One of the difficult things about the ongoing PayPal censorship saga is determining how much of a monetary loss this is going to create for the writers. Now presuming that the writers of the Forbidden Four are doing it for money, this is a very important question.
There are some who believe that writers of the Forbidden Four write this type of stuff because they are perverts. This is wrong. Working writers drift to the fields that result in paychecks and royalties. Let's be honest--the first time, I realized that someone had to be getting a paycheck to write was when I encountered a letter magazine devoted to one of the Forbidden Four. The only reason I ever considered writing the Forbidden Four was all about the MONEY.
So how does one figure out how much of a financial loss that writers of the Forbidden Four are going to suffer now that PayPal has decided that they can no longer write and sell this type of material while using PayPal's services. (And yes, there are other payment options---they are just not good payment options.)
Let's take a look at a writer who was relatively new to writing in the Forbidden Four ebook market and what type of loss she suffered. Her entire stock of the Forbidden Four consisted of five stories (two were reprints), and they were only involved in this market for two quarters (six months).
If she would have sold these five stories in the print market, she would have recieved 50 to 125 dollars for the material, provided that all would have been accepted. If we look at her quarterly earnings (and ignore the fact that she just started to supplement her regular writing in this field), her quarterly loss was 55 to 80 dollars (presuming no gain in future quarters and no new stock added).
Of course, PayPal would love to argue that the loss in income stops right here. But it does not.
For one thing, a single quarter is not the entire commerical life span of an ebook. So what is the commerical life span of an ebook? One year? Five years? Ten years? Or more?
In the space of a year, the loss in income is somewhere between 220 and 320 dollars. Over ten years, presuming no drop in sales, this is someplace between 2200 and 3200 dollars.
And the writer was planning on doing more of this type of work...clear up to the second that PayPal steeped in and denied her this income source. So we are looking at a monetary loss of anywhere from fifty to three thousand plus for someone who only lost five ebooks (short stories really) to this PayPal policy change. But the real loss cannot be figured out because we can never be sure how much this writer would have written in this field in future years. (Their goal was to continue adding stock until they did not need to flip burgers any more---good move PayPal, we must keep people in their burger flipping jobs.)
Showing posts with label economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economics. Show all posts
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Money rules PayPal censorship
The Smashwords PayPal censorship saga continues...much to my surprise.
One of the strangest ideas that I have seen being floated is that this is merely a ploy by Smashwords to get rid of all those "icky" books. The person who said this obviously does not realize that economics is driving this particular situation. If Smashwords actually just wanted to make the forbidden four disappear, they could have easily done so long before this point. But I imagine that Smashwords, like most indie writers sooner or later, realizes that some dubious books actually make a decent amount of money. And considering that Smashwords makes their money by taking a percentage of the money a writer earns, it does not make any sense for them to kill the forbidden four (at least one of the forbidden four is a gold mine).
On the other hand, PayPal has every reason to want to kill off the forbidden four. After all, PayPal is trying to run their business as cheaply as they can. And the forbidden four generate more costs than other types of transactions.
One thing that I have yet to locate is an actual figure for the percentage of returns/chargebacks that there is for ebooks. In fact, I cannot think of a single outlet that gives refunds on ebooks. Then again, I never thought about claiming that my ebook purchases were a mistake, fraud, or "not to my taste." Honestly, I am not sure that ebooks, even the forbidden four, really create more chargebacks than the normal stuff, like food and gas.
But Morgan, what about the two romance outlets that killed off the forbidden four. Well, one of the outlets killed off ALL indie writers using the forbidden four as an excuse, then left all their own in-house stuff with the forbidden four up. And the other one wasn't someplace I would have thought about looking for the forbidden four on in the first place. So I am guessing that the forbidden four were not earning that much money for those two outlets--at least, in the hands of indie writers.
And if you think Amazon counts, well, go over on Amazon and search for the forbidden four. Amazon is still knee deep in the forbidden four; the only real change is that Amazon has managed to get rid of their legal responsibility if the s*** hits the fan.
