Buyer's Remorse

There are cultural and legal differences that apply here in the UK but the principle of keeping customers happy (although NOT at the cost of your profit margins) is surely one that should underpin any successful and sustainable business?

Over here we have a "cooling off" period that means you can't hold someone to a contract, regardless of how ever many disclaimers you pin on the wall. And people don't respond well to hard selling either, usually choosing to buy NOTHING at all when faced with an overly-assertive salesperson.

But some compromise has to enter into the argument in order to keep your business flowing, not waste studio time AND keep your customers coming back. Perhaps the introduction of an unrefundable sitting rate that will ultimately be reduced in proportion to the number of prints ordered might be some sort of happy medium in an otherwise unhappy situation?
Roz

eLZolan said:

Russ Jennings said:

How many of you deal with buyer's remorse, and how exactly do you
deal with it? At my studio, we have customer's sign at least 2
seperate contracts stating that there are no refunds, and no
changes can be made to an order after it has been placed. Of
course, customer's just glance over this, and then throw a fit when
we won't let them change their order.

We definitely sell our customers. We're not pushy or misleading,
but we do have trained sales people who try to get customers to buy
a lot of pictures. Recently, as our volume has gone up, we've had
more people who come back the next day and want to change their
order, or get their money back.

This is definitely a no win situation for us. They signed off on
the order, but if we argue with them, it creates bad blood. On the
other hand, I hate the idea of our profit walking back out the door
12 hours later. We had one guy today, who spent 4 hours in our
studio with his family, and ordered about $900 in pictures. He
signed everything, paid in full with his credit card. This
morning, he calls demanding that the entire order be cancelled, he
doesn't want any pictures whatsoever. So, not only is this $900 in
sales out the window, but 4 hours of my and my employee's time
wasted.

How do you handle these situations?

Click to expand...

--
eL

Click to expand...

voices in afka_bob's head said:

dpophyte said:

... I know
people who won't say how much they paid for their car, their house,
their home stereo... anything they buy... because they are affraid
someone will say, "You got ripped off."

Click to expand...

Or, because of good breeding: it really isn't anyone else's
business, except for, perhaps, your accountant.

Click to expand...

LOL... it would really be tangantal to get into Nature vs. Nurture but it is safe to rule out breeding in this case.

Seriously, some are exhibiting trained privacy preservation behavior. Most are, despite exellent and well-practiced breeding by their parents, terribly afraid of looking incompetent or foolish.

I'll give another example: I have a friend who consistantly underreports prices he has paid. I've watched/helped him buy a TV set (I was in the store and helped him load it onto his truck) for $460, then two weeks later was told it cost $350. Is that good breeding? Or is it a fear of people thinking you spent too much and considering you a fool with whom money is soon parted? A need to be seen as having received the best possible deal so people can't say, "dude, you paid too much!"

dpophyte said:

I'll give another example: I have a friend who consistantly
underreports prices he has paid. I've watched/helped him buy a TV
set (I was in the store and helped him load it onto his truck) for
$460, then two weeks later was told it cost $350. Is that good
breeding? Or is it a fear of people thinking you spent too much and
considering you a fool with whom money is soon parted? A need to be
seen as having received the best possible deal so people can't say,
"dude, you paid too much!"

Click to expand...

No, that doesn't sound like good breeding, and forgetting who really knows what is even more foolish.

My wife and her friends (being women, and being more practical) worship the bargain (triple coupons, half off, etc.)

Me and my friends (men, and less practical, it seems), contrary to your model brag about the great expense of the new car or plasma TV ("that TV costs over $4000!").

Go figure.

Russ,

You state you had 212 customers last month and that 208 were happy. Assuming your average order is $300 (you said the one that canceled was $900, so $300 average seems fair), that's $62,400 (gross) for one month. Why are you worrying about 1.8% of the people (or $1200)? Just write this off and move on. Not to be rude, but you seem to have a lot of time to write in this forum for someone who is doing 212 jobs a month. 212 jobs would imply you're doing one shoot every hour for 8 hours each day... you must be really good and in high demand. It's surprising that you're so concerned about 4 jobs out of 212.

