Why so low?

[carpenjoyce]

I've seen a few posts here that warn writers about charging too much for their articles, but none about the opposite problem. I've seen writers selling full rights for as little as $7.00. That's just crazy! If you're good enough to get past the C.C. editors, you're good enough to be worth more than $7.00 (minus the 35% commission). Unfortunately, sites like Helium, Associated Content, and Suite 101 have conditioned writers to think they have to give themselves away. This site is a cut way above those, and buyers will pay more for quality.

I've been here less than a year and have only been posting seriously for a few months. I've made money on 6 of the first 18 articles I posted. Most sold fairly quickly for prices of $60 or more. One full rights article sold for $150. (I should say that I write on fairly technical topics and do not charge this much for articles that require less expertise.) Granted, you can't make that much if you write more general content, but you can certainly get more than $7.00. Try turning off the offer button at first--you'll never know if you could have sold an article for $50 if you accept an offer for $10. And when the ripoff artists try to steal your work, just say no. Remember you can always lower your price later.

I hope everyone will think about what I'm saying, because when good writers give themselves away, they hurt writers everywhere. No one will pay fair prices if they can get good work for next to nothing.

[Evelyn]

Amen!

[KadenP]

Where is the "Like" button around here?!

[CRDonovan]

Agreed. Everyone creates their own market, certainly. But I do think that many writers sell themselves short.

[Judith]

I agree 100%! Most people who sell online have never sold to magazines and newspapers. They don't know they are giving their work away.

[Tianna]

I think that a lot of people also go by what they find for freelance writing positions at other sites like odesk or freelancer. It's almost impossible to find work at those sites that pay even $5.00 an article, let alone a decent price. The really cheap rates have almost conditioned some people to believe that this is acceptable pay for their work.

[Kimberlysh]

I whole-heartedly agree! I'm still a newbie here and CC is my first attempt at selling my writing. At first I thought about pricing my articles low because I didn't feel like I was worthy of pricing on the same lines as seasoned authors. But then I thought that would just cheapen the article pool. I took a chance and set my prices right in the middle ($55 for full rights) and to my surprise I've sold several articles. I don't have time to write a lot so $7 an article wouldn't even be worth my time.

Gotta say I love Constant Content!

[JStone]

While I agree with a lot of the above, one of CC's strengths is that it caters to a wide variety of budgets. A new website owner with a low budget might need to pick up a load of cheap 'filler' articles to fluff out his website...as his website grows and he is able to increase his budget, he may then start to buy higher priced (and higher quality) articles. But if there are no cheap articles for him to buy in the first place, he'll more than likely buy them somewhere else, and probably won't bother to come back when his budget increases.

As a writer, I don't think it does any harm to have a few "cheapo" articles hanging around your portfolio...CC sales rates (in my experience) are about 70-80% - so why not knock down the price of those 20-30% that haven't sold after the first 6 months? I also priced articles low in the beginning so that I could build up the amount of "articles sold" on my profile page because it looks better to potential customers if you have a few sales under your belt.

Just my ten cents worth

[carpenjoyce]

Your argument about start-up websites does not make sense to me. If I want to start a computer store, HP and IBM aren't going to say "O.K., we understand you're just starting up, so we'll give you our product for 10% of what it's worth." Why should freelancers have to subsidize some other business? Moreover, it isn't just start-ups that are offering pennies for content. All over the web, you can see publishers offering "$20 for 50 articles" and so forth. There are posts on this forum that show how publishers trade ideas on how to psych our writers into accepting low-ball offers. (which shows they want the content badly enough to go to some effort!). If writers don't resist this, cc will soon be just another site where you can pretend you're a writer for 50 cents an hour.

I also object to the idea that cc should be used for sub-par articles. You have to proofread very carefully to get past the editors, so why not write your best? You say that buyers won't come back if they can't afford the articles, but I think the opposite thing happens. If they come here and see garbage, they won't come back. There are dozens of sites where buyers can get so-so articles to use as fillers. There is only one cc. We as writers have to decide if we want this site to keep its reputation as a place for topnotch quality or let it disintegrate into just another junk site.

I think writers from poorer countries and stay-at-home moms are particularly prone to fall into this trap--the former because they don't know how little a dollar buys in the western world, and the latter because they are undervalued by society and haven't learned how to value themselves. If we get the word out, we can all make more money.

So I'm saying it again--if you're good enough to get accepted by cc, you're worth more than $7 an article.

[JStone]

I was just offering an alternative opinion carpenjoyce. I never said anything about using sub-standard articles, but it would be naive to think that all articles on here are of the same quality. If I write a basic list article for beginners on a particular subject (e.g. 10 ways to....blah blah blah), I know that it is worth less than a comprehensive/advanced guide to the same subject. Using your HP/IBM analogy, cheaper articles (more basic versions of the full price articles) are just like buying a budget computer instead of the top-of-the-range model.