Of course, if you do not think that economics do not drive the engines of censorship attempts, just watch the matchup between One Million Moms and Toys R' Us. “Please remove all the same-sex ‘Just Married – Archie’ comic books immediately from your shelves. My decision to shop in your stores depends on it.” Whether Toys R' Us pulls the issue from sale will depend on whether they think that conservative moms outweigh the same-sex marriage rights market share--whoever represents a bigger slice of pie will win that battle.
(I find it interesting that there is research showing that the most conservative regions of the United States consume the most porn--I am guessing that they also consume the most forbidden four erotica also.)
And that brings me to tonight's final point about the Smashwords PayPal censorship saga: The only way that PayPal will allow the forbidden four to exist will be if PayPal discovers that they will lose more money getting rid of the forbidden categories than they will save. Money talks when it comes to corporate censorship.
One of the strangest ideas that I have seen being floated is that this is merely a ploy by Smashwords to get rid of all those "icky" books. The person who said this obviously does not realize that economics is driving this particular situation. If Smashwords actually just wanted to make the forbidden four disappear, they could have easily done so long before this point. But I imagine that Smashwords, like most indie writers sooner or later, realizes that some dubious books actually make a decent amount of money. And considering that Smashwords makes their money by taking a percentage of the money a writer earns, it does not make any sense for them to kill the forbidden four (at least one of the forbidden four is a gold mine).
On the other hand, PayPal has every reason to want to kill off the forbidden four. After all, PayPal is trying to run their business as cheaply as they can. And the forbidden four generate more costs than other types of transactions.
One thing that I have yet to locate is an actual figure for the percentage of returns/chargebacks that there is for ebooks. In fact, I cannot think of a single outlet that gives refunds on ebooks. Then again, I never thought about claiming that my ebook purchases were a mistake, fraud, or "not to my taste." Honestly, I am not sure that ebooks, even the forbidden four, really create more chargebacks than the normal stuff, like food and gas.
But Morgan, what about the two romance outlets that killed off the forbidden four. Well, one of the outlets killed off ALL indie writers using the forbidden four as an excuse, then left all their own in-house stuff with the forbidden four up. And the other one wasn't someplace I would have thought about looking for the forbidden four on in the first place. So I am guessing that the forbidden four were not earning that much money for those two outlets--at least, in the hands of indie writers.
And if you think Amazon counts, well, go over on Amazon and search for the forbidden four. Amazon is still knee deep in the forbidden four; the only real change is that Amazon has managed to get rid of their legal responsibility if the s*** hits the fan.
Of course, if you do not think that economics do not drive the engines of censorship attempts, just watch the matchup between One Million Moms and Toys R' Us. “Please remove all the same-sex ‘Just Married – Archie’ comic books immediately from your shelves. My decision to shop in your stores depends on it.” Whether Toys R' Us pulls the issue from sale will depend on whether they think that conservative moms outweigh the same-sex marriage rights market share--whoever represents a bigger slice of pie will win that battle.
(I find it interesting that there is research showing that the most conservative regions of the United States consume the most porn--I am guessing that they also consume the most forbidden four erotica also.)
And that brings me to tonight's final point about the Smashwords PayPal censorship saga: The only way that PayPal will allow the forbidden four to exist will be if PayPal discovers that they will lose more money getting rid of the forbidden categories than they will save. Money talks when it comes to corporate censorship.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Depression
 |
| When cats get depressed. |
The stress of college and the joys of senior year has combined with a small student loan problem to create a perfect storm of depression. Of course, my genetics and childhood programming does not help. And I have gotten to the point that I am not even eating out of the vending machines...which would be good, except that I am generally not eating; even vending machine food is better than no food at all.
All this depression is having an effect on my school work, as well as my writing.
Thanks to the depression and my empty wallet, I have considered dropping out of college to increase the liklihood of getting a job. For some reason, employers do not want to consider anyone who is not available 24/7---especially in the only types of work that I am qualified for (restaurant and retail).
I need a piece of paper to be able to get a real job, but I need a real job to make sure that I survive long enourgh to get the piece of paper. It is a rather wicked little Catch-22 that I am stuck in. (By "real job" I mean one that does require me to drop out of school for minimum wage.)
And today on Facebook, I discovered a new twist. One of my Facebook friends (a writer of Tarot and Wiccan material) recently took a "day job" to help make ends meet---and now, she has people thinking that she is no longer an occultist or an author anymore.
