Supply and Demand, Steemit-Style
I won’t pretend to be an expert on how Steemit works, nor do I have a guess about how big it might get, how long it will last, whether it will implode, peter out, continue to grow, whatever. I will let others theorize about that. Today my commentary is about Steemit as a microcosm of the free market, and how “fairness” and “equality” are never things you should expect from free trade. (That’s not a criticism of freedom; that’s just how it is, and how it has to be—and it will still always be way better than any coercively controlled system.)
As more and more people jump on the Steemit bandwagon (and there have been a lot of anarchists doing so recently), it is inevitable that some people will end up complaining about the outcome being “unfair.” After all, there is a huge disparity, from author to author, and from article to article, how much content creators get paid—if they get paid at all. If you happen to be on the losing end of that you may be inclined to grumble, maybe even opine that something nefarious must be going on.
Welcome to the market. Almost anyone who has run a business, providing goods or services to the general public, knows that the “goodness” of your product doesn’t automatically mean big profits—or any profits. Sometimes predicting what will sell gets so complicated that it starts to feel like chaos theory. The smallest thing can make the biggest difference, in either direction. You can either bellyache about how that’s not “fair” (whatever that means), or you can try to improve your bottom line by focusing on supply and demand. Here are a few pointers:
ON THE “SUPPLY” SIDE:
1 - Be aware of the content monsoon.
Keep in mind that a lot of anarchists are currently cranking out material on Steemit, which means that you immediately have a lot of competition. If ten thousand anarchists each wrote and posted a spectacular article today, most of them would get little or nothing as a result of it. So it might help to be patient and wait a bit until there's a lull in the tidal wave, so your drop in the ocean—which may be a stellar “drop”—is more likely to get noticed.
2 - Find a way to stand out.
Just because there is a big supply of articles saying that freedom is good and authoritarianism sucks doesn’t mean that there might not be a much smaller supply of articles on some particular topic, or articles that have some interesting slant or approach. It is at least as important for your content to be unusual in some way as it is for it to be good. Again, almost anyone who has sold a product knows this. If you make the twentieth brand of cookie on the store shelf, and there is nothing distinctive about yours, don’t expect to become a cookie tycoon (even if yours is slightly better than all the others).
3 - If you want to sell more stuff, make a variety of products.
Rather than hoping that one awesome article will make you a bazillionaire, try to regularly produce quality stuff, in different categories on different topics. Diversify. Even if none of them individually are massive hits, they can still add up to a significant payout. (The down side is that it requires more work. Darn market!)
ON THE “DEMAND” SIDE
4 - Be famous.
Okay, this piece of “advice” might be mostly worthless. However, when it comes to music, books, movies, and other creative endeavors, what people are willing to pay often has far more to do with who made the thing, than with the actual quality of the thing. If Stephen King published an absolutely crappy book tomorrow, millions of people would buy it. As an example on a much, much smaller scale, if I published two articles on Steemit today, one under my name and one under a fake name, the one under my name would likely get a better response (even if the other one was a better article). Because at least some people know my name, and have liked stuff I did before.
No, it’s not “fair,” but it’s still reality. A bunch of people complained when Jeff Berwick made a pile of money off of his first Steemit post, which pretty much just said “Hi!” (That was only a slight exaggeration.) Those people who presumed to declare that that article wasn’t really “worth” that much don’t seem to understand what “value” means, or where it comes from. Is it really “worth” a million dollars for some celebrity to say, “I use this brand of shampoo”? In some abstract, arbitrary sense, no. But in the economic world, it absolutely is. That’s why famous people get huge piles of money just for endorsing stuff: because the manufacturers know that a certain number of people will buy stuff just because someone they admire said to. Is that rational? Probably not. Is it “fair” that no one will pay you a million dollars to say you like their shampoo? No. But again, that’s life.
And even though “be famous” sounds like a stupid suggestion, the realistic equivalent is, if you can be patient, and reliably produce good stuff, you can start to build up a following (a sort of “micro-fame”). Hey, I’ve been babbling on about anarchism for twenty years now, so don’t you dadburn whipper-snapper upstarts be belly-achin’ if mah post gits more ’tention than the first thang you evuh posted ’bout voluntaryism! (Sorry, slipped into bitter old redneck mode there for a second.)
