The Podcast Secrets $20 Preview Call - Methods To My Madness
Posted on 7:49 pm by Paul ColliganHere’s a little insight on the methods behind the $20 call we’re doing for Podcast Secrets on April 2. There are some really interesting methods behind this madness that I wanted to share with my readers. Hopefully it’s a model and a numbers run you can use elsewhere too.
First of all, the big elephant, nobody buys an expensive training program without really feeling it was worth the money spent. I can’t just plop Podcast Secrets in front of you and expect you to buy. I need to prove the value of the program. That is why we do the $20 call.
Why $20?
$20 means you have a potential to be serious. $20 means your going to listen to the call expecting value. $20 means nobody is joking around.
And $20 means that we can give our affiliate partners $18 per person they bring to the $20 call. We also give them a commission on the class sale as well (they brought us the new audience, they deserve it).
I don’t want the $20. I want to sell the class.
So on April 2, we have the big $20 call. We give a ton of information, show people why they’d want to upgrade to the full class and, hopefully, many will. If they don’t, their $20 on the “Podcast Monetization Roadmap” training was well spent and we part as friends.
People who don’t think Podcast is worth spending money on won’t be on the call.
People who do … will.
And my partners are paid well for direction the right kind of traffic my way.
Now let’s compare an $18 commission to a $40 Podcast CPM. If someone has the type of show where less than 3 out of 1,000 buy - they wouldn’t want to grab this deal.
But if their audience of buyers is more than .3% (and the right audiences are), they could do really well. And, the cool part, … I enjoy sending those checks more than some enjoy receiving them.
Remember, in this case, when I mean buyers, I mean of the $20 call. If 3 out of a thousand bought the class, heck if 1 out of a thousand bought the class, we’re talking a CPM of more than $500.
Nice numbers. When you run the numbers this way, you can have Podcasts of 3 and 4 figure CPMs. No, they don’t have the download numbers of GeekBrief.tv - but they don’t need them either.
Everyone who buys the preview call will have the option to get the class by Premium Podcast (would be silly not to). We’ll promote accordingly using this channel. We know how to do that well. When you can send a different message to each user, you can do some very cool things.
Is Podcast Secrets worth the cash? I obviously think so. FWIW, we didn’t get a single refund request for the class last year and there are some great testimonials on the order page for the call.
But the big question … does this model work outside of people looking to sell ANYTHING OTHER THAN information products on Podcasting?
Of course it does. Anybody can do this with any audience.
Step 1, spend a little cash to get the right audience. With Podcasting we can really segment out a list and get the exact people we are looking for. Get that niche audience. You can earn it or you can buy it. We’ve done both.
Step 2, give that audience what they want. This is the class this segment of the population wants.
Step 3, charge accordingly. We’re going to do just that.
And thus the method to my madness.
Don’t worry, my next piece ain’t about Podcast Secrets at all. It’s about another Premium Content Delivery Channel - HBO.
Technorati Tags: podcast secrets, podcast secrets 2008, podcast marketing, podcast monetization
13 Comments »
March 18, 2008
Cameron Weckerley said:
Hey Paul.
IMHO this is completely the wrong track to take with podcasting. The advertiser ,not the consumer, should bear the burden of cost for monetization. Once we start running the numbers on everything and monetization becomes the primary goal, then podcasting is going to go the way of FM radio.
I personally will not pay for ANY podcast and don’t expect anyone to. I would hope they do not tune out the short commercial content we do by hand every week.
Best.
Cameron
March 18, 2008
Paul Colligan said:
I was hoping I’d get this kind of comment first as it helps illustrate the model.
Cameron would never pay for Podcast content. As a result, he’s not the audience I’m looking for. Marketing Podcast Secrets to him would not just be a waste of my time - but a waste of his time as well.
Sift and sort.
Paul
March 18, 2008
Thiago Guerra said:
Cameron, I think you got it all wrong. He is not selling his podcast for $20, he is trying to convince people to join his training program and to do that he made a podcast with, let’s say, a introduction to his seminar, and he is selling that because he wants to get only serious prospects, not curious ones. I think he is on the right track.
March 18, 2008
Chris O'Byrne said:
I love the fast interactivity of the Web 2.0! I’m going back and forth between blogs and tweets…
Paul, I would definitely pay for any podcast that I felt was worth it. I even pay the small subscription amount asked for by TWIT… because it is worth it.
Now to go sign up for that call…
March 18, 2008
Elizabeth Potts Weinstein said:
Great that you mentioned HBO, which is something that should be pointed out — in any content delivery medium, there are multiple methods to monetize.
Some people will never pay anything for TV. They get regular broadcast channels w/ advertising and generalized for-the-masses content.
Some people will pay a bit for TV. They get cable or satellite w/ advertising and more specialized/long tail content.