Seriously?! I have never understood the idea that if you are an occult writer, or at least a real one, that you cannot have a day job. Given how small occult book sales are, one automatically needs a day job, or another type of writing gig, to support oneself. It is the reason that I occasionally write other type of stuff under another penname---I like to get paid occasionally.
Anyways, I am hoping that my depression lifts soon. That and the problem with my student loan is fixed. Otherwise, I am going to have to start cruising the LolCats sites to cheer myself up...and that is even worse for my schoolwork and writing than the depression is.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Mathematics of Expertise
Today, I was reading a post over on FreelanceFolder on The Mathematics of Freelancing. Laura Spencer was talking about what I refer to as "critical mass equations"---those times when in order to make the happy buck, one has to send off a ton of stuff. Spencer was also talking about good bookkeeping practices---something that a lot of freelancers seem to ignore.
To the examples that she mentioned, I would also add "mathematics of expertise." This is how to figure out when it is cheaper to pick up the phone and call an expert in to do a job that you can do yourself.
It is something that I learned from my father. He was a big DIYer (do-it-yourself-er). But every once in awhile, he would pay someone else to do a task for him.
For the record, I am not a big DIYer. I am sort-of a kluntz. There is also the fact that I have no desire to know how to fix my own car---not that I own a car---but all men in my family are supposed to know how to fix one. There are a lot of things that I have no desire to learn how to fix.
For instance, one of my father-in-laws (my wife's biological father) believes that I should invest in some tools and do all the plumbing repairs that homeowners eventually need to do. In his mind, I should not be picking up the phone and calling in a plumber to do the job for me.
I disagree.
There is actually math involved in my reasoning for doing this.
When you add up all the time, it takes me to figure out what DIY book to read, the time it takes me to go to the hardware store, the time it takes me to screw up the first attempt to fix the problem, the time it takes me to figure out what the bloody hell I did wrong (sorry about swearing there), the second trip to the hardware store, plus the time to redo the job and hopefully finally get it right, when you add up all that time and grief, and compare it to the amount that I make as a freelancer, you discover something important.
I almost always lose more income than I saved by doing the job myself.
An actual expert not only can do the job quicker, and get it actually done right, than I; but they can do it for a cheaper price than the amount of income I would lose if I attempted to do the job myself.
For me, that is something inportant to know. After all, in my family, men are supposed to do all the repairs and never call in an expert to do it for them.
And as a freelancer, the logic extends to editing, advertising, etc.
Honestly, I would rather pay the experts to do their job while I focus on the area of my expertise. And that is why I will never be considered a "real man" by my father-in-law.
To the examples that she mentioned, I would also add "mathematics of expertise." This is how to figure out when it is cheaper to pick up the phone and call an expert in to do a job that you can do yourself.
It is something that I learned from my father. He was a big DIYer (do-it-yourself-er). But every once in awhile, he would pay someone else to do a task for him.
For the record, I am not a big DIYer. I am sort-of a kluntz. There is also the fact that I have no desire to know how to fix my own car---not that I own a car---but all men in my family are supposed to know how to fix one. There are a lot of things that I have no desire to learn how to fix.
For instance, one of my father-in-laws (my wife's biological father) believes that I should invest in some tools and do all the plumbing repairs that homeowners eventually need to do. In his mind, I should not be picking up the phone and calling in a plumber to do the job for me.
I disagree.
There is actually math involved in my reasoning for doing this.
When you add up all the time, it takes me to figure out what DIY book to read, the time it takes me to go to the hardware store, the time it takes me to screw up the first attempt to fix the problem, the time it takes me to figure out what the bloody hell I did wrong (sorry about swearing there), the second trip to the hardware store, plus the time to redo the job and hopefully finally get it right, when you add up all that time and grief, and compare it to the amount that I make as a freelancer, you discover something important.
I almost always lose more income than I saved by doing the job myself.
An actual expert not only can do the job quicker, and get it actually done right, than I; but they can do it for a cheaper price than the amount of income I would lose if I attempted to do the job myself.
For me, that is something inportant to know. After all, in my family, men are supposed to do all the repairs and never call in an expert to do it for them.