=========================================

Russ Jennings said:

We've done 212 customers for the month of November, and we've had 4
complain and try to change their order. That's about 1.8% who are
unhappy. Not too shabby, IMHO.

Click to expand...

As someone who is begining a portrait business I have read this thread with great interest.

I love photography, but I don't think of myself as going into the "photography business" per se, so much as going into a customer service "business" with the product incidentally "photographs" and "satisfied customers."

I can't answer Mr. Jennings original question from experience... yet. I personally would never enter or purchase from a high pressure studio such as he describes. But I do have a family to feed, and who knows what I will feel compelled to do in the coming years? I do know that my skills as a marketer and salesperson are going to be a lot more important than my skills as a photographer.

So from that admitedly naive perspective Mr. Russ Jennings efforts to make a living and to squeze the last 2% of revenue out of his (self described as large) flow of customers seem both completely understandable... and yet decidely unpleasant.

Yet the basis of his annoyance with the buyer's remorse customers is also understandable.

I think that part of the problem here stems from the way in which such arguments tend to break down into binary stereotypes...

Commercial survival means selling... selling can happen on a spectrum from 100% laid back to 100% aggressive. At a certain point, if you are too aggresive you are selling your soul along with your photographs. But fail to sell at all and surely you will sink, as I'm told many many photographic businesses do.

So you want to sell at a level that makes a reasonable (for whom?) living possible, but one that minimizes the extent to which you cause people to buy things they don't want and which thereby builds instead of harms your reputation.

And then, complexly, in a consumer culture, people are OPEN to being sold... open to having their wants influenced by their interactions with professionals (doctors, lawyers, photographers even) and advertisements. So influencing what people want can be done TO SOME EXTENT with their consent... and yet take it too far and people will know they have been messed with and resent it.... perhaps Jennings 1.8%

Doesn't sound like I would want to run my business as Russ Jennings does, but we all have differing levels of hunger, economic need, and economic insecurity. Who am I to judge how hungry he is? I'm getting hungry myself.

Maybe he is serving a large market of people who not only don't mind being hard sold, but are open to it... perhaps the 98.2%.

---

I would hope it would be possible to find the balance that put enough food on the table without perhaps going to the length where I was obsessed about the 1.8% who experience buyers remorse after I gave them a hard sell. If I was giving the hard sell, 1.8% seems like a small payment for my sins... Although once you are committed to hard selling, you probably don't see it as "sinful" at all, and that of course as others have pointed out is the root of the original questions "how do I deal with this problem?"

For my part I can't help feel a certain subversive pleasure in the thought that at least 1.8% realize they have been SOLD... that in some sense "needs" were implanted in them that didn't really exist. I can't help but seeing their behavior as a noble awakening and "justice" for a company that pushed too hard.

Will the bad karma come back to bite this studio? Have people stopped buying cars because of car salesman? Saturn tries to sell its cars differently, but they haven't taken over the world have they?

Maybe Americans have a pretty thick skin about high pressure sales... and even welcome it, even if the sensitive artistic types here hate that sort of thing?

And maybe the world really is divided into hard selling winners, and laid back losers?

I'm setting forth on my career with the belief that such a dichotomy must be an over simplification, and that it is possible to sell without hard selling, and that range of strategies such as described by some people above enable you to move product, generate revenue and satisfy the customer.

I hope so, but I don't know it yet, and this discussion has been really interesting.

An interesting analysis.

I've made no claims of being in the portrait business, but I am in business... and if a business, be it the photography business or a customer service business with the product incidentally being photographs , truly faces a "laid back losers, hard sell winners" dichotomy, it is unique... and sad.

From my perspective....

There are businesses that make promises and must then deliver on them, and there are businesses which make products and must then sell them. That is true in every field, from homebuilding to photography to... anythng you can think of, really.

