<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;selling&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 16:27:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Dan Pink Offers 'Access' As A Reward For Helping Promote His Book</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121115/13563021067/dan-pink-offers-access-as-reward-helping-promote-his-book.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121115/13563021067/dan-pink-offers-access-as-reward-helping-promote-his-book.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've written about Dan Pink's last work, <i>Drive</i> before.  It's a fascinating book that explores some counterintuitive concepts about how <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100603/0311539672.shtml">money incentivizes people</a>.  His new book, <a href="http://www.danpink.com/books/to-sell-is-human" target="_blank"><i>To Sell is Human</i></a> appears to build on these concepts, as it specifically relates to salespeople (who many people assume are only incentivized by money).  An HBR article appears to <a href="http://hbr.org/2012/07/a-radical-prescription-for-sales/ar/1" target="_blank">summarize the thesis</a>:
<blockquote><i>
Some things in life we know are true. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. A body in motion will remain in motion unless acted on by an outside force. And the best way to motivate salespeople is by offering them commissions.
<br /><br />
But what if we&#8217;re wrong, at least about that last one? What if paying salespeople commissions is rooted more in tradition than logic? What if it&#8217;s a practice so cemented into orthodoxy that it&#8217;s no longer an actual decision? That&#8217;s what a handful of companies have begun discovering. To the surprise of many, these firms are showing that commissions can sometimes do more harm than good&#8212;and that getting rid of them can open a path to higher profits. 
</i></blockquote>
Either way, it should come as little surprise that Pink is also trying unique ideas for the selling of his own book, including <a href="http://www.danpink.com/tsih-launch-team" target="_blank">recruiting a "launch team"</a> made up of 96 people who promise to share the ideas in the book (and, no, I'm not a part of that).  He's offering up "rewards" for people who are willing to do this:
<ul>
<li>Advance galley copy of&nbsp;<em>To Sell is Human</em> &#8211; there&#8217;s only a couple hundred of these ever printed.</li>
<li>Signed 1st edition hardcover of&nbsp;<em>To Sell is Human</em>.</li>
<li>A public Thank You on my blog along with links to your website and Twitter.</li>
<li>Exclusive access to me &#8211; and each other &#8211; via a private Facebook group.</li>
</ul>
It's that last one that I find most interesting.  It's not all that different than some of the <a href="http://rtb.techdirt.com/products/watercooler-special/">offerings we've put together</a> for people on Techdirt as well, who wish to support the site, and can get greater access in exchange (which has been really fun in practice!).  It will be interesting to see how well this works (and hopefully Pink will report back on the success or failure of the program as it goes on).
<br /><br />
What do people have to do in order to be included?  Well, first they have to apply (and applications close tonight at midnight eastern) and be chosen.  But then, it's pretty straightforward:
<ul>
<li>Spread the word about the book on your platform during the weeks before and after publication.</li>
<li>Leave a short, honest review of <em>To Sell is Human&nbsp;</em>at Amazon.com or BN.com on December 31.</li>
<li>Join us in the Facebook group to brainstorm and share ideas on how we might spread the word about&nbsp;<em>To Sell is Human</em>.</li>
</ul>
I would imagine that, under <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091005/0943016423.shtml">current FTC rules</a>, anyone in this program would actually need to disclose their participation in the program whenever they talk about the book -- which hopefully Pink is telling those who sign up for this.  I also wonder if those who don't get "in" to the program will walk away feeling negative about it.  Hopefully not.  Either way, it's an interesting experiment and hopefully he'll share how well it works.  I've always been a big fan of "access" to content creators as a possible unique form of "reward" -- and it's the kind of experience that can't be copied, which is what makes it so valuable.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121115/13563021067/dan-pink-offers-access-as-reward-helping-promote-his-book.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121115/13563021067/dan-pink-offers-access-as-reward-helping-promote-his-book.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121115/13563021067/dan-pink-offers-access-as-reward-helping-promote-his-book.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>interesting-ideas</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121115/13563021067</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Aug 2010 20:49:12 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Connecting Authors To Tangible Goods They Can Sell?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03131810469.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03131810469.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ When we talk about business models for content, one question we get asked a lot is how these business models could possibly apply to authors.  We're always told that such business models might work for music, but couldn't possibly work for authors.  To be honest, I find this sort of response incredibly uncreative.  If you look around, it's actually not hard to find authors who are making use of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090828/0159066032.shtml">new</a> and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090621/2137115307.shtml">innovative</a> business models, and even publishers who are willing to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/entrepreneurs/articles/20100512/0242119390.shtml">embrace</a> that kind of thinking.  This is definitely a good thing, but we're always interested in hearing new and more examples of this happening.
