Need some help pricing photo for t-shirts and posters

[epp_b]

Actually, he gave me the exact numbers. It costs them $17 to buy the shirts and have them silkscreened. Maybe they aren't getting the best deal, but we live in a small town; things are more expensive here. Anyway, that makes their net profit $3 per shirt before distribution costs (they plan on selling them through gas stations, shops, etc.).

Also, he didn't actually say that the t-shirts were an advertising medium for the club; I was just making a guess based on that they aren't really making a sizable amount of money from t-shirt sales.

I know this guy a little bit personally (outside of business), he's not the type to lie about numbers to get a deal.

Based on the calculations you suggest, I should be asking at least $1,500 for them to use the photo on 400 t-shirts and 200 posters.

While you and I understand why this might a reasonable amount, I have a strong suspicion that they'll blow me off if I present a figure like that for what they'll see as "one picture".

 

[Blank]

I have no alternative to suggest to you. Business is business. I offered two very lengthy replies to which both you have hesitated on doing. I have nothing else to offer. Professionals are fighting everyday to maintain good margins on legitimate business practices while competing with the Walmarts and Walgreen's that offer ridiculous prices on "Say Cheese" photography services. You are effectively adding to the fight. By literally giving your image away for pennies on the dollar cuts potential profit margins for any photographer offering services in your immediate area.
He might be the most trustworthy guy on the planet and may be very true to his word about his costs, does that mean that your price should be affected because he can't find a bargain. If I cut everybody a break on how I charge in comparison to the economy or I had a bad pay check month or something similar, I'd be selling my equipment.
Don't be offended, it may seem like an attack but it's not. It's a learning curve you need to go through in the event that you do decide to make photography a profitable living.
What do you think is fair for him to pay? Your original post mentioned you were there for 14 hours? If that's your logic, then minimum wage is $6.00 an hour, give him the image for $84.00. My point is, justify your price, don't randomly pluck a figure out of the air the second guess it because it has 3 digits!

Take a look at this link, there are alot of professionals that use this and similar for license fee's for 1 image.
Stock Photo Price Calculator
Go to Getty Images or Alamy and inquire as to the license price of 1 image. I don't know what to say pal. I don't see anyone else replying, I thought i'd throw you a bone.

 

[epp_b]

Well, you've been very helpful and given me a lot of information to chew on... thanks for that.

Thanks for the stock sites, I took a look at those. It looks like they could expect to pay between $300 and $350 for a royalty-free photo to use. Although, iStockPhoto will let you have something for about $6 (seriously).

What I likely have over any stock photo site here is a photo of their cars at their event. But, I wasn't the only one with a camera at last year's event. If I present them with a four-figure or high-three-figure amount, they are likely find a photo from someone else who will sell it to them for less.

 

[epp_b]

Blank may not be impressed, but I ended up making a deal for a $100 flat fee to use the photo for any club publication. But, I also track access to this year's event and a credit byline on any publication of the photo.

Frankly, they would not have gone for a 1% rate at $260, much less 5% at 1,300. These guys are a non-profit organization that give big grants to worthy causes; whatever money they make does not go to pad someone's pockets.

I'm happy, they're happy.

 

[Blank]

Firstly, I don't care what you got. You originally asked for advice and ideas. Two of us offered advice and comments based on experience, which you obviously have none of. As I said to you, at the end of the day, you need to be happy with what you negotiate. I also said to you, justify why you charge what you do. I suppose my question is, how did you come at $100 flat fee for what sounds like an unrestricted use for an indefinite amount of time? You don't even have to answer, just know why you charged it, because if you look back at "your" worksheet, there isn't any point on that whole sheet as to how you have come to your figure.

I was going to hammer you and probably get banned, but I thought better of it. Not that I care about the site, more the fact that I am trying to help you, not hinder you. As I also mentioned, you probably would (and did), get "track access" for this year's event. In my opinion, they sucked you out with this whole "we don't make any money bs", now I may be completely wrong, but I'm a gambling man. Here's the point of this paragraph, as you gain experience in this world of business and bottom lines, they now have the upper hand on your true net value. I can safely assume that you now have to live by extremely low costs and if you ever rely on photography as a primary source of income, you will kick your own ass for being so cheap. This is just my opinion. You have also knocked out any potential for any other photographer to cover the event because they want to pay those license fee's for any image of their event that you give them.

