Despite Chris’ assertion that information wants to be free, some of it just isn’t. Sorry.
In fact, some information is worth far more than the paper it is printed on (or the pixels it lights up).
For example, imagine that your company publishes technical articles. Short, sweet, fine-tuned to a specific purpose for a very specific audience.
The trick is making money from them, so maybe you’ve found that the best way to do that for your company (vs all other models) is to charge for access to your publication.
The Wall Street Journal does this. So does Investor’s Business Daily, as do a number of publications (online or print) in technical fields like auto mechanics, programming and FOREX trading.
One of the biggest challenges these firms have is proving their publication’s worth at renewal time.
When renewal time comes up, or the charge appears on the credit card bill, the customer thought process goes something like this:
Come on, why should I pay $300 a year for a technical investing article resource when I can find everything Google has indexed for free?
The answer these businesses might commonly respond with include some of these:
- Because it’s well-indexed so you can quickly find the exact trading info you need.
- Because it has a search engine that understands investing terminology so you can quickly find exactly what you need
- Because our publication is fine-tuned to the audience’s investing style (or whatever). It’s as if it was written solely for day traders with between $4200 and $6500 to trade per day.
- Because it includes proven step-by-step guides for trading without losing my shorts (pun intended).
All of that is warm, fuzzy but not so exciting.
#3 and #4 aren’t bad but #1 and #2 are Google’s domain. They get better at it every day and paying you for it is going to get less and less likely unless you are much, much better at it in your specialty area.
I got your proof right here
Bottom line, almost all of that is pretty subjective. Bean counters (and spouses?) want hard numbers: “Why do you need this?”
Why not let them tell you?
If your article instructs them and provides them with a skill or offers a way to discover a new technique, make sure your feedback mechanisms (on the site or whatever) allow a way to say “Dude, this article saved me 2 or 3 days of struggling with this task”.
And yeah, it’s a lot like a Digg or a reTweet, but it’s more accurate than that.
The mechanism that works for you might need to be a number they can type in, or it might be a radio button with selections like “Waste of my time”, “Saved me maybe an hour”, “HUGE, DUDE. This got me back on track after a week”.
Whatever it is, it provides them with a way to tell you how much time, money, etc your information, your service, your product, your help saved them.
Think about where you could go with that info, even if it is largely anecdotal and not scientifically defensible.
If you have 100 clients and they (on average) provide feedback via a mechanism like this that says you save them 112 hours per year, seems to me that your prospects might want to know that information.
It also seems like it would be a great way to totally defuse the “your price is too high” argument (and maybe a number of others).
It might tell you how outrageous you can make your money-back guarantee. If it’s 30 days but it should be a year or 5 years, these numbers will give you some insight into it.
Who knows, you might even find out that your pricing and your value proposition are in vastly different places.