Explain solo content pricing...

[mineistaken]

Hi, for instance:

http://adultmaestro.com/set.php?setid=1189 solo photos - 35$

http://adultmaestro.com/set.php?setid=3715 solo photos - 1$

What am I missing here? How come similar content has 35 times (!!!) different pricing.

And follow up question - how do you make money by selling that content for 1$ (model is not some crappy amateur)

Cheers

[xNetworx]

WARNING - First Link contains Arbys

[Inter-Sex]

Well with a price tag at $35 you buy yourself saturated content,
on the other side, if you buy at $1 you buy yourself a SUPER SATURATED set.

[MaDalton]

i never understood those who sell for $1 a set - even if you sell it 100 times the "profit" still sucks. and i very much doubt than anything nowadays sells 100 times.

we rather keep our prices so that our clients have some kind of "exclusivity" when they buy from us. at least for our own, brand new content

and when i look at our numbers it seems like our clients appreciate that

[NaughtyRob]

I sell sets cheap sometimes but only when they are in bulk packages like below.

[INever]

One set for $1 sucks. 1000 sets for $1000 is better.

[TrashyContent]

Let me turn on my "rant now" switch...

The World is suffering, time is hard... so some people get desperate and sell at ridiculus prices... Like Stefan god knows how someone can sell at $1 a pop... yes I know they bundle stuff up... but I just wouldn't devalue the content we sell...

Sure a lot selling at ridiculous prices are either selling really old content that's been sold thousands of times, or maybe even content that isnt their own...

Either way killing the industry... ok rant over...

[globofun]

I just bought this set for $1.......thanks for the link!




http://adultmaestro.com/set.php?setid=54

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by Inter-Sex

Well with a price tag at $35 you buy yourself saturated content,
on the other side, if you buy at $1 you buy yourself a SUPER SATURATED set.

Are you saying that even 35$ for solo girl photo content is cheap?

[Yngwie]

Originally Posted by globofun

I just bought this set for $1.......thanks for the link!




http://adultmaestro.com/set.php?setid=54

You overpaid. haha

[mineistaken]

I would like to hear more opinions.

[sojproductions]

i wouldnt argue... it costs $1, unreal.

[Inter-Sex]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Are you saying that even 35$ for solo girl photo content is cheap?

Yes I'd, besides that it is cheap, it's also non exclusive. (What may make the set even more expensive.)

[st0ned]

Even better! 577 photos for $0! ;)

http://adultmaestro.com/set.php?setid=4179

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by Inter-Sex

Yes I'd, besides that it is cheap, it's also non exclusive. (What may make the set even more expensive.)

Exclusive content is different thing. Of course that would be cheap if it was exclusive. Too cheap.
But we are speaking about not exclusive. Do people pay 35$ for solo photo sets non exclusively often? If they do often it may be cheap, but do they?
From what I see on this forum average webmaster would say its worth 10$ or something. So 35$ is way more than that.

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by NaughtyRob

I sell sets cheap sometimes but only when they are in bulk packages like below.

Nice plug.


Rob has good package deals guys.

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Exclusive content is different thing. Of course that would be cheap if it was exclusive. Too cheap.
But we are speaking about not exclusive. Do people pay 35$ for solo photo sets non exclusively often? If they do often it may be cheap, but do they?
From what I see on this forum average webmaster would say its worth 10$ or something. So 35$ is way more than that.

yes, they do

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

yes, they do

Ok couple questions for you

Why would someone buy that (or any similar) 35$ photo set if they can buy 35 1$ sets that are of same quality. I see only one possible reason - being afraid of saturation, but even then you can only ASSUME that you are getting less saturated content when paying 35 times more.

What kind of pay site typically buy solo photo (without video) content? Can any paysite even be profitable having only solo (non niched) photo content? Personally I do not see much surfer value in those sets from my original post (and similar)..

[mineistaken]

bump for the question

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

bump for the question

oops, missed it... ;)

well, i cannot list all my clients here... lol

but saturation is definitely one reason

i also cannot imagine that someone would be so stupid to sell a fresh, non saturared set for $1 - actually content COSTS money to produce it and unlike some people seem to think, we're not shooting content because its so fucking fantastic to see a girl naked.

Quality is also an issue - not only regarding whats in the picture but also to be sure that it's bought legally with all necessary documentation. From someone who has been in the biz for a while, is accessible and stands for his work with his name.

and since we sell for fair prices, we can afford to stay in the business and not disappear like all the others that are gone already

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Inter-Sex

Well with a price tag at $35 you buy yourself saturated content,
on the other side, if you buy at $1 you buy yourself a SUPER SATURATED set.

The saturation of non exclusive was once true, and the rest of the time BS. Logic tells anyone why.

Saturation is good for the seller. Even a small number of sales very often out prices what you could get for exclusive.

To saturate a scene in a niche with 1,000s of sites there's a couple of ways to do it. Give it to affiliates. This is undoubtedly the way to get it onto hundreds of sites and applies to exclusive and non exclusive. If a sponsor buys non exclusive to give to affiliates, he's a cheap, broke idiot. Because 10 others will do it.

