October 2009 Get out of a Price Rut Challenge - Who's In?

[eek]

Here's another perspective: You go through some experience and discover something that you think is fresh, if not new. Everyone should be warned! Or they've got to know about the good news! You write an article on it, thinking you've found something unique, only to find later that it's not. Research is always time well spent, even if it's just to figure out how unique your observations are.

[JackieL]

I'm a firm believer in "slow and steady wins the race." While at some point all authors must find a point at which they've spent enough time on an article, comprehensive research, careful writing, and thorough proofreading result in better articles that command higher prices and heighten a writer's reputation as someone who can be depended upon to produce quality work. If you have high standards that you require yourself to meet, it shows.

Constant Content isn't the site for writers looking to "churn out" articles. If you're a slow writer, it means you're a careful writer, and that's the type of writer we are looking for. No one here should feel pressured when they hear others talking about pounding out an article in a few minutes, because it should take more than a few minutes to write an article.

Thanks,
Ed

Hi,
I am not a speedy writer, either, so I was particularly happy to read this post. It seems that everywhere you look, you see headlines that speak to the importance of numbers. Quality is usually mentioned but almost always secondary to speed. When I decided to become a full-time writer I made a conscious decision to go for quality over quantity but I must admit, I have felt a little uncomfortable at times when I log on to Twitter and read posts that say "submitted 5 (10) (12) articles today." On the flip side, there is nothing that annoys me more than reading an article that basically says nothing, or at least nothing new.

Regarding pricing, I have been clueless on how to price my articles. Being a newbie at this, I would like to get some sales under my belt but I am wondering if pricing articles dirt cheap is really what I should be doing. So, I will accept the "challenge" and see what happens! Maybe if enough of us make the decision and take the challenge we can raise the bar and make things better for everyone!

Have a great day!
Jackie

[Debbi]

Of course we don't want to price ourselves out of the running, but I do wonder how the authors that routinely sell their work for $5 (and sometimes less) can make any money? I think I saw an article the other day that sold for a quarter? Considering authors only get 65% of the sale, $5 is really $3.25. I have to admit I did sell an article for $5 a few days ago. It was a very specialized article written for a public request and I didn't think anyone would ever buy it, so I figured the $5 was better than $0.

Maybe it's all about volume sales when authors only ask $5 or less? A strategy to build up the sales total? Or maybe CC is just a "pocket change" option for them? I'm curious.

[eek]

I can't answer for that kind of strategy, because I don't understand it myself. The only way I can see it working is if a writer is a super-expert - tons of education and experience - of a hot topic, who can write short articles relatively quickly, with the hopes of selling that article several times over (usage) to make it worth it, and to retain the rights to their name on the article. Even by that logic, it doesn't make sense that anyone would be accepting $5 when they might make $8, or $10, or even more for a usage license (before the cut), unless they are writing purely as a hobby or to benefit mankind. On other sites volume might be advantageous if you are paid for residuals.

Jackie, On CC your writing is allowed to stand for itself, regardless of how many previous sales you've had. It may be tempting to price your articles dirt cheap to get a few initial sales, but I don't believe you have to do that here. There's also the argument that you should see your name as your brand, and part of promoting or marketing your brand is pricing your articles at a higher-than-sweatshop level. If you put time into careful research and word crafting, then attaching a decent price is justified.

Of course, when you compare what print markets pay, decent web content pay seems like peanuts. But times, they are a-changin'.

[Nessiee]

I've lowered the prices on some of my shorter "already been sold with a usage licence" articles to $5. I figure since I've already made some money from it, then perhaps I can bring in another sale or two if I lower the price. I tend to lower my prices a bit after each sale, because I figure people are less likely to buy something at full price once it's already been sold. But I'm not really sure. Pricing tends to be a real struggle for me as well, but I refuse to drop anything lower than $5 usage.

[eek]

Nessiee,
Just curious - do you find you get more sales that way? Do you stair-step the usage price down each time, or do you drop it right down to $5? I can see the advantage of lowering a price if the article already has a few downloads. Thanks for your input!

[Nessiee]

I'm not really sure if I get more sales like this or not. Though, I have found the ones that seem to sell several times are the cheaper ones, so it might make sense. And I don't drop them right down to $5 after the first sale unless it was a really really small article to begin with. Usually, once I've sold an article (especially if it's new) I'll leave the price at the same amount for the next month or two and then drop it down. I don't like to drop prices right near a sale, because I don't want the buyers to feel cheated, if that makes sense.

Like you've mentioned, I stair-step the price down. If it's an article that I had sold at $15 usage, then I'd drop it down to $10 a month or so after it sold. If it sells again, then I'll drop it down to $5. For the longer articles that have sold for say $40 usage, I tend to drop the prices by $10, and so on...

