> How do you see product or service differentiation then? What is the difference
> between a Rolls Royce and a Mini? Is it not the VALUE of the product, which
> people are willing to pay different amounts for?
Teri:
The difference between those two cars is the value buyers attach to them, not vendors. Both
companies produce cars that are meant to make a profit at their chosen price-point. There
are high-priced photo agencies too. But they don't add value by delcaring themselves
valuable, they get high prices by offering images that clients are happy to pay high prices for.
> Perhaps this value is different things to different people ... quality finish,
> uniqueness, brand, status ... Maybe we can treat our photos as creations that have
> different value!
We all do that already, from the moment we start deciding what to point our cameras at. It's
just that most of us don't know what to do in order to add that value. Simply saying that our
work is worth five times what we get for it is meaningless unless we can regularly convince
buyers to pay it.
> Have a look at this article `How about this hybrid pricing model for photography'
> http://www.fastmediamagazine.com/blog/2010/03/10/will-this-model-be-able-to-replac
> e-existing-stock-photography-pricing/#comments written by Glen O Connor has been
> responsible for pricng at both Getty Images and Corbis.
I'm okay with it but he's addressing a different issue. I'm more concerned with what happens
before we pull out the price calculator - that is, what we do to our images that can make
buyers want to talk price with us in the first place.
Brian Yarvin
Author, Educator, Photographer
0 comments:
Post a Comment