Why are packages considered a means for undercutting other authors?
Can you offer an explanation that does not contradict the logic behind your reasons? Well, if it is about the price range… Why not reduce the price of the bundle? On the other hand, if songs are not good enough to appreciate at the worth of $20.00 – $40.00 a purchase, why is a template? If you consider the value of a masterpiece, then you’d realize it is worth its creation and would not devalue the worth of its popularity with a small price tag representing it. But if undercutting other authors with a bundle is your reason, then who can say that anyone can appreciate a good piece of work? Because the masterpiece is what will sell for, from and by these marketplaces as well as by the author who constructs it. If undercutting because of low price is the reasoning, then I think the price range should be reconsidered, and I mean considered thoroughly. It is quite reasonable to judge the range of value for a bundle of products and give them a price that is higher than the most expensive single template, while maintaining the image of a stock marketplace that offers products at low and reasonable prices.
I’m not sure if I understood you right….. but what I guess is, do you mean that the prices on the Music Section are underpriced?
if so, it is not… $10 is the highest price of a track in the Music Section
in the Source Files Section the tracks are priced $10 – $40 because, like the Title says, the Source Files are included.. so it’s fully customizable and everything is adjustable with the right program/DAW… and btw the quality is higher on the Source Files Section because of that you can customize it, I think
it might be a bit confusing if you browse on the homepage…... IF I understood you wrong and you know that already, sorry for that.. I just wanted to help
Well, I kinda figured that source files were included with some of the downloads. ... Forget it. I’m just dumb.
@Daniel: I think you misunderstood him
@Ben: The reason that people sell bundles for less is the same reason in any buisiness, the more you buy the cheaper each individual thing you buy gets, and that is to tempt people to buy more, with the idea that they will be saving in the long run.
Obviously, the more files you fit in a pack, the more expensive that pack goes, until the reviewer will turn around say that there are two many products in this pack for the price limit on the envato marketplaces, and reject the item in question.
It’s part of an age-old marketing ploy, prety much any buisness has this some way or another.
Ok, can I translate? the over neutral and less hurt felling question posted by aw_shucks?
the problem appears to be that authors on audio jungle sells packs of files that are already present on the marketplace as individual items.
the question is now clear, is this a way to “kill” the other authors or not.
I don’t know what template aw_shucks and danielku are speaking about, the link provided shows me a pack that sell mp3 files.
good luck with your answer
ahh.. I excuse…. in my opinion Music Packs are an good oppurtunity for the buyer to get more songs for a budget price, and the author earns also more
I don’t see why those Packs would undercutting the other music here
- some people need only 1 or 2 songs
- people don’t buy a Pack if they didn’t need the most songs of the Pack
- if someone needs a special song for a vid he buys a masterpiece that fits perfect, not a Pack
just my opinion
I don’t even know which template…
BUT the files they sell in a pack that are already present on AJ… logically they can’t kill themself with their own files…......
I mean its their own choice of every author… if you want to sell your songs in a Package, do it… I don’t see the problem in this
All of the stuff you’re talking about I already know. Somehow, I just don’t understand a lot of it though. Most people don’t have software that allows them to edit songs. And the people who do usually have their own equipment for editing music, they create their own music with it. So, with that in mind, why would you sell a song for $10.00 to someone while they can go to the store or iTunes and buy a whole album for that amount? If the songs are being sold just to be listened to, granted not all them are especially for that, but say the ones that are being sold just for listening, wouldn’t it be a smarter move to reduce the prices? A high potential music file being sold at $1-$3 would sell at a higher rate, make more sales, and overall, if it meets its potential, would generate more revenue for the sellers. JUST like flash, there is a big problem with quality. I’m an example of that. That means low potential earnings because my files don’t deserve much in return for what they have to offer. I also see a lot of over-population. Dude, I saw a member with 111 files and most of them have either no sales or only 1 or 2 sales. But if there were more files that reflect that more time was spent on them to increase the quality and potential, then those file’s would achieve more success. And the argument that an author deserves to earn money for his hard work… just bogus. Then if that were the case, albums would be sold at a much higher price. I’m talking $140.00 average price for one album if there were 14 songs on that album.
I’m addressing the problems. I’ll get to my point soon. These stock marketplaces need files that can be customized to make each purchased product individually diverse with each individual customization. I’m thinking of quitting because I can’t even think of anything like that. I have nothing to offer. There is only ONE file I can think of that offers a true diversification as a customizable product—Vector Flower’s banner rotator. While other files offer awesome functionality, his file is truly, in the essence of the word for a stock flash file, “customizable”. You can create literally just about tens or hundreds of different variants of the same product’s features. I think these marketplaces need more things that can do that. That is what these bundles and their prices should be considered for.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention plainly, Quality.
ok I understand it now…... or maybe not
you know.. I can’t steer the quality, as well as you and others, I think we agree on that.. only reviewers could change that… I also know that my loops are not the best example… you might know it, but I can say and assure you 100%, I know a Bunch of people that made music for AJ that is outstanding, top quality, unique and top notch, and also sell very well….. and why not to buy music on iTunes? you can’t buy “instrumentals” there and as well not in that quality… and you can’t get on iTunes those licenses you have on AJ, normally the music in here is stock audio and royalty free music… so its not worth just listening to this music!!
I don’t understand the part where you said: “A high potential music file being sold at $1-$3 would sell at a higher rate, make more sales, and overall, if it meets its potential, would generate more revenue for the sellers.”
our prices for music on AJ was low in the beginning, it was too low… it would be not worth to move your finger, IF you sell a song with a duration of 3:00 for only $3….. maybe I would stop selling if that would be come true and many others
Then so would everyone on iTunes that sell their songs for 99 cents and albums for $9.00. And I can buy high quality instrumentals on iTunes. Have you ever heard of Aphex Twin? I got his high quality instrumentals on iTunes. Music IS for listening.
Music wasn’t my only reason for this post. It was also about the overabundance of files that are too easy to generate and have less worth than what is demanded by the consumer. But I’m just looking at fish in a barrel. So what would I know?
I know that this place is an equal opportunity company. So, if anyone would have said that from the beginning, I guess I would have apologized for wasting my time. ... Might as well do it anyway. Sorry for mentioning things that don’t matter.