5 - Don’t expect quality alone to sell.
For every famous pop star that some record company manufactured, packaged, and then peddled to the world (and raked in millions), there are thousands of individuals who are far more musically talented, but who you’ve never heard of … and never will. Is that “fair”? Well, if you’re asking if it fits within some arbitrary sense of universal righteousness, no. But so what? Whining about that won’t change reality. You can either bitch about how professional athletes make more than school teachers, or you can accept that that is how supply and demand work, and move on. Opining that people should want different stuff won’t make it so. If your goal is profit, then what you think is good is irrelevant; what other people like and want is what matters. (Unless you intend to sell stuff only to yourself ... which isn't exactly the most genius business model.)
6 - People can’t like something if they never hear about it.
If making a good product was all you needed in order to make money, there would be no such thing as advertising. Yes, at some point trying to come up with stuff that is attention-grabbing can turn into obnoxious “jumping the shark” tactics (look it up). However, don’t be scared to use a certain degree of “click bait” if you actually have something worth saying, and if the “bait” is actually relevant. For example, I’m pretty sure that the video titled “When Should You Shoot a Cop?” (based on my article by the same name) would not have a total of over a million YouTube views if the title had been “An examination of ethically sound principles regarding the use of lethal force against aggressors acting in an official capacity.”
7 - Be a sell-out.
Okay, I don’t really advise that, but this list wouldn’t be complete without mentioning the fact that right now it makes a huge difference what the “whales” on Steemit notice, and what they like. There is a huge variation in how much an “up-vote” from different people is worth. If your goal is to make money, it makes sense to see what kind of thing is trending and popular on Steemit, and maybe model your content accordingly. Ironically, this article may be the only example of me doing that on Steemit so far (because Steemit likes it when you talk about Steemit). Most of the time I use the stubborn, ornery bastard approach of, “I write whatever the hell I want, and if you don’t like it, you can go jump in a lake!” Hmmm, that may explain why I’ve been broke for so damn long. Anyway, make your own choices about that.
8 - Learn the little tricks.
There are a bunch of simple things that can increase or decrease an article’s popularity on Steemit. Having images in the article is a big plus. Formatting it so it looks good, and doesn’t trigger “TL;DR Syndrome,” is of course also a plus. I’ve found that posting stuff mid or late morning, especially on Saturdays (thus the timing of this posting), has worked well for me so far. Also, the first tag you choose for the article is very important. Do some research, because I’m sure there are people who know a lot more little tricks than I do. When in doubt, use trial and error to figure out what will make people read your stuff, like your stuff, and perhaps most importantly, share your stuff with others.
9 - Accept that sometimes it’s just blind luck.
Figuring out what there will be a demand for can get ridiculously complicated, to the point where it seems almost random. (The payouts for my various posts have fluctuated a lot, for reasons that are still a mystery to me.) So, for psychological reasons, I suggest not expecting anything. If you get more than zero … well, that’s better than nothing! Having the right attitude, and deciding what your priorities are, can help. For example, my main reason for being on Steemit is my main reason for doing almost everything else I do these days: to try to tear down the cult of authoritarianism. If I can accomplish that and get paid, cool! But if I’m just ranting and raving for free, I would do that too (and have for twenty years). Having that outlook, where I expect nothing and plan on getting nothing, makes the whole thing a lot less stressful and annoying. So I suggest that you write for the sake of spreading whatever worthwhile stuff you have to say. And then, if some money magically appears in front of you as a result of that, be surprised and happy.
Great read, I am actually already coming back to Steemit today, now that I have some breathing room to dedicate to writing. Thanks for the tips!
Very good tips. As a new writer, I am trying hard to gain readership and followers. The competition is very tough and I have yet to come out with a strategy and formula. Your tip to be unique resonates with me. I am sharing from the perspective gained from my experiences in living with my autistic son.