A wedding photographer, for example, makes promises of their abilities and must then be able to take the one opportunity, the real-time event that is the wedding, and deliver the desired results. A portraiteer takes photos on speculation (though they may charge a sitting fee to defray some costs or because the market will bear it) in order to build and sell a product -- finished prints, which they can largely demonstrate with proofs and samples.

These are fundementally different business models, though they can often lead to similar results in terms of the end "product", and the differences can cause misunderstandings between the camps.

For myself, I deal mostly in promises. My customers pay me believing I can do what they require, though usually they cannot fully articulate what that is. I am paid in advance, or as the job progresses, and jobs take a long time, often with little visible progress for months. To work in that world, the most important sale is the first one... selling yourself. All of my hard sell is in that area. I'm damned good at what I do, and I'm not shy about demonstrating it. Once the customer has bought me...accepted that I'll get the job done... the rest of the sale is ... quite laid back. It is really just keeping them happy with the process and confident in me; laid back confidence helps more than additional pushy selling.

I see that same behavior and view in some of the pro photographers who have posted in this thread... they sell themselves, not their product... and additional pressure would reduce their value.

When selling a product... hard sell works. It may not be good for the producer's reputation, but there really are no repeat sales of durable goods like photographs... there are NEW sales to repeat customers, but those customers rarely have any loyalty anyway. Closing now is more important than some speculative future... ...and that's where the difference becomes extremely clear, because in the other type of business, the speculative future is all there is.

I'm not sure I'm being clear, but the distinction is clear to me. If you are selling a product (this 8x10 print, that framed portrait) then hard sellers will win and the laid back will be losers. If you are selling yourself, then the "laid back" (meaning those who sell themselves then maintain the relationship rather than close the biggest one-time sale they can muster andburn their future oportunities) will be winners and hard-selling will cause losers.

--
So you run and you run
to catch up with the sun
but it's sinking; Racing around
to come up behind you again.

dpophyte,

I think that sounds just right. Thanks for those thoughts. If you determine that you are selling to a large ocean of one tme customers there is little disincentive for hard selling.

If you are hoping to see people again and if you are in the relationship building and maintaining business then your self interest changes and there is a much greater reason to behave like a mensch.

And of course that poses some fundamental questions for capitalism (and for each budding capitalist), like "what's the percentage in being a decent person?"

Let's hope there is one.

Or maybe the question is "are people's real demand functions adequate to sustain a viable business, or must they be supplemented by advertising and selling, and if so by how much advertising and how hard?"

Something like $120.00 for the time & if he comes back & buy's over $500.00 in prints, you'll credit the $120 back to him.
Win Win situitation.

It's best to try to be flexible whenever possible.

Myles said:

Maybe he is serving a large market of people who not only don't
mind being hard sold, but are open to it... perhaps the 98.2%.

Click to expand...

Forgive me, but I think most of you have it backwards. If only 1.8% have remorse and try to change/cancel the order, then I don't think his selling methods are that hard, nor is he forcing people to buy more than they should.

If a quarter or a third of the people cancelled, THEN he's selling too hard.

Flipping it the other way. What business do you know of that deliberately sends people home, telling them to think it over?

What other business inconviences their customers by forcing them to make unneccessary trips back to the store?

What's high pressure about showing the pix then and there, mentioning the package or two that might be on sale, and asking, perhaps, if they need a few more to give to family or friends?

To me it's smart business, and it can be done in such a way as to imply that you want to make sure they end up the photos that are right for them, that fits their budget, and that they haven't forgotten anyone who'd want a picture of their favorite grand-daughter.

Michael Long said:

Forgive me, but I think most of you have it backwards. If only 1.8%
have remorse and try to change/cancel the order, then I don't think
his selling methods are that hard, nor is he forcing people to buy
more than they should.

Click to expand...

OK, then we assume that this is a business and not an business-ethics-and-morality-enforcement bureau -- is it worth vigorously pursuing the 1.8% remorseful buyers? What will that cost -vs- what is to be gained?