If the non exclusive is for members areas only. It's very hard to saturate it. Unless it's a cheap broke idiot who bought it in 1999 and never updates the site. You get the idea I'm sure.

Still selling a set and video 10 times over it's life time is dead easy. Don't even factor in the other sales. $600 for a scene you still own. When so many sites were only willing to pay $300, I could never understand why shooters were happy to sell exclusive.

I can't comment why this site prices the way it does, I can comment why we sold cheap.

After a scene has made it's 10 sales, then you can move it to the budget sector, change the license, bundle it with others, etc. A $5 set only can sell 100 times. There are at least 10 people for every one who will but because it's cheap. And that's why sites sell cheap.

Why would anyone ever sell exclusive and be left with nothing at the end?

Never figured it out. The excuses were always leaving me thinking BS. Today it's a different game and you grab what you can.

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

well, i cannot list all my clients here... lol

Not asking that, but like I said I do not imagine buying solo photo sets for 35$ making much sense. Lets say you buy 500 solo photo sets and now you have paysite. I do not imagine many surfers signing up for the site filled with random photo sets. I know there are few exclusive sites that do well with super good solo content, but that content is from the different league (compared with 35$ and non exclusive).

I know you as a content provider should not agree with me, so I do not expect 100% honest reply. But still some thoughts..


I mean can anyone who is buying 35$ solo photo content step in and say some words as well?

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Not asking that, but like I said I do not imagine buying solo photo sets for 35$ making much sense. Lets say you buy 500 solo photo sets and now you have paysite. I do not imagine many surfers signing up for the site filled with random photo sets. I know there are few exclusive sites that do well with super good solo content, but that content is from the different league (compared with 35$ and non exclusive).

I know you as a content provider should not agree with me, so I do not expect 100% honest reply. But still some thoughts..

I mean can anyone who is buying 35$ solo photo content step in and say some words as well?

Are you talking sets as in collection of pictures or as in pictures and video?

Why is a $35 set better than a $150 set shot for ATK? They bought 100s if not 1,000s at this price.

500 scenes @ $35 = $17,500

500 scenes @ $150 = $75,000

Please explain what the difference is. Besides $57,500.

[DBS.US]

Walmart/SamsClub pricing style

[The Ghost]

Different producers, different prices.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Are you talking sets as in collection of pictures or as in pictures and video?

Why is a $35 set better than a $150 set shot for ATK? They bought 100s if not 1,000s at this price.

500 scenes @ $35 = $17,500

500 scenes @ $150 = $75,000

Please explain what the difference is. Besides $57,500.

Waiting for an explanation.

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Waiting for an explanation.

Question should be for those who advocate paying more IN HOPE that the set will be less saturated. I am not one of those people.

As for another question I am speaking of photo only content, no video. I do not see much value in such a content myself, but I am hoping that maybe someone who pays 35$ for SOLO PHOTO ONLY NON EXCLUSIVE content could step in the thread

[V_RocKs]

Shit... Maybe it is time to open a site

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Not asking that, but like I said I do not imagine buying solo photo sets for 35$ making much sense. Lets say you buy 500 solo photo sets and now you have paysite. I do not imagine many surfers signing up for the site filled with random photo sets. I know there are few exclusive sites that do well with super good solo content, but that content is from the different league (compared with 35$ and non exclusive).

I know you as a content provider should not agree with me, so I do not expect 100% honest reply. But still some thoughts..


I mean can anyone who is buying 35$ solo photo content step in and say some words as well?

well - whoever makes a site with 500 random sets needs to rethink his strategy anyways... that might have only worked in 1996

and i would also not recommend to do a site with pictures only, video is crucial nowadays

but if you cater to a certain audience - like big tits - pictures and video - then also a solo site can do very well. if the content is not crap. hence the quality issue.

also well known solo girl sites do not just buy exclusive - but they would not swamp their member area with saturated crap either

[mineistaken]

Makes sense.
Still waiting for someone who regularly buys 35$ solo photo content, otherwise I would still think such a buyer is very very rare breed

[MaDalton]

i would have no problem if there were more - lol

but i just checked - half of my clients last month bought solo SCENES - pictures and matching video

also a few single picture sets, many of those buyers are phone sex girls btw who make up profiles with them

[Fletch XXX]

always looking to work out content deal for design anyone interested hit me up! email me via this http://www.getbannersmade.com/order.html

[tonyparra]

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

Shit... Maybe it is time to open a site

[INever]

Originally Posted by mineistaken

Makes sense.
Still waiting for someone who regularly buys 35$ solo photo content, otherwise I would still think such a buyer is very very rare breed

As a seller.....

In 2006/2007 I was selling single PHOTO sets for as much as $100.

Lately, $10/set. Tops.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Fletch XXX

always looking to work out content deal for design anyone interested hit me up! email me via this http://www.getbannersmade.com/order.html

I'll give you some for anything I might need down the line.

[mineistaken]

Originally Posted by INever

As a seller.....

In 2006/2007 I was selling single PHOTO sets for as much as $100.

Lately, $10/set. Tops.

Yes, thats what I was seeing, 10$ per that kind of photo sets was pretty much the going price.