I really wish you luck. Your happy, they're happy. The problem is, your not looking down the road. Every photographer would like to think their work could get published somewhere, recognition is huge, but at what cost. Regarding your reply to my last post, yes, it does piss me off that you and other's give your work away. I and many other photographer's deal with this everyday. "Why do you charge so much?", "How come Walmart offer $1.99 for an 8x10?", "My boyfriend has a Sony digital camera!", this and many more. There is always a comparison.

I have seen your site, you do good work. It's definately sellable images. Your momentum will gain with exposure, but taking good photographs is less than half the battle of being profitable with photography. Will you still be happy with $100 if you see your image on a highway billboard that will attract and extra 10,000 people?

Did you at least get exclusive access to the track as photographer?

Best of luck. Post some images when the event is completed.

 

[epp_b]

I suppose my question is, how did you come at $100 flat fee for what sounds like an unrestricted use for an indefinite amount of time?

$100 is usually a fairly agreeable amount. Not too high, not too low. It is restricted to only club publications (ie.: they cannot resell it or give a copy to someone else to use). Yes, it's for an unlimited amount of time, but that just means I get unlimited free advertising out of it.

I was going to hammer you and probably get banned

Um ... for what?

In my opinion, they sucked you out with this whole "we don't make any money bs"

This is just another observation, but do you always assume the worst of people? These are honest, small-town people I'm working with here. The club is a non-profit that gives thousands of dollars in grants annually. Why would I work a hard business line with someone who can't afford it and get myself a reputation that I'm unwilling to do reasonable business?

I'm willing to go low for a buyer who can't afford it in exchange for access of some sort and a lot of free advertising.

Will you still be happy with $100 if you see your image on a highway billboard that will attract and extra 10,000 people?

Considering those 10,000 people will also see my name next that photo ... yes. If a commercial business wants to use a photo on a billboard, I'm certainly not going to give it away for $100.

Did you at least get exclusive access to the track as photographer?

As far as I know, I'll be the only photographer that gets passed the spectators' gate.

Best of luck. Post some images when the event is completed.

Will do

 

[KmH]

$100 is usually a fairly agreeable amount. Not too high, not too low. It is restricted to only club publications (ie.: they cannot resell it or give a copy to someone else to use). Yes, it's for an unlimited amount of time, but that just means I get unlimited free advertising out of it. Lucky for them too. Now they don't have to mess with you again for 4 or 5 years. Is your track access unlimited or just 1 year.

Um ... for what? Lmao.

This is just another observation, but do you always assume the worst of people? These are honest, small-town people I'm working with here. The club is a non-profit that gives thousands of dollars in grants annually. Why would I work a hard business line with someone who can't afford it and get myself a reputation that I'm unwilling to do reasonable business? Blank said it earlier: "Business is business." If they can afford thousands of dollars in annual grants they can afford to pay a fair fee to enhance their advertising so they continue to have the income to annually grant thousands of dollars.

I'm willing to go low for a buyer who can't afford it in exchange for access of some sort and a lot of free advertising. Been tried over and over, doesn't work. It's better to take your image and go home.

Considering those 10,000 people will also see my name next that photo ... yes. If a commercial business wants to use a photo on a billboard, I'm certainly not going to give it away for $100. The billboard company is not obligated to give you credit because it's not a club publication. Unless you have specific language in your contract with the club.....You did have a properly drawn up contract right?

As far as I know, I'll be the only photographer that gets passed the spectators' gate. You're not sure. You don't have a contract do you?


Will do

...

 

[epp_b]

The billboard company is not obligated to give you credit because it's not a club publication. Unless you have specific language in your contract with the club.....You did have a properly drawn up contract right?

Yes. I specifically noted that they can only use it for club publications. It is not for them to resell or give away to someone else.