I think that most of photographers specially in the UK and USA are getting the thing wrong. First they consider their work as a business and put all the brunt towards the consummer. But have a think... Imagine you are a pianist, or a plumber: would you tell the producer or the caller that has a leakage "Hey I want a call fee, paid in advance and all the expenses for my concert/repair BEFORE I even play a note or solder a pipe!!!" That would be a laugh hey!!!! But that is exactly what every photographer business I looked into does. I am surprised that there are any customers at all in these countries. A Photographer is mainly an artist business, a single man job. If any of you were contracted by a large company ie IBM when would you get your first instalment? At least one month after you deliverd the goods, ALL the goods. So I think that if you have these "minor" losses/hicups you are just asking for it. The only way, honest way is to put the prospective buyer in a responsible situation as if he is buying a car or a house. The upfront booking fee is ominous and should be scrapped immediately. I cannot see any other business (except for buying concert tickets) where there is such practice. Not even doctors or lawyers use it.

If you have a big order ie above a certain amount you consider fair ask for an upfront payment ie 20%, contractually non-refundable and you have all the problems resolved. It is only because you are too greedy and ask for the full whack BEFORE the goods are made that you get this sort of "surprise" which is not surprising at all.

Take a look at my Terms of Business page http://www.azuzarte.com/terms.htm and tell if they can be any fairer to both parties involved.
Regards
Paulo
--
'Ignorance is bliss' Anglo-Saxon proverb
'Ignorance kills' Portuguese proverb
Paulo Ferreira
http://www.azuzarte.com
http://www.fotki.com/azuzarte
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/paulo_ferreira
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/view ;%20id=102681

Paulo

I think you have things totally wrong here. First, most portrait photographers are not working as Commissioned artists. They're preparing a product, just like a carpenter. The reason we have up front sitting fees is so that people show up to their appointment. We have some people that don't pay session fees in advance. Of those, about 20% show for their appointment. Of the ppl who do pay in advance, 85% show for their appointment. Keep in mind, I'm having to pay a makeup artist, photographer, and salespeople to be ready for these customers. If they no-show, then those employee's salary come out of my pocket. If I didn't have those employee's, then the people who WERE on time would throw a fit about having to wait. Good luck finding a portrait photographer who'll gaurantee you an appointment time without a deposit. They may offer to take you as a walkin, but they certainly won't block off 2 hours of a busy day on good faith. And if they do, they probably aren't pulling $70,000 months.

We ask for payment in full because that's how we stay in business. When the current owner and I took over, the previous owners had over $300,000 in past due accounts. That's over a quarter million dollars of people whom they'd given credit to, and then bailed. We pay our lab at the end of every month, wether the customers have paid for the prints or not. Any lawyer will tell you the same thing. Sure, they'll help you sue, and you might win a million dollars. But you're paying the lawyer up front, out of your pocket. If you lose the case, or even if you win and can't collect, the lawyer still has his money. If people can't afford a big package, we take them down to something within their price range. We don't lend credit. If they were credit-worthy, then a bank would have given them a credit card, and they'd pay in full with that. If they don't have credit, it's probably for a reason, and we'd be fools to give it to them.

Paulo Ferreira said:

I think that most of photographers specially in the UK and USA are
getting the thing wrong. First they consider their work as a
business and put all the brunt towards the consummer. But have a
think... Imagine you are a pianist, or a plumber: would you tell
the producer or the caller that has a leakage "Hey I want a call
fee, paid in advance and all the expenses for my concert/repair
BEFORE I even play a note or solder a pipe!!!" That would be a
laugh hey!!!! But that is exactly what every photographer business
I looked into does. I am surprised that there are any customers at
all in these countries. A Photographer is mainly an artist
business, a single man job. If any of you were contracted by a
large company ie IBM when would you get your first instalment? At
least one month after you deliverd the goods, ALL the goods. So I
think that if you have these "minor" losses/hicups you are just
asking for it. The only way, honest way is to put the prospective
buyer in a responsible situation as if he is buying a car or a
house. The upfront booking fee is ominous and should be scrapped
immediately. I cannot see any other business (except for buying
concert tickets) where there is such practice. Not even doctors or
lawyers use it.
If you have a big order ie above a certain amount you consider fair
ask for an upfront payment ie 20%, contractually non-refundable and
you have all the problems resolved. It is only because you are too
greedy and ask for the full whack BEFORE the goods are made that
you get this sort of "surprise" which is not surprising at all.
Take a look at my Terms of Business page http://www.azuzarte.com/terms.htm
and tell if they can be any fairer to both parties involved.
Regards
Paulo
--
'Ignorance is bliss' Anglo-Saxon proverb
'Ignorance kills' Portuguese proverb
Paulo Ferreira
http://www.azuzarte.com
http://www.fotki.com/azuzarte
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/paulo_ferreira
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/view ;%20id=102681