What I've found that's worked for me as well is what Larken was saying about diversifying. I put out articles periodically shutting down common objections or particular issues dealing with authoritarianism, but I also have a memoir series, do short fiction stories, and have an ongoing sci-fi story that I post as well. Not all of it is super successful, but I produce quality work for all of it, and I've gained a small core readership that's sticking with me.
aha!
I see you found my steemit-logo thumbnails, I'm glad to see the thumbnails come to good use :)
I wrote a cute little story about a baby dolphin and all the posts he read on steemit last week and your post is in it!
(although not this post, the thumbnail atracted my attention, as I recognize it)(it's the 'vacuum' post I refer to)
have a look, I hope you like it
thanks
I found it on Google images, but thanks for making it, now that I know where it came from!
another aha ... it's shows that google is indexing this site really well
it will bring a lot of extra traffic
cheers
Have an upvote for making those nice thumbnails!
Was it conscious that you did not address the investors' point of view? I.e. what might motivate to actually pay for the stuff that people cash out via Steem/BTC?
Spot on, as always. I keep comparing this with college.
Write hundreds of well researched articles; I'll charge you a small fortune to read and grade them. At the end, if I like you enough and you've paid your tuition, I'll give you a certificate you can include on your resume when you apply at KFC.
Ok I agree, having written a similar idea for which I earned $1000. So no complaints.
So I totally agree with you on the realities of this social experiment, but perhaps fairness should improve.
Some may leave Steem for a less world-comparible system. Some like robinhoodwhale, may work to improve meritocracy, which is what I think could improve. Market forces may eventually provide systems and incentive to reward less famous writers, especially when they originate great ideas.
I saw someone state an new idea which has led to many great articles. They earned $1. The writer who made it famous earned thousands. Perhaps the latter deserved it for giving more attention to such a great idea. Maybe in the future, new systems or market forces will reward those who inspire the famous or discover great hidden gems.
I think maybe what you're describing is how facebook and some other world elements work. But if you sell something below cost on Craig's List, it is bound to be bought even if you're not well-known, like Walmart. This is partly in response to https://steemit.com/steemit/@alexgr/dealing-with-variance-in-commerce-and-steemit-the-merchant-approach
No offense is intended, just a bunch of ideas bouncing around. Thanks for stating well a comglomate of ideas out there right now.
Good points. I really think the timing of a post can't be overstated enough... the tricky part is that great timing changes from day to day!
I read the article and was honestly surprised when I got to the bottom and saw it was written by @larkenrose!
Very well put together.
Did it surprise you that it was me BECAUSE it was very well put together? (Just kidding.) :)
LOL!
Yeah, I wasn't sure what he meant by that comment either.
Thanks for the suggestions Larken. Glad I have the attitude you mentioned in your last point, about not expecting or focusing on the money. I value what is received more when it does come my way.
Your article also helps by encouraging me to think more about marketing, and to broaden my subject matter. Thanks for that. Been a fan for a long time and I can't imagine that will ever change, not that I expect you to suddenly turn into a stone monument (tho you are certainly worthy of one). Lets not call it change, lets call it evolve, implying positive movement towards higher order, not decay and erosion.
Value is subjective.
Some people don't seem to able to grasp this.
A glass of water is more valuable to a person dying in a desert, than it is to someone swimming in a lake.
Just because you spend time on a post, and you think it's good, doesn't mean that everybody else thinks it's good.
A lot of people talk about their "good posts" that never got attention and "bad posts" that got upvoted without deserving it. But you can never objectively state that something is valuable to everybody else.
People can simply have different tastes.
"Opining that people should want different stuff won’t make it so. "
I do less of this, and more realizing that people are fucking retarded.
I've had numerous bursts of enthusiasm for various products that have resulted in failed entrepreneurial endeavours. Making a fair priced, quality product available to others isn't enough - idiot consumers need song & dance sales pitches and they need everyone else to do their thinking for them by buying it before they do. In the end, it's always me that is the idiot for trying to service an idiot market with smart-people products.
Or, to put it another way, "The customer is always right ... and is usually stupid."