Over the past little while I've been trying to raise my usage prices higher than I'm used to, hoping to encourage full rights purchases. Strangely, even though I haven't sold any full rights licences with this new plan, I have sold two articles for the raised usage prices. It just goes to show that not undercutting yourself can pay off

[Debbi]

I thought about that stair-step straegy and then I wondered: Do other buyers remember what it sold for in the first place? If you're asking $20 for usage, how would they know you didn't start out at $30? From the author's standpoint (knowning the original price), we may feel that the appeal fades with each sale, but I don't know if the buyer is so calculating about it. Now if there was a note that said "Was $20, now $10!" but I certainly don't want to encourage that (having begged for the removal of (Best Offer) thank you again, Support!).

Just thinking out loud.

[Nessiee]

That's true too Debbi, I never thought about it from that side of the fence. Why oh why does pricing have to be such a difficult thing to figure out? It's nice to hear everyone's opinions on the matter though, so we can look at the pricing challenge from all angles.

[Celeste Stewart]

The reason usage licenses are lower in the first place is because of the one-time use concept. I don't see any reason to discount a usage price once an article sells once because it was priced with that possibility in mind to begin with. As a customer, I'd be annoyed if I were to see that the price went down after I bought an article.

[eek]

The buyer can see how many times the article has been purchased from CC. So that stair-stepping down makes sense to me. I've never been on the client end, so I didn't think about the angle of being annoyed after purchase. Wouldn't the number of downloads make an article less attractive? Isn't this similar to a retail store putting products on sale?

Personally, I would leave articles alone if they continue to sell, especially if they are on hot-selling topics.

I think the only time I've adjusted usage prices were for articles I thought were going to pass their prime quickly. I had a green resolutions for 2009 that didn't sell until July, and then it sold twice in a row to different clients. I'm pretty sure I had adjusted the price on that one before it sold.

[Celeste Stewart]

But by lowering the usage price once it sells for usage once or even multiple times implies that the article is damaged goods - maybe that's not the right term but perhaps that the article is no longer as valuable as it once was. However, it's a usage licensee and customers understand that others may have already purchased it and that even if no one has downloaded it yet, the article may already appear on the Web via other channels. For example, a writer may have the article posted on their website, blog, on AC, on Helium, on a press release site, etc before offering to CC for usage. Even if the article doesn't appear anywhere yet, it may later as other customers buy it. So, I don't think the value of a usuage article diminishes once it's been purchased using the usage license because it was priced appropriately for multiple one-time sales to begin with.

In fact, if several customers are buying that same article for usage, that's telling you that they do value it at that price, so why go lower? If anything, if the article proves especially popular, I'd consider raising the price a tad. But that's just me and I don't do usage much anyway, so take what I say with a grain of salt

[Nessiee]

I'm not sure if buyers would care or not... but I'm also thinking, if I buyer sees that an article is also being offered for Unique or Full Rights licence, then they know that the article doesn't currently appear anywhere else. The "usage" article would in essence be unique content for their website or publication until someone else purchases the article, or the author decides to post it elsewhere. This type of purchase would essentially give their website a "You saw it here first!" kind of article. Sure, it might pop up in other places sometime in the future, but their publication would have been the first to publish it.

I'd think that in itself would warrant a somewhat higher usage price than an article that is only being offered for usage. When I see an article selling for "usage only" (whether or not CC shows any downloads) I come to the conclusion that this piece of writing has been published somewhere else before. If CC is displaying a number of downloads, then you know for certain that the article is not unique and that your website wouldn't be the first place to showcase it.

Just another couple of cents to think about.

[Debbi]

Right, the buyer can see that it's sold before, but my point was how do they know what it sold for the first, second, or third time? This decline in value is all in our heads. If a buyer would buy an article he finds perfect for his site or newsletter (since not everything sold here is web content), why would he expect a reduction in price (when he doesn't even know the original price or how much it has been reduced) for it? In retail the reduction is marked so you know what kind of a deal you're supposedly getting, even though in most cases the item was outrageously marked up to being with.

And how much value does an article lose with each sale? Cutting $20 down to $15 after one usage sale is a 25% cut. Would the value drop exponentially after each sale? Say, 50% of $15 after two sales? That would be $7.50 for the third sales price. 75% off the third price for the fourth price? That would be $5.60 or so. Even at these extreme reduction rates, after four sales, it's still more than the $5 some people ask. If you did a straight 25% of the original price each time the article sold, that would be $20, $15, $10, $5 but by that logic after the fourth sale the price would be $0.

Ok, this is all academic and mainly just so I can play with my talking calculator, but you see my thought process here.

[Celeste Stewart]

First dibs might not be that important to some customers buying usage, especially if they are using the article in print or email. Duplicate content doesn't matter to that segment at all.

Why not just put a "best offer" option once the usage article sells once then? That way, you might get full price or you might get a slightly lower price instead of guaranteeing yourself a lower price by lowering it?