And as a freelancer, the logic extends to editing, advertising, etc.
Honestly, I would rather pay the experts to do their job while I focus on the area of my expertise. And that is why I will never be considered a "real man" by my father-in-law.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Surfing with the trends
One of the causes for spikes in my online earnings as a writer is when I just happen to have a piece that is related to a hot news story and people start suddenly reading my content; in other words, I managed to get lucky to be a part of the websurfing trend.
Such earnings tend to be short-lived, but they are interesting to experience.
There are three ways to get involved in such trends.
One is to be a really fast writer, and keep up with the news. I tend not to be in that category, though I did write a personal comment on Flight 1404 when it ran into trouble a couple of weeks ago. I am a college student after all; most of my writing is done between classes without any internet or media access.
The second way is to predict what is coming up in the news. I am more in this category than the previous one. Like for instance, I suspected that today's unemployment news was going to be bad. Therefore, I wrote a piece about how unemployment is defined.
(If you ask me, I believe the official reports are unstating the problem. After all, I am a discouraged worker [unemployed but no longer looking for a job]; how many more are actually out there?)
But let's be honest, all of us could have made that prediction.
The third way, which is my personal long term plan, is just to have a variety of articles online. I am in the process of creating articles in categories I have no articles in yet; another reason for the set of unemployment articles that I am writing.
The reason that I lean towards the last option, besides time restrictions, is that most surfers are using a search engine to find items of interest to them. So if an article has not been indexed yet by a search engine (Google seems to be the main way for people to find my stuff), then no one is going to find it. Most of the traffic on the article sites, such as Helium and Associated Content are coming from search engines and not internal traffic.
I just hope that my unemployment article has been indexed already, so that I get some surfing income from that one.
Such earnings tend to be short-lived, but they are interesting to experience.
There are three ways to get involved in such trends.
One is to be a really fast writer, and keep up with the news. I tend not to be in that category, though I did write a personal comment on Flight 1404 when it ran into trouble a couple of weeks ago. I am a college student after all; most of my writing is done between classes without any internet or media access.
The second way is to predict what is coming up in the news. I am more in this category than the previous one. Like for instance, I suspected that today's unemployment news was going to be bad. Therefore, I wrote a piece about how unemployment is defined.
(If you ask me, I believe the official reports are unstating the problem. After all, I am a discouraged worker [unemployed but no longer looking for a job]; how many more are actually out there?)
But let's be honest, all of us could have made that prediction.
The third way, which is my personal long term plan, is just to have a variety of articles online. I am in the process of creating articles in categories I have no articles in yet; another reason for the set of unemployment articles that I am writing.
The reason that I lean towards the last option, besides time restrictions, is that most surfers are using a search engine to find items of interest to them. So if an article has not been indexed yet by a search engine (Google seems to be the main way for people to find my stuff), then no one is going to find it. Most of the traffic on the article sites, such as Helium and Associated Content are coming from search engines and not internal traffic.
I just hope that my unemployment article has been indexed already, so that I get some surfing income from that one.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Money in science fiction
I started out wanting to be a science fiction writer. There are still days when I dabble in it, mainly those days when I am sitting in class trying to figure out how I am going to get hired by anyone with a degree in literature.
A few years ago, I read an article about what you named the currency in science fiction indicated a lot about the economics of your fictional world. (I would love to be able to cite the author and title of the article, but it has slipped my mind completely.) The example from it that sticks in my head was the "Golden" which indicated a world that went back to the gold standard.
Today while reading the financial articles on MSN, I came across a term that a columnist has been using to describe our own monetary system: Xera.
The exact quote is:
Xera: The dollar is in need of a name change. Xera is a combination of: (a) Xerox -- for the piece of Xerox paper that it is, (b) lira, which in the past was one of the world's chronically weak currencies, and (c) most importantly, the fact that it sounds like zero. Which is ultimately where the Xera is headed.
The scary part is that it is true.
But I digress; it got me thinking about naming money in science fiction. What you name your money in science fiction says a lot about your world.