<br /><br />
<a href="https://twitter.com/rosspruden/status/20171219116" target="_blank">Ross Pruden</a> alerts us to an LA Times story about a company called OpenSky that is apparently <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cover-opensky-20100801,0,1640852,full.story" target="_blank">helping authors implement additional business models</a> by helping them find tangible products they can sell in association with their books.  Indeed, the whole concept seems to fit in with our concept of using infinite goods to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939.shtml">make scarce goods more valuable</a>:
<blockquote><i>
A cookbook author, for example, not only sells books through OpenSky but also hawks a favorite barbecue sauce and grill. The author pockets 50% of the profit, with the rest going to OpenSky and others involved in the transaction.
<br /><br />
[...]
<br /><br />
David Hale Smith, a Texas literary agent, was about the only one who hadn't morphed roles since Naples last saw him. After they sat down at a table near that escalator, Smith immediately handed her a copy of a client's newest novel: "So Cold the River" by Michael Koryta. Smith mentioned that it's set in an old hotel in central Indiana known for its Pluto Water, believed to have healthful effects.
<br /><br />
Naples lit up: "If [Koryta] was on OpenSky, the novel could be tied to a promotion of the hotel. He could have a button on his site for readers to buy the book and the water." (OpenSky would find a supplier to bottle and ship it.) She described other commercial possibilities: a sneak-peak download of a chapter of his next book, a "webinar" with him discussing his stories.
</i></blockquote>
I can already hear the critics complaining about this sort of "crass commercialism" that I'm sure is "destroying" the concept of "art for art's sake," but I find it odd that those who focus on the whole "art for art's sake" argument are the same folks who also complain that the changing marketplace means content creators can't make money any more.  No one is saying anyone <i>has</i> to adopt these models -- just that for those who feel comfortable doing so, it's now easier than ever to embrace infinite concepts -- and use them to make scarce goods more valuable.
<br /><br />
That said, after reading about all of this, I went and looked at <a href="http://shopopensky.com/" target="_blank">OpenSky</a>, and I don't see any of this on their website.  Instead, it looks like a plain old store.  If they're really focused on helping content creators, it seems like they would be a lot better off promoting content creators on their site as well.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03131810469.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03131810469.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100803/03131810469.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>business-models...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100803/03131810469</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 3 Feb 2010 22:52:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Murdoch's Daughter Recognizes That 'Piracy' Can Be Good</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100203/0229528022.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100203/0229528022.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Even as Rupert Murdoch is calling aggregators and other sites "pirates" and claiming that fair use <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091108/2223416852.shtml">can be blocked</a>, it seems his daughter has a more enlightened view.  <a href="http://twitter.com/copycense/statuses/8564529777" target="_blank">Copycense</a> points us to a recent talk by Elisabeth Murdoch, who owns a TV production house, where she basically admits that <a href="http://paidcontent.org/article/419-murdoch-jr-borderline-piracy-may-be-our-best-outlet/" target="_blank">blocking what people want to do is a bad idea</a>:
<blockquote><i>
"Fans remain the best salesmen of our content, even if that behavior is on the borderline of piracy. Danger of the new world is that we must concede that we'll lose some control."
</i></blockquote>
Nice to hear.  Now, if only her Dad would listen to her before he pisses off a bunch of his best content salesmen.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100203/0229528022.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100203/0229528022.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100203/0229528022.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>tell-your-dad...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100203/0229528022</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:58:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Is It Really Such A Problem If People Sell Your Works?  Or Is It Just Free Market Research?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091210/0530007290.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091210/0530007290.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ One of the key questions that comes up when you discuss the concept of a world without copyright is "what's to stop others from just copying that book/DVD/CD etc. and selling it themselves, thus making the money that you could have made."  The answer is that there's usually a lot preventing it.  Filmmaker Nina Paley, a big supporter of culture without relying on copyright, has a great post <a href="http://blog.ninapaley.com/2009/12/09/whats-stopping-you/" target="_blank">discussing the "what's stopping you" question</a>, where she notes that most people simply won't go through the hassle.  However, what's more interesting is that even if people <i>do</i> start selling your works, it's not necessarily a bad thing.  This is the similar to the discussion we recently had about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091204/0027327200.shtml">others making money off of your content</a>.  If they're able to do so, it often suggests some sort of demand that you haven't met.  As Paley notes, it's <i>free market research</i>:
<blockquote><i>
In general, I would much prefer you bought Sita merch from the Sita Merch Empire than from a CafePress store. Reasons include: I know the Merch Empire merch is high quality, I personally designed and like all the products there, and a much higher % of the money goes to me. CafePress merch tends to be overpriced for the quality, and CafePress takes almost all the profits unless the seller sets prices absurdly high.
<br /><br />
That said, Drakar's store offers Sita merch that doesn't exist at the Merch Empire. If I offered mugs, mousepads and stickers, he wouldn't have needed to make a Cafe Press store in the first place. If he actually sells any, it will demonstrate there is demand for such products. Then I can offer the same or similar products at my store. Drakar is essentially providing free market research, as are any other "competitors." If any of them do exceptionally well, I'll know what merch I should be selling.
<br /><br />
This is why old-school economists say competition is good for businesses. It is. Too bad there's so little real competition in our supposedly "free market democracy."