Click to expand...

--
http://www.rj-exposures.com

Sorry Russ but I agree with Paulo.I was'nt going to comment in this topic because I get complaints about the modern Photogs all the time when unhappy clients meet me and discover we're not all trying to become millionaires overnight.I get plenty of work without advertising so unfortunately these people end up going to studios that speculate a few dollars to get the punters in then hit them as hard as they can.

My clients(eventually friends) can take as long as they like to complete order,on one occasion it was almost a year before order was completed.
Try to slow down a little,be happy with half a million.
Carl

It's interesting to hear how portrait photograhpers work things. I only do Archetecture and then only if someone wants a website too. I have a half day minimum and charge $100/hr. The client then owns all the images I've taken. I get 40% (non-refunable) up front and don't deliver anything until the last 60% has cleared the bank. I add at least one hour of post production to every hour of on-location shooting so if I shoot for one hour, I also bill them at least another hour for photoshop work, archival, and contact sheets and sometimes more. They also pay all travel costs and if I have to stay overnight they pay for the campsite. (I love to camp) If they want prints, I upload the images to Shutterfly.com where I can charge whatever I want for the prints. I usually double the price I pay for them. If they want to change their order that's between them and Shutterfly.com. If they want to print them themselves, go for it, I already got paid.

I don't make jack off of prints like many of you but I'm booked solid with web design and photography at least four months out and could work 12 hour days/7days a week if I wanted. All of my clients used to hire photographers that charged a per print price and everytime they wanted to use that image again they had to pay. None of my clients liked that. If my client used the photos for a print project they had to pay the photographer for another run if they needed it. In my clients eye they feel like they had already payed for the print once, why do they have to pay again?

Times are changing. I'm happy with me and my wife both making $800 a day, everyday. I know there are people out there that make a lot more money but I'm just not that greedy but If you schedule my time, you pay or get sued. If I get a flake all it takes is one letter from my attorney to change their mind. (The good thing is I have a number of attorneys for clients so I usually trade for their time)

The way I work with my clients is that they are buying my time, not the prints. If I show up and if the client is not ready, I don't care because the clock is running. I've had no problems what so ever with this system and the clients love it! They retain all rights to the images forever so they are happy and I get paid and get to go kiteboarding so I 'm even happier!

I know a lot of you are getting rich selling prints and I wish you all the luck in the world! I just want to shoot a home in the morning, go kiteboarding all afternoon and then party in Photoshop all night! The only thing I would change is maybe snowboard or mountain bike instead of kiteboard
Fred
P.S. If your wondering what kiteboarding is check this out:
http://www.butterflydesigns.net/action01.htm
(I don't have s* for glass but I have a bunch of nice kites!)

Butterfly said:

I've had no problems what so
ever with this system and the clients love it! They retain all
rights to the images forever so they are happy and I get paid and
get to go kiteboarding so I 'm even happier!

Click to expand...

Of course they love it, they're making out like bandits.

The primary reason most commercial work is billed out with limited rights is that the sales of additional rights, over time, generates additional income.

As you build up a body of work and clients that money starts to become significant.

As it is now, if you go on vacation, take a week off, get sick, or retire, your $400 a day minimum stops. Period. No more income.