For instance, in Star Trek we do not hear much about money, at least in classic Star Trek. We know that flame gems and tribbles can be traded, and once we hear Scotty making a joke about his pay, but it was not until the Ferengi come along that we learn of latinum (something that can not be generated by a replicator; ahhh, no printing money for the Federation). There is something to be said about a society (Starfleet Command) where its members care more about starships than they do their paychecks.
In the TV series show The Prisoner, they had work units. The most important inhabitants of the Village, including Number Six, did not seem to work---exactly what that means is unknown to me.
Of course, we must not forget the most commonly used fuctional currency: the credit. Fictional is the sense that it really does not exist, despite the fact that we use it all the time at the shopping mall. Nevertheless, when it comes time to write my next science fiction story, I think that I am going to use the Xera. I hope that Bill Fleckenstein doesn't mind.
A few years ago, I read an article about what you named the currency in science fiction indicated a lot about the economics of your fictional world. (I would love to be able to cite the author and title of the article, but it has slipped my mind completely.) The example from it that sticks in my head was the "Golden" which indicated a world that went back to the gold standard.
Today while reading the financial articles on MSN, I came across a term that a columnist has been using to describe our own monetary system: Xera.
The exact quote is:
Xera: The dollar is in need of a name change. Xera is a combination of: (a) Xerox -- for the piece of Xerox paper that it is, (b) lira, which in the past was one of the world's chronically weak currencies, and (c) most importantly, the fact that it sounds like zero. Which is ultimately where the Xera is headed.
The scary part is that it is true.
But I digress; it got me thinking about naming money in science fiction. What you name your money in science fiction says a lot about your world.
For instance, in Star Trek we do not hear much about money, at least in classic Star Trek. We know that flame gems and tribbles can be traded, and once we hear Scotty making a joke about his pay, but it was not until the Ferengi come along that we learn of latinum (something that can not be generated by a replicator; ahhh, no printing money for the Federation). There is something to be said about a society (Starfleet Command) where its members care more about starships than they do their paychecks.
In the TV series show The Prisoner, they had work units. The most important inhabitants of the Village, including Number Six, did not seem to work---exactly what that means is unknown to me.
Of course, we must not forget the most commonly used fuctional currency: the credit. Fictional is the sense that it really does not exist, despite the fact that we use it all the time at the shopping mall. Nevertheless, when it comes time to write my next science fiction story, I think that I am going to use the Xera. I hope that Bill Fleckenstein doesn't mind.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
How much is exclusive (all rights) worth?
For those who missed it, there was a big flap today over on Associated Content. They made an announcement on the writer forum that they were no longer going to consider non-exclusive content for upfront payment. There was a lot of protesting, and by the time that you read this AC has changed their minds and decided to put this policy change off for awhile longer.
But it is coming; you can see the storm building over there. As time has gone on, AC has been rejecting more and more articles for upfront payment. You can still put them up for performance bonus (page view payment), but it has been getting harder to get them to cough up anything up front. Even when you are offering them exclusive rights (also known in the business as All Rights), it is getting harder to pry any upfront from them. And forget about getting a fair amount for anything (ten dollars is a really low all rights payment); even if you can crank out something in an hour, there is no way that their upfront offers will cover your time and energy.
Face it, economics has caught up to AC. They are hoping that decent writers will make enough from the performance bonus to stick around. And as it is they have a ton of writers flooding the stacks with stuff anyways. There are always new writers (unpublished and eager for that first byline) waiting to line up and write for them. It is only us established writers (those of us with more than one outlet for our work) who are going to bolt at the very idea that AC is trying to turn us into work for hire slaves.
Personally, I have already quit trying to get upfront payment for non-exclusive content from them. Outside of my first piece published there, I figure that anything I have used or plan on using elsewhere is off-limits when it comes to upfront payment. I use AC as a secondary income source for my work, not my primary one.
The only articles I consider giving them exclusive rights to are actually News (which are hard to sell on most websites unless you have a relationship already built) and those which felt into AC and that I can't think of any other place that I would ever use them. The problem with News, quite simply, is that it has a really short shelf life. The instant that it passes that point, and becomes no longer of interest, it will expire like month old fruit cake, forever on the web, but with earnings no longer coming from it. For instance, the last piece I offered to AC as an exclusive (Hillary Clinton speaks at Auraria Campus) was one that I figured could last until either the Democractic Convention this summer, or be dead in a couple of weeks. After all, it was political, things change there fast; and once a politician is out of the running, no one cares anymore.
