent of firms saw rising client demand for AI efficiencies or transparency. Procurement teams are starting to ask how AI was used and what it saved. “We used some AI” is not an answer a sophisticated buyer will accept for long.
5. Your partners need to believe the number.
Thirty-five percent of firms named partner discomfort discussing AI as a barrier. You will never have the authority to overrule a partner, and you shouldn’t. What you can have is evidence clear enough that the partner doesn’t want to overrule you.
What we have built, and why we will not describe it here.
mattermeter was founded for the people who price legal work in a world where AI has changed what the work costs. We have built something specific. We are not describing it on a public website. Like a good pricing model, it’s worth more when the other side hasn’t seen it.
What we will say is this. It was built for finance, with your IT. It treats privilege and client confidentiality as non-negotiable. And it gives partners evidence while leaving the final call exactly where it belongs: with the partner who carries the client relationship.
Here’s what I’d like you to do.
Fill in the short form below. It takes less than a minute.
I will reply personally and arrange a private working briefing. Come with one type of matter you find hard to price this quarter. No client data needed. We will talk through how AI is changing the economics of that work and what a defensible number looks like now. You leave with a sharper way to frame your next estimate, whether or not we ever work together.
Now the part I have to be straight with you about.
We are taking on no more than [5] founding firms before launch. That is how many we can serve properly while we are this small. Founding firms see the work first, help decide what is built, and get terms we will not offer again. When those places are gone, they are gone.
The next RFP is already on its way. It would be good to price it with something better than last year’s hours.
Sincerely,
[Founder name]
Founder, mattermeter
P.S. If you have ever watched a careful estimate get cut in a hallway, mention it in the form. You will find we speak the same language.
P.P.S. We wrote separate letters for your managing partner and your CFO. Forwarding them may be the easiest business case you make this year.