Can you please raise the minimum price to be competitive? Rinky-dink sites aside, the lowest minimum out there is $99 and that does not buy exclusive rights!
Pretty please?
Store
Find and purchase an exclusive, unique and professional logo now. Customization for your name is included in the price. Read more
Contests
Post Contest
Post a logo contest for our designers around the world and receive dozens of options within just 10 days or less. Read more
61 Comments
Yes! At $75.00 a designer only nets $51.75 after SL's cut and Paypal deduction. That's kind of insulting.
Besides being a ridiculous payment to the designer, it really sets an unrealistic expectation for the buyer that a logo could or should be bought for $75 and makes for harder sales of more appropriately priced designs. Exclusive rights, customization, approved vector files, artists time and talent... that's a lot of value and the minimum price should reflect that value.
Nancy, I could not have said it better.
Very well put!
Maybe we should raise the minimum price?
that would be awesome!
If you raise the minimum price to $99, would this be retroactive? Would all 1024 logos that are priced between $75 and $98 be raised to $99 to comply to the new minimum price?
Thanks,
Spintherism.
We could force all cheaper logos to become $99.
For some ppl 99 dollar is what they get in a month, and others earn it in a hour....i guess thats the problem why people make it so cheap.
This is a good idea to increase the minimum price of logos but at the same time, i think the standard of logo designs should also be a little more strict and some filtering is also possible in this regard.
+10 points to this idea ! :)
I subscribe!
Personally I think the minimum should be at least $150 - it's still below direct competitions' mins ($300, $250 for exclusive rights.) I also think that there should more ability to sort and filter. Search results return newest designs and only 20 on each page - this can make it difficult for some very desirable designs to never get seen. I know this is something Ivan is working on - hopefully soon we'll see some better tools for buyers to find logos!
agree!!!!!!!!!!!
Does the competition have tiered pricing for exclusive vs. non-exclusive rights? If so, why would anybody want a non-exclusive logo?
Yep. $99 for non-exclusive, add $199 more for exclusive. I'd assume that no intentions to trademark or affordability would be two reasons for non-exclusivity.
nancy when you say exclusive rights that means that the designer loses his creation rights?
In non-exclusive the designer retains rights, the buyer buys a license to use the design. If a design has sold once as non-exclusive, it's no longer sold as exclusive.
With exclusive rights sales, the designer sells all rights to the design to the buyer.
You mean that the designer cannot claim that he created the logo?
Typically the designer is allowed to display a sold logo in his portfolio (just as you would with a client's logo) - that doesn't mean that the designer owns rights, it's just that he's permitted to display it.
There are times when a client or buyer will request that the designer not display the logo. This is why some designs are hidden after purchase.
I guess this term (displaying the logo into my portfolio) is defined in a Logo transfer of rights?
I've seen non exclusive logos for sale at $30! A logo should always be exclusive, otherwise it's just paid clipart. I welcome the rise in minimum sale price but I would start at $99. let's not push clients away.
Why only $99? The competition is 2 to 3 times that.
That's upto the competition to do so, it doesn't mean they are right. They probably sell less. If you put all your own logos at a $150 minimum then that's fine, but why should everyone else? Just look at the amount of logos that sell for less than $150.
I can see your point Nancy but we are not all professional designers here, some do it for a hobby.
SL is a business and should cater to professionals - both designer and client. There are industry standards that should be considered. If the min price is set too low so as to accommodate hobbiests it unfair to those of us who do this for a living, who've invested time and money into our craft as well as to those who have some of the best works published here.
The average price of the last 20 logos sold was $200 and nearly 1/3 of those sales were sold for $150 - it doesn't seem like a stretch or something that would drag sales down to set a reasonable min. It might might benefit SL both in profit as well as buyer satisfaction.
Sorry I don't agree. If you want that minimum then you set your own prices. Yes SL is a business, I'm a business too but that's in my spare time which is why I'm a hobbiest business. I work full time in a different job.
I think it's good to have different business attitudes, (edit. other competition) have there minimum but also take more of the sale price, they are also a bit more strict on submissions. They cater for middle of the road type companies. That's there business attitude. SL caters for a different client base, the mobile hairdresser down the road is not gonna pay $200 / £120 just on a logo, I know I've spoken to and done business with these types of business. I've tried explaining what goes into to it, what it's use is and why branding and identity cost but those types of business are not interested, if they were they would consult a proper design agency and not buying stock.
Stepping up to $99 is the first step, SL doesn't want to out price those start ups. Like I said if you want to set a $150 minimum that's your choice. To be honest none of my logos are that low because that's my choice.
That hairdresser's budget affords her a non-exclusive rights logo, not full rights. We buy what we can afford. Many businesses start off using clipart etc but then when they have grown they invest more in a trademark-able design. I don't lower my rates because a hairdresser can't afford me. She's not my target client - my target client can afford me - and the target client on SL does in fact spend an average of $200.