On the other hand, I figure that an article about improving one's credit score will have some shelf life. And I can figure out more than one place to use it, so why offer it for upfront payment consideration; after all, I have to live with myself and I do have some ethics to my name. Besides for an non-exclusive, they are probably going to offer nothing; I can hit publish now and start generating page views from it.
AC and its content producers (writers) are both struggling with opportunity costs. AC realizes that they can focus on exclusive for upfront payment consideration and not lose much while the writers are realizing that the upfront payment on an exclusive is not worth the time that they spent writing the piece. It will be awhile, but we can expect to see more changes there as the supply and demand curves keep moving towards equilibrium.
But it is coming; you can see the storm building over there. As time has gone on, AC has been rejecting more and more articles for upfront payment. You can still put them up for performance bonus (page view payment), but it has been getting harder to get them to cough up anything up front. Even when you are offering them exclusive rights (also known in the business as All Rights), it is getting harder to pry any upfront from them. And forget about getting a fair amount for anything (ten dollars is a really low all rights payment); even if you can crank out something in an hour, there is no way that their upfront offers will cover your time and energy.
Face it, economics has caught up to AC. They are hoping that decent writers will make enough from the performance bonus to stick around. And as it is they have a ton of writers flooding the stacks with stuff anyways. There are always new writers (unpublished and eager for that first byline) waiting to line up and write for them. It is only us established writers (those of us with more than one outlet for our work) who are going to bolt at the very idea that AC is trying to turn us into work for hire slaves.
Personally, I have already quit trying to get upfront payment for non-exclusive content from them. Outside of my first piece published there, I figure that anything I have used or plan on using elsewhere is off-limits when it comes to upfront payment. I use AC as a secondary income source for my work, not my primary one.
The only articles I consider giving them exclusive rights to are actually News (which are hard to sell on most websites unless you have a relationship already built) and those which felt into AC and that I can't think of any other place that I would ever use them. The problem with News, quite simply, is that it has a really short shelf life. The instant that it passes that point, and becomes no longer of interest, it will expire like month old fruit cake, forever on the web, but with earnings no longer coming from it. For instance, the last piece I offered to AC as an exclusive (Hillary Clinton speaks at Auraria Campus) was one that I figured could last until either the Democractic Convention this summer, or be dead in a couple of weeks. After all, it was political, things change there fast; and once a politician is out of the running, no one cares anymore.
On the other hand, I figure that an article about improving one's credit score will have some shelf life. And I can figure out more than one place to use it, so why offer it for upfront payment consideration; after all, I have to live with myself and I do have some ethics to my name. Besides for an non-exclusive, they are probably going to offer nothing; I can hit publish now and start generating page views from it.
AC and its content producers (writers) are both struggling with opportunity costs. AC realizes that they can focus on exclusive for upfront payment consideration and not lose much while the writers are realizing that the upfront payment on an exclusive is not worth the time that they spent writing the piece. It will be awhile, but we can expect to see more changes there as the supply and demand curves keep moving towards equilibrium.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Falling behind on word count--blame college
Well, I am falling behind on word count something fierce this week. I only did 83 words yesterday and none the day before. I am not really surprised, after all this is my fifth semester of college and I knew how busy it was going to be walking into the month.
On the bright note, I turned in my economics paper yesterday, which means that after he grades it I should be able to pass the class even if I don't hand anything else in. And my political sciene paper is not due for a little over a week. My philosophy paper is going to be an easier one than the last one, so I should be able to get that one done in a timely manner. Sure, I have two books to read over the break, but what else is new?
Ultimately, I was planning on being behind on my word count going into this week; I didn't see any way around it. Now I am off to study for an astronomy test.
On the bright note, I turned in my economics paper yesterday, which means that after he grades it I should be able to pass the class even if I don't hand anything else in. And my political sciene paper is not due for a little over a week. My philosophy paper is going to be an easier one than the last one, so I should be able to get that one done in a timely manner. Sure, I have two books to read over the break, but what else is new?