Some people are okay with paying more for TV because they want more or don’t care about the cost. They pay for premium channels and pay per view, no/limited advertising, higher end and special content.
There is room for every kind of delivery & monetization. All depends if you want to be broadcast TV, cable, or HBO.
~ Elizabeth
March 18, 2008
Cameron Weckerley said:
And he addresses the issue (Not)
March 18, 2008
Cameron Weckerley said:
Pretty bold of you too to ridicule a customer in public. No, I would not pay for a podcast of any kind, including my own, believing the the old radio model still makes the most sense for the end user. Our customers, remember?
I have been a fan of the New Media Expo, but you are quickly changing my opinion sir.
Best
Cameron
March 18, 2008
Paul Colligan said:
Cameron,
I’m sorry you feel ridiculed. That was by no means the goal. I said you won’t pay for content - which you said twice - and I said you aren’t the audience I’m looking for.
My audience is people who pay for content.
The $20 model is what finds me my audience.
Where is the ridicule?
In terms of fan of New Media Expo - I’m not part of that team. I just speak at the event.
Paul
March 18, 2008
Chris O'Byrne said:
Cameron,
From what I know of Paul, I just can’t see him ridiculing anyone. I read and reread the comments and I still don’t see it. I think he was just pointing out and admitting that his program is not for everyone.
And I would definitely not let this taint your view of the New Media Expo… Paul is just a small part of that event and I plan on attending to hear many people speak, not just him.
Sincerely,
Chris
March 18, 2008
Shaun Noonan said:
I run a language training program and we’re launching premium content this week. Many of our listeners have been asking for it! They don’t want ads, they want to pay us directly for a monthly subscription. I did surveys to confirm this.
I would say the medium is only superficially comparable to radio. We have a huge range of diffetent content options to develop. Some of that content fits a direct pay model and some of it doesn’t. I’m happy to see several different monetization methods in place. It gives us a broader range of options to deliver high quality, well funded content different audiences (some who pay directly and some who accept ads).
March 18, 2008
Mike Paul said:
Cameron,
I have to agree with Chris. I’ve been listening to many of Paul’s shows over the last 2 and a half years and have done a little bit of work with him. There was no ridicule intended at all in this.
The wonderful thing about podcasting is that there’s enough room for people that want to have free podcasts and those that want to have paid ones to both do very well, whether we run ads or we sell our own products or even our podcasts.
“Free” podcasts have done very well selling advertising space in their shows. Lots of folks have no problems listening to ads in order to get the content for free. I do it a lot myself, watching old TV shows like Airwolf on Hulu.com.
But I also pay for the privilege of watching some shows commercial free, which I’m more than happy to do for content that I feel is worth it. Just come look at my DVD rack and see all the TV series I have, not including the ones in my iTunes library.
Whichever model you choose, it’s not a great idea to automatically discount the other and say that it’s wrong or it doesn’t work. Both work, but both don’t work for the same people. Your audience will determine which one works the best. Paul wants to find an audience that will pay for some great premium content. I took the Podcast Secrets course last year and paid gladly for it. I’m taking it again this year. He wants an audience that will pay. No big deal. If you don’t want to pay, not an issue. Good luck and God bless, there’s a lot of other great information out there that can be had for free.
I think that’s the point Paul was trying to make.
Mike
March 18, 2008
Cameron Weckerley said:
OK…
Perhaps that comment was off-base. As one reader pointed out the fast interactivity of web 2.0 makes it possible to go off half-cocked.
What I really think is this, and I mean it as a point around which to create discussion, not as an attack.
Paul is, of course, free to do as he pleases. My only point of contention is this. When you take something that is essentially open source and attempt to monetize every aspect of it you flirt with the possibility of killing the golden goose. I am just as much of a capitalist as the next guy, I just prefer my daily loaf to flavored more Bill Graham (The 60’s “hip-capitalist” rock concert promoter) than Bill Gates.
If I attacked you unjustly sir, I apologize, that is what I get for blogging BEFORE motorcycling. (note to self, always MOTORCYCLE first.)
Best,
Cameron
March 18, 2008
Hieronymus Murphy said:
Paul,
No, you didn’t ridicule Cameron at all. Period.
As you said: sift and sort - Cameron wouldn’t pay for instructional content as is his choice. As Cameron concedes, his reaction was half-cocked.
For anyone with a sense of history, Cameron’s reaction isn’t due to the hyperconnectivity of Web 2.0 at all - it’s pure Web 1.0, reminiscent of my earliest days on line (late 1996) in the Table Talk discussion boards at Salon, when people (myself included, on occasion) would go off half-cocked at any perceived slight because interactions lacked the essential human context elements: gesture and facial expression.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.