Constant Content

I'm so conflicted about how to price my articles, specifically about the difference between "usage" and "unique".

For Usage, I'm fine with that, rent it out lots of times, with my name on it, sounds fine to me.

Or, just sell the whole thing outright, as in Full Rights, that makes sense to me, too, that's just basically ghostwriting, and you get all your money right up front. And what do I care, after all? I can just make up more words any time I want to, that being the primary fun of words, indeed.

But what about that gray area in between, for Unique? Possibly if they keep your name on it, and someone else sees you out there in a place you might not normally think of posting, that's good, I would think. But then again, what if they just take it down completely, and that's that? But of course, you did get paid a bit more upfront, after all.

As I said, I'm conflicted.

I wonder what other authors do about pricing their articles in relation to these types of questions?

Usage used to sell pretty well but I don't think it's as popular anymore.

If I were a customer, I'd buy use as the first time download and gamble that no one else will be able to use the content. Lots of writers sell dirt cheap on usage, so that's what I would do as a customer. I've dabbled in different pricing and most people want full rights anyway regardless of how cheap you go with usage.

I've messed around with price a lot. Topic and the industry have a lot to do with pricing. I also stick to what I know, so I feel I am writing at a higher level than most writers on the topic.

If you're new, having your name on a blaaahg post might be helpful. I was desperate for a byline back when I started too, so I'd take any byline. But really, how much is a byline on some random blog post really worth? Bylines are great when they are on a brand. They aren't worth anything on some random blog.

I don't bother with Unique anymore. I think it's probably the rarest. Usage is good for cheap and full rights ensures it's yours, so I think buyers are more interested in those two aspects.

Just from my personal experiments, price doesn't really drive sales much. It drives faster sales, I think, if you need money now, but overall I sell about 6-8/10 articles I put up in the open market. Higher priced articles might take a bit longer to sell, but they still sell. I find that I normally sell articles that are older anyway. Usually, 3-6 month articles sell faster after the initial post. Had one guy ask me to turn offers on, but I told him I probably wouldn't budge on any article that has been written within the last year because they are still popular for me.

I haven't written for CC in 4 months now (I keep telling myself that being back on the forums will push me to write more again lol), and I still have payouts each month. I don't see a correlation between price and sales, and I have tested different prices a few times on here.

Thank you for taking time to share your thoughtful and helpful reply.

I have been doing similar for awhile (usage & full rights only, but not offering unique) for just the reasons we have discussed, but then I starting to get wishy-washy and feeling uncertain about that approach.

It occurred to me to check what I have actually sold, and I was pleased to realize that I have sold quite a bit from my (still small) library, even with that approach, so there's not much reason to stop that approach, since it is working.

Best way to increase sales, for me personally, appears to be "write more" . . . what a shock. ha.

Also, thanks for replying, which inspired me to review your author's bio and I was quite inspired and really must get my own up to a better level, as yours demonstrated.

Thanks again!