You sound like a live-for-the-moment kind of guy, but you just might consider for more than half a second how your fee structure is impacting your future.

Really, without income derived from the sales of future rights, you're not much better off than the guy flipping burgers at Micky's. Stop putting in the hours, and the money stops as well.

Although you both have good points, there is nothing wrong with the 'getting paid for your work' model as opposed to having to carry around a book of usuage right and fees. Sure there are lots of people getting rich off of this method, but there is obviously a very large market for the other models as well. It sounds like the clients who prefer it this way would not want to have to dish out money each time they wanted to use the picture again, and would likely just scrap the idea all together and explore a different avenue of adversiting.

I think many wedding photographers are moving to this model as well. They complain about other people taking pics at wedding with their high end gear and how its cutting into their print sales. Well... the solution for that is to just charge for what they think their time is worth, as opposed to needing to make money off the prints. If the client orders, great, if not, they made money shooting that day.

I think consumers are getting smarter and smarter and nobody wants the lowballed with a cheap rate up front, but major fees in the long run. After all.. that's why digital is so attractive. Pay lots of money now for DSLR, but each picture is essentially free after you have the gear. I really do think that photographers who cannot adapt to the new model will become extinct.

Now of course the major contracts will still work on usage right and fees, but there is loads of business for the new model of doing things. I can recall many people on here stating that they wanted the original files after the wedding and if the photographer didn't work that way, they would find one that did. Although this may be extreme, and not everyone wants all original pics, you can surely see how times are changing!

Kiran

Michael Long said:

Butterfly said:

I've had no problems what so
ever with this system and the clients love it! They retain all
rights to the images forever so they are happy and I get paid and
get to go kiteboarding so I 'm even happier!

Click to expand...

Of course they love it, they're making out like bandits.

The primary reason most commercial work is billed out with limited
rights is that the sales of additional rights, over time, generates
additional income.

As you build up a body of work and clients that money starts to
become significant.

As it is now, if you go on vacation, take a week off, get sick, or
retire, your $400 a day minimum stops. Period. No more income.

You sound like a live-for-the-moment kind of guy, but you just
might consider for more than half a second how your fee structure
is impacting your future.

Really, without income derived from the sales of future rights,
you're not much better off than the guy flipping burgers at
Micky's. Stop putting in the hours, and the money stops as well.

Click to expand...

The main problem for the wedding portrait side is that they wont pay the big upfront fee you need for this model to work

Your point about people not wanting to be lowballed up front and get slugged later is true, people appreciate upfront quotes, although the degree of 'estimation' some photogs give varies a bit. I am personally moving towards slightly cheaper reprints, slightly more expensive packages, and for portraits, slightly more expensive sitting fees partially offset against orders. The key word is slightly.

For wedding and portrait photography, anyone who wants all the original images and wants to pay fee for hours/work/images outright, is angling to pay as little as possible 99% of the time. Really. I know there are some who want the security of being able to access the originals anytime (fair enough) and some who want to be able to meddle with the images (no thanks)

Look at portrait photography, as Russ has said the product they are buying is the print, that is all, they only want to use it once or twice, why would they buy all rights to it without the print? So they can make crappy prints on their inkjet? Only if it is cheaper than buying the good one from the photographer. The only people who have a problem buying portrait prints are the people who should know better, that is amature photographers. They know it costs $2 to print an 8x10 so thats what they base the value on.

Look at weddings, you can do a maximum of 1 per week as a one man operation, in reality. If you could book more you would burn out after a year anyway. So effectively you need to make a weeks pay out of each one at least, you will still need to do other work as well, maybe portraits to pay your business costs. So to be a professional wedding photographer you need to get $1000 - $3000 at least, per wedding. If you were paying that much you would prefer to get a nice album and some nice enlargements than a couple of cds with raw images, or a bag of 6x4s with the negs. Personally I need to sell extra sides for the album and reprints to make enough money as well as the album package they buy.