I'm not sure I understand your point about people from poorer countries and stay-at-home mums. CC is meant to be a marketplace for professional writers.

But like I said earlier in this thread, I agree with most of what you said in your first post...I just don't think writers should be made to feel like they are letting everybody else down if they choose to price their articles low.

[carpenjoyce]

It certainly wasn't my intent to make anyone feel bad about charging less. What I was trying to do is act as a cheerleader for those who may be afraid to charge a fair price--and I think there are a lot of them, particularly among people who may be trying to start a writing career or who aren't familiar with this site. The web is full of buyers trying to get people to work for next to nothing. They prey on people who think they're building a writing career, when all they're doing is getting ripped off. They also prey on the unemployed and desperate.

As for quality, why bother posting on cc if you're going to settle for peanuts and when you have no assurance the article will sell? It's easier to just get an upfront payment from Associated Content or a similar site if you want to settle for $4-$5 an article (after the commission). That doesn't mean your article has to be long or involved. People dash off reviews of books or movies, post them here, and get paid $20 or more because they fill a need and write them well. If you haven't tried pricing your less complex articles this high, you might be pleasantly surprised. At 5 cents a word, 400 words is still $20. I don't know why anyone wouldn't at least try for that.

[JStone]

I think you're missing my point, but it's probably best just to agree to disagree

Personally, I wouldn't sell a "quality" article for less than $49, but I also sell more basic versions of these articles for less. If I can write a 300 word article in 20 minutes, I'm not going to rip clients off by charging them the same amount I would charge for a 600 word article that took me 2 hours to write. And as a full time freelancer, I can't afford to sell only my "best" work...all writers have mediocre days.

I understand what you're saying about vulnerable people, but this site is not meant to be for the unemployed or desperate...a freelance writing career is a difficult path, it's not something that people should choose just because they have nothing else to do and no other way to make money. There are far easier ways of making money.

Serious writers/freelancers will realise their worth in their own time.

[carpenjoyce]

You're probably right that we'll have to agree to disagree, but I just can't help making a few more points. I really can't imagine any danger of ripping buyers off, at least in the current market conditions. An article that is written in 20 minutes is not just the product of that 20 minutes. It requires that you have received an excellent education in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and English usage. You must be able to organize your thoughts in a clear and convincing matter, write an opening sentence that grabs the reader's attention and summarize effectively. Often, you may spend 30 minutes or more in thinking about the article before you actually sit down to write.

Freelance writing is a tough gig. We get no paid vacations, no health insurance, and no check when we have a bad week or month. I recently asked whether there were any other sites where writers could earn a decent rate. You answered me and said you didn't know of any. Instead, the web seems devoted to sites that rip writers off. A buyer who doesn't want to pay a fair price can always go to one of the poorer-quality sites and find someone who will write for next to nothing.

I'm not sure where you're writing from, but perhaps the quality of education in your locale is better than it is in the United States. Here, the writing skills this site requires are a fairly rare commodity. Google Constant Content, and you'll find dozens of people--including some who claim to be professional writers--complaining that cc rejected them. The quality required to write and sell articles here is something that buyers are willing to pay for. It saves them the time of looking through dozens of poorly written articles that will reflect badly on them. Five cents a word (or more for more complex pieces) is hardly a ripoff for those who care about their websites.

[JStone]

I really do feel that you're missing the point that I'm making - I'm not advocating selling articles cheap, I'm saying that I expect to be paid far more for articles that take me a lot of time and effort to write than I do for articles I can throw together in 20 minutes. Part of being a freelancer is being able to recognise the value of the articles we write - some are premium quality, some are good, some are just "acceptable", and others are pure junk (but still of saleable quality in some circles).

I'm sorry to say that most online content sites are not aimed at professional writers - they are aimed at people with acceptable writing skills looking to make a little money, etc. That's why I don't believe there are any other sites worth writing for.

But if you want to broaden your horizons, have you considered writing for print magazines? If you don't mind putting in the work to get the gigs and chase the money up afterwards, they pay far better than online writing.

[MicheleH]

JStone, think about how you are able to write an article on a topic off of the top of your head. Were you born with that knowledge? Or did it come from hours, months or even years or study?

The typical American history professor could probably pound out thousands of articles off the top of their head.

I have been building websites for over 10 years. Through years of experience and constant experimentation, I have a list of what I think does and does not work well. I also read a number of forums. I easily could dash off more than a few articles on related topics without further research.

If that professor and I wrote an article about the Civil War and another about SEO, does it make sense that the one of us who had to do more research should be paid more for the same information?

I agree that "fluff" pieces are worth less than in-depth pieces. I do, however, disagree with you that the time required to produce an article is a greater indicator of its value than the information it conveys.