Ultimately, I was planning on being behind on my word count going into this week; I didn't see any way around it. Now I am off to study for an astronomy test.
Friday, November 9, 2007
My best earning articles on Helium
One of the things I am doing for my Microeconomics term paper is to look at my own freelance writing; why not use my own business as a company to look at.
My very best earner, if you include income I earned from Associated Content for it also, is What is Golden Dawn (retitled A Brief History of Golden Dawn for AC). It did very well for me before they did away with the Occult Channel. Now, it only earns a few cents a month; I think it is because no one would look for it in its new channel, New Age Groups. Golden Dawn is not exactly New Age.
My second best earner, which at its current pace will surpass the Golden Dawn article is How to Flip a House. It has slowed down a little lately, due I presume to the mortage market.
My third best earner is The Importance of Teamwork in the Company. I am proud of it, for it has managed to stay in the top fourth of the articles under that title.
My fourth and sixth best earners are both in the Wicca and Witchcraft channel--in fact the articles are related to one another: How to start your own Wiccan Book of Shadows and An introduction to the Wiccan Book of Shadows.
My fifth best earner is a TV review of Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader. I think the reason for its high earnings is the fact that the title made the Helium homepage a couple of times this year, including once when mine was the highest rated article under that title.
My seventh is a Golden Dawn article listed under the Wicca and Witchcraft channel, The Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram--I am not happy with that placement, but there is nothing I can do about it.
All of these articles, except for the last one have earned me at least a dollar this year. The Pentagram ritual article is currently at 91 cents, so it may break a dollar this year.
If I could write more articles that make a dollar or more a year on Helium (the real estate article is only six months old, and has earned me $2.24 so far this year), I would be very happy.
My very best earner, if you include income I earned from Associated Content for it also, is What is Golden Dawn (retitled A Brief History of Golden Dawn for AC). It did very well for me before they did away with the Occult Channel. Now, it only earns a few cents a month; I think it is because no one would look for it in its new channel, New Age Groups. Golden Dawn is not exactly New Age.
My second best earner, which at its current pace will surpass the Golden Dawn article is How to Flip a House. It has slowed down a little lately, due I presume to the mortage market.
My third best earner is The Importance of Teamwork in the Company. I am proud of it, for it has managed to stay in the top fourth of the articles under that title.
My fourth and sixth best earners are both in the Wicca and Witchcraft channel--in fact the articles are related to one another: How to start your own Wiccan Book of Shadows and An introduction to the Wiccan Book of Shadows.
My fifth best earner is a TV review of Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader. I think the reason for its high earnings is the fact that the title made the Helium homepage a couple of times this year, including once when mine was the highest rated article under that title.
My seventh is a Golden Dawn article listed under the Wicca and Witchcraft channel, The Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram--I am not happy with that placement, but there is nothing I can do about it.
All of these articles, except for the last one have earned me at least a dollar this year. The Pentagram ritual article is currently at 91 cents, so it may break a dollar this year.
If I could write more articles that make a dollar or more a year on Helium (the real estate article is only six months old, and has earned me $2.24 so far this year), I would be very happy.
Friday, October 26, 2007
To delay payment or not
Today, on MyLot, I responded to a discussion about whether or not, someone should raise their payout from the standard ten dollars to a higher amount (ex. twenty-five).
Now, due to my experience running a business (a restraurant in a chain), I approach it from the viewpoint of a business owner. Being in a second economics class this semester just amplifies that tendency.
Personally, I set all of my payouts (the amount that one must earn before a company mails you a check or paypals you) to the lowest possible amount whenever I have a chance. It is my money, and I want it in my grubby hands as soon as possible.
And not just because I am a straving college student either.
If one has earned enourgh to make payout, and rises the amount of their payout threshold, what happens? The company that owes you the money holds it in their bank account. Standard business practice is for this account to be an interest bearing account. I watched my bosses depositing money into their bank as quick as they could, and then take as long as possible to pay their expenses (labor, rent, suppliers, etc.). This practice earned them a lot of interest income off of money that rightfully belonged to other people.