</i></blockquote>
Indeed.  This is also why we've said time and time again that it's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090116/0348223430.shtml">perfectly fine</a> if you want to copy this blog and try to sell ads against it (or make money some other way).  If someone actually figures out something that works well, then that's useful info to us, and would allow us to then incorporate those findings into our own offering.  That's actually good for everyone...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091210/0530007290.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091210/0530007290.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091210/0530007290.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>not-too-hard-to-figure-out</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091210/0530007290</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:08:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>BitTorrent Site Mininova Makes It Easier To Sell Scarcities With Downloads</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0243584322.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0243584322.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A bunch of folks have been sending in the news that popular BitTorrent site Mininova is now making it <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/mininova-helps-artists-to-monetize-torrents-090330/" target="_new">much easier to monetize your own BitTorrented music</a>.  Basically, it makes it easy to sell <i>other things</i> alongside the torrent.  This is very much about using the free music to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939.shtml">sell related scarcities</a>, such as concert tickets, CDs or other promotional goods.  Imagine taking the various <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/171933538.shtml">tiered</a> upsell solutions that are <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090326/2255304272.shtml">becoming popular</a> and connecting them directly to your own torrent of the music?  As the story notes, at least one indie record label, Beep! Beep!, has signed up and is releasing all of its music via this system -- and even offering those who download a 20% discount on products as a thank you for helping to seed the files:
<blockquote><i>
"It's only fair not to pay for something you haven't heard yet.  In our opinion torrents are an excellent way to present you with our music. That's why Beep! Beep! and Mininova have teamed up. We like the fact that you're taking the effort to get to know new music. In fact, we'd like to thank you for downloading and seeding our music by giving you a discount on our hardcopies."
</i></blockquote>
But, of course, we'll probably still hear from people about how such torrent sites are destroying the recording industry... even as it helps enable exactly what's coming next.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0243584322.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0243584322.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0243584322.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>neat</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090331/0243584322</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 8 Oct 2008 00:34:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>EMI Sets Up Its Own Online Store As YouTube Tries Selling Music</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081007/2140232485.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081007/2140232485.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Lots of folks are trying to figure out new business models in the music space, and here we have two separate big companies testing out ideas that seem unlikely to work all that well.  First up is EMI, the big record label that keeps insisting that its going a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071009/191057.shtml">different route</a> but can't seem to reign in its lawyers from taking <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080630/0114251541.shtml">the same old route</a>.  This time around, it's <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b76fa624-94d1-11dd-953e-000077b07658.html" target="_new">launching its own music download site</a>, where it's promising lots of extras and goodies -- including some stuff for free.  It will be interesting to see how the actual site is set up, but the idea of setting up just a label specific site seems destined to fail.  People want a one-stop shop.  They don't want to have to know that the music they like is on EMI.  Imagine, back when people bought CDs, if they had to go to a different store for each record label.   Maybe there's more to it than what's being described, but at first pass, this sounds like more of the same: a big record label sticking a square peg into a round hole, covering it with shiny paint, and talking about how awesome it is.
<br /><br />
Then there's Google, which has been <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080616/0729051417.shtml">struggling mightily</a> to come up with ways to make money off of YouTube.  At the same time, record labels have been complaining about how much "music" (accompanied by videos, of course) is available on YouTube, and the folks at Google put two and two together and will start <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSTRE4970U820081008?rpc=401&#038;" target="_new">offering options to buy the songs you hear on YouTube</a> at partner sites such as Amazon or iTunes.  While it's not a bad idea (why not offer people a chance to buy if they want it), it's hard to see this really getting that much traction.  Some people may go ahead and buy out of convenience, but it's hard to see people actually doing that much music "shopping" this way.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081007/2140232485.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081007/2140232485.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081007/2140232485.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>try,-try-again</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081007/2140232485</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:31:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Selling Stuff On The Internet?  Why, That Infringes On A Patent!</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080624/0125561485.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080624/0125561485.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Erich Spangenberg was mentioned here earlier this week for having to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080620/0544071462.shtml">pay $4 million</a> for shuffling some patents around to shell companies and suing a company he had already agreed not to sue over those patents.  Of course, that's not slowing him down apparently.  Not only has he asked for a new trial on that ruling, he's continuing to file new patent lawsuits -- with the latest one apparently being for a <a href="http://www.google.com/patents?id=8wweAAAAEBAJ" target="_new">patent</a> on selling stuff on the internet.  Yes, the patent may say it's about selling vehicles, but of the <a href="http://thepriorart.typepad.com/the_prior_art/2008/06/relentless.html" target="_new">47 new companies being sued over this patent</a>, it looks like they're all selling other stuff, not cars.  Basically, it looks like he's trying to sue every internet retailer there is -- because, of course, none of them ever would have come up with the concept of selling stuff online if this patent didn't exist.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080624/0125561485.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080624/0125561485.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080624/0125561485.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>prepare-to-get-sued</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080624/0125561485</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>