I understand that SL is designed to hit a broader clientele than other sites. That doesn't mean it shouldn't have bottom lines that match both SL business model and the industry. If other sites' minimums are $250-300 (the $300 site offering no better or worse logos than SL) then it's not a stretch to think that $150 is still a bargain price yet sets reasonable expectation of price range here.
That's fine don't lower your prices, keep them high that's your choice but why should anyone else because you say so? It's up to the designer, it doesn't affect you if I sell a logo for $100.
What I'm saying is let up it a bit and see what happens? Start with $99 then if it's needed then take it up again.
I agree with Nancy. The minimum price should be $150.
Although my line for work is closely related (Digital Graphics Technician), I only do logos as a creative outlet, not as a business. I find it annoying when I see a logo selling for $50 or $75, I think it does affect designers' morale. Maybe it's just because I've worked for some the the largest advertising firms in Canada for 28 years, and saw clients paying $2000 minimum (usually well over that), to have logos designed.
If clients want ultra-cheap logos they can advertise (for free) on Craigslist. People who feel like designing logos for $75 or less, can pick up on those jobs.
Let's do it. $150 minimum!
Comparing SL to design and studio agency work is ridiculous. This is a stock site. The whole logo and identity design process is completely different to bespoke agency work. Prime example is I've just done some work for a 230pp brochure for a busy large format litho printers. I charged £15 an hour for it. If they went with the studio it would of been £60 an hour. £45 an hour less for the same result, the artwork was done, I just had to do some amendments and supply back single page print ready PDFs.
$150 IS a reasonable minimum but I think it would result in less sales. Just my opinion. As a business which SL is, I'd rather sell 10 @ $100 than 4 @ $150!
I have no logos at $100 by the way, if I do pls let me know so I can change them.
Hi Nancy,
I agree, but the competition on various sites, not to mention the freelancer sites, are going down with the logo prices drastically.
There are lot of people who want to work on logo design for 30-50$ (and less) and this brings this minimum price threshold on SL to the slippery spot...
Yes, the work quality of those people is questionable - but most of the clients do not care much if they have an original design or some clip-art "cocktail"...
The reason for that is that the large percentage of clients are not educated enough what the logo really is... all they are looking for is to get a "nice looking sign" for a minimum price ... sadly, but true.
Do I want to get more for my logos?
Yes, no question about it - but we have to be careful not to create a bad reputation to SL site in a sense of becoming a too-pricey on-line service...
BTW - I'm interested - could you pls. write what are the sites who have larger price-threshold then SL.
Thank you!
sooooo true!
I agree, that site needs an advanced search.
Ivan, do you use "Views taxonomy selective filter" module or "Advanced search" module? or any other module, so that people can search for tags?
It would be better to create a taxonomy vocabulary "Price" and make the tag Price range (99$ -150$, 151$ -250$ ... etc). Then customers will be able to seek sighting.
Standard of living varies in different countries, the U.S. prices look great in Nepal and Russia, for example. I think, better search engine will help solve the problem of "abandoned" logos.
Just a note to artists of all sorts: Lowering your price does not make your work more appealing. It makes people think you think it's not good.
I really don't like the "non exclusive" rights idea for the logos! I do agree for the minimum price to be raised, at least to 150$
I didn't mean to seem like I was suggesting a non-exclusive option, I was only trying to make a point that the competition has a higher price point for a lesser product.
no prob. Nancy....no harm done :)
I agree with Nancy.
Personally I don't consider offers below 200$ and don't participate in contests with prizes under 200$.
However 150$ might be a good starting point... No offence but $75/$99 is for Hobbyists and makeshift designers...
Exactly! I couldn't agree more.
Agree
Not even for hobbyists !!!!
It comes down to choice, just set your prices and it doesn't matter about the minimum does it?.
I'm a hobbyist but I can quite easily mix with the so called professionals here mate. In fact true pros say no to spec!
We all do realize that we set our own prices.
If you go into $1 Up store and find a $15 item, you are like whoah! Go into a $10+ store, and the same item was $15 it'd seem reasonable. With the min price set so low, the *perceived cost* is much higher because the expectation is so low.
I think $99 is a reasonable starting point, any higher would price some clients out and reduce sales, bad times. It's stock after all, these logos are not crafted individual bespoke company logos where you have done all the ground work about the company before even putting a rough sketch/idea down on paper. Sometimes you never know what the company is!
Briefs are totally different and should have a minimum of at least $200. The work that goes into this kind of work is more involved.
