Puzzled

mercphoto

Maybe someone can explain something to me. I've heard it over and over again, that photographers who shoot on the cheap ruin the industry, hurt working pros, etc. And then I'll hear these same people talk about getting free music for their wedding DVD's (doesn't that hurt the musician's industry?), or like the following thread on open source software:

http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=19809

I draw the analogy that me, as a working software professional, see my industry devalued by free software just as the photographer's claim. In other words, photos that have value should be paid for, but same for anything else, including software.

I want to know if I'm off my rocker. Because frankly I fee at times I'm being hit at both ends, where some photographers claim I'm hurting their biz but not seeing that they hurt mine.

SCS_Photo

mercphoto wrote:

Maybe someone can explain something to me. I've heard it over and over again, that photographers who shoot on the cheap ruin the industry, hurt working pros, etc. And then I'll hear these same people talk about getting free music for their wedding DVD's (doesn't that hurt the musician's industry?), or like the following thread on open source software:

http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=19809

I draw the analogy that me, as a working software professional, see my industry devalued by free software just as the photographer's claim. In other words, photos that have value should be paid for, but same for anything else, including software.

I want to know if I'm off my rocker. Because frankly I fee at times I'm being hit at both ends, where some photographers claim I'm hurting their biz but not seeing that they hurt mine.

Free software is another competitor, nothing more. Just as the 'cheap' photographer is a competitor. There is nothing inherently wrong with either.

To be blunt, if a competitor's product devalues your own, than its your product that needs to change.

David_S85

SCS_Photo wrote:

To be blunt, if a competitor's product devalues your own, than its your product that needs to change.

I hope you're not suggesting that you change by dropping your price. I've seen a lot of that in here lately. Photography, software, marble counter tops, architects; whatever the industry, there will always be the price whores. That's never going to change.

Differentiating one's product from the competition is a good start.

If you find that you are offering something very similar to the competition, and can't change the product too much, then there are ways of dealing with the situation.

What really separates the big boys from the all the rest boils down to two things. Product quality and marketing.

You first absolutely need to prove your stuff is quality. Then you must market the hell out of it.

My industry, there's always a new bicycle store opening up somewhere close to us. They come. They go. The strong survive with the quality and marketing strategy. You do those right, (and treat people well) and the clients will stay. Price, in every business survey I have ever read or participated in, ranks in about #5.

Where many crappo stores might charge $19.95 for a complete tune up, why is it that the long-standing successful dealers get $70 to $90 for the "same" service? Again, the strong two main anchoring ideals and practices.

My favorite story ever is the two dealers a block away from each other. The new dealer took in a boatload of spring tuneups for $12.95. Huge numbers, but hardly any were done right. The 25-year old store on the other side of the block was charging $45 (this was 1978), also doing a dandy business in spring tune ups, but their numbers were even higher. Two reasons:

1) The job was done right, the first time.

2) Their big big sign up front read "We fix $12.95 tune ups!"

Midnitsage

mercphoto wrote:

Maybe someone can explain something to me. I've heard it over and over again, that photographers who shoot on the cheap ruin the industry, hurt working pros, etc. And then I'll hear these same people talk about getting free music for their wedding DVD's (doesn't that hurt the musician's industry?), or like the following thread on open source software:

http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=19809

I draw the analogy that me, as a working software professional, see my industry devalued by free software just as the photographer's claim. In other words, photos that have value should be paid for, but same for anything else, including software.

I want to know if I'm off my rocker. Because frankly I fee at times I'm being hit at both ends, where some photographers claim I'm hurting their biz but not seeing that they hurt mine.

Sounds like you letting it get to you. Understand that everything has a double standard. All you can do is try and educate people. Explain why buying a logo from an on line, premade, unoriginal template, that has copied and altered ever so slightly from a successful business for $99 is hurting them (not you). And you have to promote yourself, promote, promote, promote, and be on top of you customer service! There's enough business out there for every, and like the above poster said, when the crap hits the fan, those people will turn to the professionals and you can charge double.:D

Jamoke

David_S85 wrote:

Their big big sign up front read "We fix $12.95 tune ups!"

:lurk Sweet

Sam

Mercphoto,

What's to not understand? While there are numerous standards and an infinite number of variations of those standards, it all boils down to: people want their own industry / profession to have limited competition, be very profitable, and have some method tp control who can gain access to their sand box.

The consumer however (and that includes all of us), wants the exact opposite. Do you buy your camera gear, TV, or automobile for example at the most expensive store?

You don’t have any questions, you understand it, you just don’t like it.

Sam

Sam

David S85,

You wrote: "Price in every business survey I have ever read or participated in, ranks in about #5."

Depending on how the question was asked, and / or the industry, it could be 1st or last, or you could just look at what happens to all the small independent businesses, regardless of outstanding services, when Wall Mart move in. That will tell you how people are voting with their money not how they vote with their mouth on some esoteric survey.

If I read your post right you are in the bicycle business. I will out on a limb and say your in the high end of the market, which I would define as a nich, specialty market, and yes for your market / clientele I wouldn't think price would be the absolute number one criteria, but if you were in the low end, the Wall Marts of the world would have put you out of business the day after they opend their store.

I think the moral here is to understand the market place, and regardless of any love or passion you may have for a particlar profession to pick and choose wisely the area you wish to compete in.

Sam

saurora

Sam wrote:

Mercphoto,

What's to not understand? While there are numerous standards and an infinite number of variations of those standards, it all boils down to: people want their own industry / profession to have limited competition, be very profitable, and have some method tp control who can gain access to their sand box.

The consumer however (and that includes all of us), wants the exact opposite. Do you buy your camera gear, TV, or automobile for example at the most expensive store?

You don’t have any questions, you understand it, you just don’t like it.


Sam

with Sam. We like having the opportunities to buy cheaper products (cameras, software, photographic services, etc.) but we don't always want to admit we are hurting the little guys who give the best service, or stealing business away from the originator of an idea. I love price-comparing...did alot of that before I bought my Canon 20D last week. But I also love going into a camera store and talking with an owner who loves photography. I could go into my local camera store and pick George's brain on what products to buy and then buy them on-line and save a ton. I try to visualize not having that personal service when all those little guys go out of business down the road. It's not a pretty picture, but it's getting there. I made the decision to buy my camera at the local camera store, not B&H or Walmart. Not the best price, but I could take it home immediately and George will remember me when I come in next time and perhaps have some more good advice or deals for me. At the same time, I will probably buy some of my accessories on line. So, sometimes you get what you pay for...and I helped (I hope) for the little guy to stay in business a little longer. Your frustration is understandable. The double standard permeates our society and industries of all kinds are affected by our choices. Finding the middle-ground where you are not hurting either side (and especially not your wallet!) is a difficult task.


(Why am I not outside shooting the camera????)