Lets look at who gives the negs/originals
1. photographers who have already sold a substantial package.
2. photographers who are selling themselves short

3. photographers who have a day job to pay the bills and for their equipment. (many of us started this way)

If people really do start demanding the new model, we will se a much higher turnover of photographers, and most will be in category 3.

Really, ask yourself how much you need to make for the job, including business expenses and living costs and retirement plan, and then ask your customer, for that price, do you want nice prints/album, or do you want the rights to the originals.

P said:

Kiran P said:

I think many wedding photographers are moving to this model as

Click to expand...

well. They complain about other people taking pics at wedding with
their high end gear and how its cutting into their print sales.
Well... the solution for that is to just charge for what they think
their time is worth, as opposed to needing to make money off the
prints. If the client orders, great, if not, they made money
shooting that day.

I think consumers are getting smarter and smarter and nobody wants
the lowballed with a cheap rate up front, but major fees in the
long run. After all.. that's why digital is so attractive. Pay
lots of money now for DSLR, but each picture is essentially free
after you have the gear. I really do think that photographers who
cannot adapt to the new model will become extinct.

Kiran

Click to expand...

I do completely agree with everything that you say, and of course the photographer has to make enough money to make it profitable. But this is exactly why the photographer needs to mention all this to the client. In terms of weddings, the photographer can easily offer two types of packages, one based on just covering the event, and another based on covering the event and having a minimum purchase order of prints. I'm sure that if you explain all this to most consumers, they would love to have the choice of which pricing structure to pick. THe problem is that I think many photographers are set it their ways and its been too long that the photographer told the client how its going to be and that's it.

In terms of the original poster, my advice would have been, as others have mentioned, to first of all not take any orders on teh day of the shoot. Give them the proofs and let them decide. 2nd piece of advice is to offer a package with a sitting fee + prints, or a sitting fee with these various packages alerady included into the price. For example, if the photographer wants to make a minimum of $200 on a booking for a two hour shoot, he could either chage $200 for a sitting fee with 4x6 proofs, and each 8x10 at $20 or so because he already made enough on the shoot and the prints are just a bonus, or he could charge very little for the sitting fee, and offer 8x10 prints at $40 or so with packages starting at $100 or something like that.

It makes no sense to me why photographers give away their sitting fees and they cry when they don't get the print orders. If the photographers feels like his work is being done when he is taking the picture, that's where his cost to teh client should be coming from. Heck... lord knows I don't want to pay $50 for an 8x10, but I guess there is no choice if I spent half the day with the photographer and he only charged $50 for the sitting fee.

I don't think any clients want to cheat the photographer out of their money, but they do want to be smart about where its going. The way it has always been didn't do the photographers justice in that it made it seem like they were gouging the public on prints, even though the reall thruth was that they needed those print orders to recoup their cost for the shoot. A little bit of communication goes a long way and if the client understands how much the photographers needs to make in the day, the client will know whether its better to just pay fully for their time with cheaper prints if they will want many prints, or pay little for the shoot but lots of the prints if they only want a few. In the end, the photographer knows how much he wants to make and shouldn't be affraid to tell that to his client by disguising this in pricing structure. If its too much for the client, he can decide right there an then without the sticker shock after the fact.

Kiran

I've been reading through this and growing more and more frustrated at Mr. Jennings tactics.

Then Mr. Mason steps in and shows us all what it is to be a true honest salesman/photographer. I admire your honest practices and wish you the best.

Mr. Jennings, I personaly would refuse to have pictures taken at your studio. The tactics you have been describing are terrible in my opinion.

Look at the contrast between you and Mr. Mason who claims to have run a photography company for 25 years based on honest practices. This is the man I want to deal with. When I know there is trust involved I am MUCH less likely to back out, or burn you so to speak.

I think you seriously need to rethink how you run your buisness because I have not heard many people supporting your viewpoint, and as another posted said, when 1 person tells you your wrong, you can ignore him. When 10 people tell you your wrong, you had better listen.

--
'L' Affliction started at age 18. It's the best disease I've ever had.

