Despite the fact that I still haven't had anyone call me from my Auditions, what you're talking about in this article is similar to what happened in the Car business. Discounts. Now, nobody buys a car for list price because everyone knows the dealer will sell as low as he can. The problem there, is you would think the dealers would get together and decide to only sell at a certain price. There's always someone who agrees to the whole plan, then goes back to the dealership and sells everything at the old price to get rid of them before the other dealers find out.

If you want Prime Meat, you've got to see the meat first. People don't want to pay for Prime rib to get Ground Chuck.

People with a following should get a higher price tag. Those of us struggling need to get a start.

It's like being an Actor (which we are), when we start out, we make barely enough and have to wait tables to make ends meet. As soon as we get a moniker on our name like "Oscar Nominee..." or "Emmy Award Winner.." then suddenly we can ask the big bucks.

Table sir?

There's a solution to this mess but sadly, the p2p sites are unwilling to implement it. They could quite easily prohibit bids under the seeker's price. If a seeker offers a budget of $500-$750 and an actor bids $200 or even $495, the system could reject the bid.

Something could be added to the terms and conditions of membership - in case an actor enters a bid of $500 but in his proposal he/she says, "The system won't allow my bid to be under $500 but I'll do it for $200 - please ignore the bid field."

Let's face it, most clients would run from someone like this anyway. But if the actor stood to lose their membership and their money, they'd be unlikely to lowball.

Yes, but what price is *too* low? $50 for an hour is pretty obvious, I think, to anyone who's done any narration work. However, I think union artists might question if $500 is too low for an hour of finished of narration if the client is expecting you to do the editing and record in your own fully equipped professional studio. My prices are definitely within (or sometimes slightly above) that $350-500 range, yet I've had union artists cry foul when I insinuate my rates are that "low."

I think part of the problem with pricing is that we non-union actors are bundling our services (recording and basic editing, or sometimes complete mastering,) and union types see this as erosion of services.

I respectfully disagree with Karl von Loewe - at some point it is not about pride, but good business sense. I don't want to just pay my mortgage this month, I want to pay it every month. Price erosion is real. The disagreement is about how is this happening & how bad is it. And, more importantly, can we do anything about it?

Hi David, I might have given you a few pencils, but you used them to make the drawing.

Some people still don't get it that there's a relationship between price and perceived professionalism.

Let's remember that people derive more pleasure from a bottle of wine they believe is expensive, even if the wine turns out to be from a box.

Ha, whoops..."rates," not "rages." Perhaps my anger over low-balling clients is slipping through?

One of my VO mentors told me to NEVER low-ball. Even if it means losing a potential gig or client, it's much better to walk away from a low-balling gig, because once you become a bottom-feeder, it is very difficult to get out of that position.

To be fair, though, I think that most of the VO talent who are auditioning for such low-income jobs are rookies who want to get their foot in the door. Rookies who, for that matter, don't understand that what they're doing might be hurting the industry at large. That doesn't make it okay, of course. I'm merely saying that I don't think *experienced* VO talent, who are worth their salt, would audition for jobs like that.

If, however, we have super-experienced VO talent, with incredible acting abilities, a great home studio, top-notch equipment, and agent representation auditioning for these jobs...then yes, that's a problem.

As VO talent, I think we have a responsibility to stick to our rages. Not just for our own sakes, but for the sake of our colleagues as well.

Thanks for posting, Dave!

These lowballing, naive, uninformed sometimes talentless idiots are not going away anytime soon!
We talent know they're out there. Clients know they're out there. They're playing a dangerous game. They won't be able to sustain a career doing $50.00 VOs. So there will be others right behind them doing the same thing.

All we career talents can do is build and maintain our client bases, keeping our services as professional as possible. In turn, keeping the value of our profession high.

Good observations David. These same people that only pay $50 for a job also want a voice sounding like James Earl Jones but don't seem to care that they get Elmer Fudd instead, as long as it's the low bid. Really sad situation.

Nicely written, David. This past week I caught a glimpse of a lead that said, "URGENT RUSH Female voice needed. Willing to pay top dollar." I clicked and found his/her idea of top dollar was $150. And people had auditioned for it!! Unfortunately, this is what we're dealing with. Bottom feeders will always be there, but it is scary to see what the clients' perception of what "top dollar" is. It really does hurt us all. On the upside, I think the really good talent seekers will always pay for quality.
-Amy

The old saying is that if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. However, there are some VO actors who low bid to get work to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. At a certain point one realizes that pride doesn't feed the bulldog.

A great reminder David, thanks for posting it. The current economic condition is fueling those who have a tendency to "bottom feed," both voice talent and prospective clients alike.

There is also an influx of new people into the business of VO, increasing lowballing and competition, thus exacerbating the situation. I trust that the majority of bottom feeder VO talent will disappear eventually and return to their regular day jobs full time. We just have to hang in there, keep our fees professional, and ride out this temporary storm.

-BP

PS:
A shout out of thanks goes to Paul Strikwerda, whose comments on the original blog post contributed greatly to this article. Thanks Paul!