Paid to post sites, and other online work sites, want you to raise your payout amount. They give you the option because it benefits them. It is not for your convenience; it is for theirs. They hope that you set your payout thresholds to a higher amount, so that they can hold your money longer and earn interest off of it. Essentially by setting your payout threshold to anything above the minimum, you are giving them a free loan.
(The other type of free loan that people are fond of doing is to have more money withhold from their paychecks than necessary--yes, a big income tax return is nice, but why give the government an interest free loan. If you want to loan the government money, invest in government bonds instead.)
The only time when rising your payout threshold makes sense is when it is close to the end of the business year and you are trying to avoid slipping over into a higher tax bracket. And that is a very rare situation for most of us--so do yourself a favor, collect your money as soon as you can and deposit it in your own saving account.
After all, the money is going to be earning interest anyways, so why shouldn't it be you that collects it?
To Join MyLot, click here.
Now, due to my experience running a business (a restraurant in a chain), I approach it from the viewpoint of a business owner. Being in a second economics class this semester just amplifies that tendency.
Personally, I set all of my payouts (the amount that one must earn before a company mails you a check or paypals you) to the lowest possible amount whenever I have a chance. It is my money, and I want it in my grubby hands as soon as possible.
And not just because I am a straving college student either.
If one has earned enourgh to make payout, and rises the amount of their payout threshold, what happens? The company that owes you the money holds it in their bank account. Standard business practice is for this account to be an interest bearing account. I watched my bosses depositing money into their bank as quick as they could, and then take as long as possible to pay their expenses (labor, rent, suppliers, etc.). This practice earned them a lot of interest income off of money that rightfully belonged to other people.
Paid to post sites, and other online work sites, want you to raise your payout amount. They give you the option because it benefits them. It is not for your convenience; it is for theirs. They hope that you set your payout thresholds to a higher amount, so that they can hold your money longer and earn interest off of it. Essentially by setting your payout threshold to anything above the minimum, you are giving them a free loan.
(The other type of free loan that people are fond of doing is to have more money withhold from their paychecks than necessary--yes, a big income tax return is nice, but why give the government an interest free loan. If you want to loan the government money, invest in government bonds instead.)
The only time when rising your payout threshold makes sense is when it is close to the end of the business year and you are trying to avoid slipping over into a higher tax bracket. And that is a very rare situation for most of us--so do yourself a favor, collect your money as soon as you can and deposit it in your own saving account.
After all, the money is going to be earning interest anyways, so why shouldn't it be you that collects it?
To Join MyLot, click here.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
What does the average writer make?
Today I spent a lot of time on Google trying to locate the numbers for what the average writer makes. I know that there are figures for this (though I am not sure if they are government or guild) because I saw a set a few years ago.
The reason for this egg hunt is that I might need the figures for my microeconomics term paper.
So if any of my readers know where I should be looking, please leave me a comment. Thank you.
The reason for this egg hunt is that I might need the figures for my microeconomics term paper.
So if any of my readers know where I should be looking, please leave me a comment. Thank you.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Bombed a test
Well, I bombed my Microeconomics test yesterday. No real big surprise--it involved a lot of equations that I kept confusing with one another. Elasticity equations (income, price, supply, etc.) mainly.
It is a good thing that Marty (Martin Sabo) allows us to fix the test to recover half the points that we lost.
Exactly why I bombed I am not completely sure. Was it the fact that I didn't study hard enough or too much (I did more studying for this test than all the ones I took last semester in Macroeconomics). Or was it that I bashed out the homework for three chapters this weekend because i am trying to clear the deck for National Novel Writing Month. Or was it that I wake up yesterday slightly depressed. Or a combination of all of these.
Oh well, I should still be able to get an A in this class if I don't bomb any of the other tests. Onward and upward.
It is a good thing that Marty (Martin Sabo) allows us to fix the test to recover half the points that we lost.
Exactly why I bombed I am not completely sure. Was it the fact that I didn't study hard enough or too much (I did more studying for this test than all the ones I took last semester in Macroeconomics). Or was it that I bashed out the homework for three chapters this weekend because i am trying to clear the deck for National Novel Writing Month. Or was it that I wake up yesterday slightly depressed. Or a combination of all of these.
Oh well, I should still be able to get an A in this class if I don't bomb any of the other tests. Onward and upward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