I've been following this discusion for a while and i am so amazed how you complain about something that even doesn't bother you. You say you have no logos priced $100 but you don't want the minimum price to be that "big". Then why you are against the raising the price when this won't affect your pricing and eventual sales? Are you here for the fun or something? Don't you have a social life insted of losing your time posting seamless comments on this site? If the price looks big to you go ot freelancer and find thosands of logo projects for $20 and you will be happy. Don't you understand that this ridicilous price of $100 affects on the other prices - recently i designer a logo for one the briefs here and i got post from the client to reduce the price comparing to the others. You see - he thinks my price is high because he has offers for $200 but what he doesn't know is that on other places for this price he won't be able even to post his brief to start getting designs and on top of that for this price he won't get anything but a clipart from "quick money designers". You say you work for $15 when an agency charges $60 - well if i will work for $1 will you compete my price or leave simply because it's not worth it? So stop complaining and if the prices here doesn't work for you find a cheaper place.
I'm not complaining mate I'm purely saying there will be less sales. I'm done with it.
R: "It comes down to choice, just set your prices and it doesn't matter about the minimum does it?."
No, it doesn't. Policy of low prices turn away talented designers. Also low Quality logos (sold at those prices) turn away talented designers. Do you understand this ? Yes, maybe some clients (e.g. street workshop) and hobbyist designers are happy to go with this policy, but are we sure this is the way for SL ? Ask yourself why the majority of talented designers aren't here (see for example the wonderful works present on LogoPond or Dribble).
If I see that SL primarily sells $100 logos (let's say 90% of the total), it's clear that I cannot compete with them so I have to leave.
R: "I'm a hobbyist but I can quite easily mix with the so called professionals here mate."
No, you're wrong mate. No offence, but you cannot compete with people that spend all their time and live for graphic. Maybe on StockLogos where the quality is low at the moment, but just here.
R: "In fact true pros say no to spec!"
No, again. I think it's a personal choice. Today there are contests that award +1000$ prizes. It's a good way to fill spare time, isn't ?
Sorry but you're talking crap mate. Those talented designers refuse point blank to sell their work here because it's classed as spec. End of.
Let's say that those talented logo designers you speak of decided to come here and sell their work for +$1,000. How long would SL last as a business? How many logos would SL sell a month? 1? 2? Would the briefs section work? Maybe, but would have certainly less Clients for the briefs.
I can't compete with the pros? No offense to yourself but from what I've seen it's clear you're not a pro. If you are, then I'm already competing better than you fair. ;)
Low prices doesn't necessarily mean low standard in logo design either. The Nike swoosh only cost $35!
There needs to be a happy medium and gradually upping the minimum is the better way of doing things to see how the business changes with it.
Concerning the Nike swoosh, you have to consider all the variables: Adjustment for inflation, the fact that the designer was fresh out of school and other further developments.
In 1971, Carolyn Davidson was a graphic design student willing to do some design work for $2 an hour. If we adjust for inflation, this would be about $12 an hour in 2012. Later, fresh out of school, she billed Phil Knight a total of $35 for the Nike swoosh. Again, if we adjust for inflation, this would be over $200 in 2012. Also, don't forget that in 1983, she was given a gold swoosh ring embedded with a diamond and an undisclosed amount of Nike stock!
So, the Nike swoosh final cost would probably be in the five (or six) digits vicinity... ;o)
Further reading: Nike swoosh origin (archived capture of nike.com, 2007)
Peace,
Spintherism.
This has gone completely off track here, I think if something is not broken, then don't fix it. Tinkering around with too many changes all at once you're not going to know if a particular change has worked.
Maybe let's wait for the changes that are already on the table and then put this forward?? Start at bringing it up to $99, see what happens, then up to $129, then $150?
Thanks for the interesting facts about Nike, spentherism.
Maybe set minimum price to $150 and allow bidding to as low as $99 if people choose to enable that? Could be a good compromise.
What a clever solution!! :D
+1
Thank you. I suggested this in the hopes of avoiding further argument as both sides have valid points. I personally am all for the higher price but I like to look at issues from all angles. ;)
Great solution! I'm all for higher prices too, I'd be daft not to be! I just think there should be a way to involve all prospective clients, maybe this is it?
What are yourthoughts Ivan?
Ivan, if you do decide to raise the min, can you give us some warning? there are a few I might want to buy at the $75 price!
I agree that even $99 is too low. As a freelancer, I have to pay taxes, health insurance, internet, trade association, software, etc. $200 is my absolute minimum on contest sites, and I prefer to go for $300 and up - considering that on SL, I still have to pay commission... there is no way I could ever compete with $99. After SL commission, that's less than my hourly rate.
Then again, I don't want to, either - I prefer to be in good company with other great designers than in a bargain bin. Basically the same reason I am selling on iStock, not Shutterstock - higher standards, great community, acceptable pricing.
Then again, my opinion might not carry all that much weight, since I am only giving SL a try for now. :)
Sell quite so many logos to 75?
I think not ... I think we should leave this amount is attractive once a client enter to find a logo at 75$ and buy one to 150.
Price 100 should be a minimum for briefs for as long as the customer pays a deposit of 100$.
Iam happy with the 150 as min. price.
What is youre thought Ivan?
agreed, $150 should be the lowest price for a logo on the site...it would set the standard a little higher and give a little more credibility.