Price vs. Worth

If you're in the market for a new home, would you call your agent and ask, "I want a house. How much?" And even if you did ask such a ridiculously framed question, typical responses might be, "How many bedrooms do you need? Do you want a water view? How much land would you like?" And of course there's the all-important, "What is your price range?" Well, guess what: the communications business is no different.

Telling a story - in any form - is a lot like real estate: there is market value and assessed value. Market value is what drives home prices, based on their particular neighborhoods, school districts, and plot of land, or proximity to airports, bus lines, or highways, and so forth. Assessed value is what the tax collector uses for grand list measurement; it is often largely based on replacement cost at a material level. In our business, assessed value is what scares us, and is often what our clients get caught up in. Market value is what we should be pursuing, as is often the biggest subjective crux of a proposal. But it's the part we need to focus on when we make our pitch.

Our good friend and head storyteller here at Moving Pictures, Tom Clifford, has much to say on this subject, as well.

Why do many clients live under the common misconception that marketing and advertising costs $29 a pound, $4 a square yard, or - for video budgeting - the oft-believed myth of $1000 per minute? (For the record, good video has never cost "$1000 a minute". Further, by this logic, could a client assume that a four-minute video can be had for half price by cutting it down to two minutes? NO. This makes as much sense as ripping the blueprints down the middle and expecting your new house for 50% less money.) The truth of the matter is that many of us are in self-exile. Guardianship of the model is our responsibility, and if it's broken, it's up to us to fix it - not the client. If we continue to perpetuate it, shame on us. And if we fail to educate our clients, double shame on us.

Here are typical scenarios that often play out:

1. client: "I have X number of dollars. What can I get?"

or:

2. client: "Here's my concept. How much will this cost?"

The problem with both of these situations is this: who or what is driving the budget? Where's the rationale and the strategy (if there is any) behind the assignment of the budget criteria? And who decides whether the proposed budget is 20% too high? Too high for what? For the value in telling their story properly? "Yeah, our company vision is just not worth that kind of money." Right. But that's often the communicated subtext, whether they realize it or not.

Here's the best scenario:

you, to client: "Here is the plan we propose to deliver, based on what we know about your customers, your competition, and your industry. Here's how we propose to do it, here's the timeline, and here's what it will cost." By shedding light on a situation and revealing a compelling case to the client, the actual price can become secondary to the value-based framework surrounding the budget. The pricing now has relevance and meaning to the client. (Mercedes' customers certainly need not explain why they sell cars to people who could just as easily buy a used Yugo down the street.)

Proper execution of an initiative cannot and should not be immediately commoditized. Can you assign a value to your own worth? How much would you spend and how far would you go to realize your vision? "I don't really need to be #1, or even #10. I'm cool with being #427." If a client focuses more on imaginary dollar figures rather than a value and investment-based model, then being #427 in their market is probably where they'll wind up. As the beloved CT Lottery slogan goes, You can't win if you don't play. True, indeed.