I remember something some sage photographer told me and I have actually used a few times...
Phone rings. AD from an agency I recently called on. "We have a great job. Shouldn't take too long. We need someone like you to shoot it right. Give us a good price on this and we will make it up with the next job."
Yeah. Right. The next job.
My response. "Wow. Thanks for the opportunity. I am not in the position right now to make drastic adjustments in my fees, so I will do this job at full rate and give you guys a great deal on the next job."
Your fees are not something that should be "adjusted" for every job. If they are, they aren't really fees... they are "whimiscally applied fiscal policy as applied to personal accumulation of wealth - or not."
I remember being told of a photographer who quoted $6k for a job. The agency called him back and told him they couldn't afford 6k, but they could get 2k from the client. Photographer instantly agreed. Fool.
If I had been the agency I would never have used this clown again. If the job was doable for 2k, what the hell was the other 4k for?
Look, it may be too late for this industry to repair its image as 'business challenged arteeeests", but I hope not. I really do.
Anyway, read the article and pass it on. (Hat tip: Steve D)
Sept. 19, 2005 issue - "I could get an art student to do it for $35 and a six-pack." I remember the first time a prospective client said that to try to intimidate me into accepting dramatically reduced fees for Website design services. I was newly self-employed and hungry for work, so I conceded. I delivered a great Web site, but I hated my client for making me work for so little—and myself for not knowing how to get what I deserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment