As a lawyer who has been doing this sort of work in Silicon Valley for quite a while, let me add my thoughts:

1. The Orrick docs are very helpful templates to assist founders in setting up a corporate startup. Orrick is an excellent firm and the quality of the templates is very good.

2. Founders should do their utmost to cut early-stage costs and this includes not overpaying for legal services. They should also do their best to educate themselves about the legal points associated with their startups. I believe strongly in this and have done what I call a Startup Law 101 series (http://www.grellas.com/faq_business_startup.html) of articles whose very purpose is to help educate founders on such issues.

3. The key to any legal help you receive in setting up your startup lies in the expertise the lawyer provides. There is no substitute for this and there is no amount of study you will do as a founder that can possibly match it.

4. I know this from years of experience because, even with founders who have been through the full set-up process under good lawyer guidance, I have routinely seen them try to use the same forms to do subsequent documentation on their own only to have it come back in botched fashion. This often is not critical and can easily be fixed but it is another way of saying that such things do not consist merely of filling in blanks. There is a lot of underlying knowledge and experience involved in doing it right, especially where a founding team is involved with a variety of issues possibly arising among the founders.

5. For the same reason that founders have trouble managing such documents without expert guidance, so too would an unemployed law grad who really doesn't know this area. Basically, this is a specialty area and is often not well-done by inexperienced attorneys. Again, from experience, I can easily recall young attorneys I hired in my own office for the purpose of assisting me with getting such documents prepared. Skilled ones can do it with proper guidance but others cannot. They come back with work that might appear fine on the service but, scratch it a little and it falls apart (of course, such work would never be seen by the client - it would be redone altogether).

6. That said, I sympathize with your point about overpaying for lawyers. The larger firms practice a high-caliber form of law but it needs to fit with the needs of your startup for it to make sense for you. If it does not, it is an expensive mismatch. This is true for bootstrap companies in particular. It is important for such startups to minimize legal fees and looking for lawyers who will not cost as much (but who can still do the job well) is important.

7. Lawyers will not just give out templates, however, because this does leave them exposed in taking responsibility for a project. It is one thing for a founder group to want to "do it themselves" while being prepared to absorb any losses that might result from their not doing it right. It is quite another to do it yourself and then say that a lawyer was responsible because you used his template. Lawyers are paid to customize documents to fit the deal before them. A template is a startup point only. If it is to be used properly, it must be customized. This necessarily takes some effort that will cost money. And, take it from someone who has seen it all over the years, it is worth paying for the right expertise where needed, even as you try to minimize costs along the way. The process is a cooperative teaming and a good lawyer will work with you to so minimize your costs. But being frugal is not the same as being foolish. Where you do need the expertise, you need to be prepared to pay for it.

The startup world is becoming more and more an open field with fewer barriers to entry than ever before. The liberation of the legal side represents one part of this and is a good development. Just be smart about how you as a founder treat your new-found freedom!