I think $50 is cheap for an 8x10.

Customers often think they may not buy many photos or like the low risk involved in a small sitting fee, this is why I cant raise my sitting fee too high. I have introduced a higher studio sitting fee with the possibility of reducing it with orders, but it is not as warmly accepted as you may think.

I have kept a low sitting fee for my outside shoots for families and kids. These usually start by ordering a $200-300 package and go up from there.

They could walk out with a single 8x10 if they wanted, but they see the photos and buy what they want, when they see them. I tried a couple of promos with a discount on the packages and for some reason they fit what they want into the packages and buy no more. These people I think would not have bothered getting photos done without the voucher.

I do give proofs to take home, after we have shown them and taken an order on the projection screen. It is not a hard sell, we give them time to sort out and pick ones they really want. If they dont order over $200 then, there is a deposit on the proofs, if they want no photos and return the proofs (NO CDS!!) they get the deposit back. (never had to ever) We find with the proofs we get some extra orders, but without the on the spot sale presentation the orders spiral downwards, not because they dont like the photos, they get used to the proofs, they get busy and never get around to it, or the car breaks down and the disposable cash is gone. You really do need to sell on the spot.

I think we could probably up our sale pitch a bit. The photos sell them selves to a certain extent, but you need to ask for the sale, you need to sell them. Crappy photos like the shopping mall baby photos need a hard sell, but that is a different type of business.

One key thing to note with portraits (at least in my experience) is that the actual sale is higher than the customer expected. They dont feel suckered, they just want more than they thought they would. Many customers tart out wanting a couple of prints. The low sitting fee or small package is necessary for these people, and higher sales (which usually happen anyway) are necessary to be worthwhile to the photographer.

I agree with being upfront with costs for wedding packages, it is a big purchase and we find knowing the package price up front is comforting to clients. Our pricelist includes reprint and extra album side prices though, and we tell them if they pick a lot of photos they may need to buy extra, but the choice is theirs.

As for a coverage fee only, I cant risk wasting a saturday for a low order wedding. I cant charge what a saturday is worth, ($400 an hour at least),

an album package is tangible, and much better perceived value. I am primarily a wedding photographer, if I was a commercial photog and just did a wedding here and there, or if I had several weddings every saturday and a few people stringing for me, I suppose that sort of caper may work.

It is all very interesting, I have gotten a few ideas from what has been tossed around here. Thanks for your input.

a.

Kiran P said:

I do completely agree with everything that you say, and of course
the photographer has to make enough money to make it profitable.
But this is exactly why the photographer needs to mention all this
to the client. In terms of weddings, the photographer can easily
offer two types of packages, one based on just covering the event,
and another based on covering the event and having a minimum
purchase order of prints. I'm sure that if you explain all this to
most consumers, they would love to have the choice of which pricing
structure to pick. THe problem is that I think many photographers
are set it their ways and its been too long that the photographer
told the client how its going to be and that's it.

In terms of the original poster, my advice would have been, as
others have mentioned, to first of all not take any orders on teh
day of the shoot. Give them the proofs and let them decide. 2nd
piece of advice is to offer a package with a sitting fee + prints,
or a sitting fee with these various packages alerady included into
the price. For example, if the photographer wants to make a
minimum of $200 on a booking for a two hour shoot, he could either
chage $200 for a sitting fee with 4x6 proofs, and each 8x10 at $20
or so because he already made enough on the shoot and the prints
are just a bonus, or he could charge very little for the sitting
fee, and offer 8x10 prints at $40 or so with packages starting at
$100 or something like that.

It makes no sense to me why photographers give away their sitting
fees and they cry when they don't get the print orders. If the
photographers feels like his work is being done when he is taking
the picture, that's where his cost to teh client should be coming
from. Heck... lord knows I don't want to pay $50 for an 8x10, but
I guess there is no choice if I spent half the day with the
photographer and he only charged $50 for the sitting fee.

Click to expand...

Kiran P said:

Kiran

Click to expand...