Another great post! This is one area that I have struggled with as my business has grown.

I operate on a handshake basis with my clients, feeling that if I am not providing value to them that they perceive as being worth the dollars they are paying, then I’d rather they work with someone else. So far I have not had any complaints from clients who actually have implemented the recommendations that come out of my analysis of their sites or who I have done a turn key optimization for.

However my main issue is how to price my services. I have done both flat fee and annuity based pricing. Since I am a small shop, I have minimal overheads and have a lot of pricing flexibility, so I can experiment a bit if I need to. I like the annuity based model, since it provides a low up front cost to the client (zero!) and has potential to be a significant income stream for me if I get the clients pages onto the first page of Google SERPs. However tracking and conversions are issues in this pricing model, which means the client needs to share a significant amount of business information on an ongoing basis, as well as allowing testing to improve conversions. I have used this model in the past with one client and it worked well for both of us until the client ended the arrangement due to a seasonal slow period in her business, as she had the time to do link building, etc in house. The main issue with this model is that once the client’s pages hit page one in Google, they very quickly begin to question the value of continuing to pay for SEO services, especially if they have learned enough to do link building and page tweaks with in house resources. This is obviously a reasonable approach from the client perspective, however unreasonable it looks to me.

So even though I like the annuity pricing model, I don’t think if makes sense to try to implement it as a standard pricing model.

I have also quoted my services based on a risk sharing approach where I quote a fixed price for the initial site optimization and link building, as well as a monthly price for ongoing tweaks, link building and SERP position monitoring. I then share the risk with the prospective client by asking for 50% payment as deliverables are completed, with the remaining 50% to be paid when page 1 ranking in Google is achieved. Jury is still out on this one… but I think it might work.

As far as fixed pricing goes, I definitely like the approach you have described since it removes the uncertainty in the process and both sides understand the goals and deliverables being paid for.

Have you used this consistently with your clients and how have they reacted to it.

Cheers,

Jim

Another great post! This is one area that I have struggled with as my business has grown.

I operate on a handshake basis with my clients, feeling that if I am not providing value to them that they perceive as being worth the dollars they are paying, then I’d rather they work with someone else. So far I have not had any complaints from clients who actually have implemented the recommendations that come out of my analysis of their sites or who I have done a turn key optimization for.

However my main issue is how to price my services. I have done both flat fee and annuity based pricing. Since I am a small shop, I have minimal overheads and have a lot of pricing flexibility, so I can experiment a bit if I need to. I like the annuity based model, since it provides a low up front cost to the client (zero!) and has potential to be a significant income stream for me if I get the clients pages onto the first page of Google SERPs. However tracking and conversions are issues in this pricing model, which means the client needs to share a significant amount of business information on an ongoing basis, as well as allowing testing to improve conversions. I have used this model in the past with one client and it worked well for both of us until the client ended the arrangement due to a seasonal slow period in her business, as she had the time to do link building, etc in house. The main issue with this model is that once the client’s pages hit page one in Google, they very quickly begin to question the value of continuing to pay for SEO services, especially if they have learned enough to do link building and page tweaks with in house resources. This is obviously a reasonable approach from the client perspective, however unreasonable it looks to me.

So even though I like the annuity pricing model, I don’t think if makes sense to try to implement it as a standard pricing model.

I have also quoted my services based on a risk sharing approach where I quote a fixed price for the initial site optimization and link building, as well as a monthly price for ongoing tweaks, link building and SERP position monitoring. I then share the risk with the prospective client by asking for 50% payment as deliverables are completed, with the remaining 50% to be paid when page 1 ranking in Google is achieved. Jury is still out on this one… but I think it might work.

As far as fixed pricing goes, I definitely like the approach you have described since it removes the uncertainty in the process and both sides understand the goals and deliverables being paid for.

Have you used this consistently with your clients and how have they reacted to it.

Cheers,

Jim