The Great Rate Debate---- Aka, my study on pricing in the DFW market

December

According to your summary you ran 3 rate structures over three 2 week intervals and your lowest rate for only one week. During the 2 week intervals, how many clients did you see per week? You presented the results from those 2 week intervals as averages. The week-to-week scatter during those intervals might help you understood the variance in visits when avail and rate are constant. I don't think your conclusion is supported by the data nor common sense. Suggest you read up on the statistics of small numbers.

It seems like the theme is higher prices are better for you. If that is the case then keep higher prices. Economy has been tough on most people, so whatever works to get you through it more power to you.

Interesting study.

Why am I never around when these kinds of studies are conducted?


Aww, phooey!!!!

December, I like the idea of your study and there are many good points listed above. One thing I am curious about is the volume of calls/contacts during those study weeks.

You listed the number of clients actually seen..but a more interesting statistic to me would be the number of calls/contacts received. I'm sure there were some who didn't pass screening, some you wouldn't see them for whatever reason, NCNS's, etc just as there would be on any given week.

So, did you notice the contact volume increase and decrease in proportion to the actual visits made? The goal, I would think, is to get your phone to ring more often, within that "sweet spot" of the price range. Converting those calls into actual visits is a whole nother thread!

Ok-- let me try to filter through everything as well as I can this morning:

Chica-- During the 6 week timeframe, I did not have a single NCNS. When at home, NCNS is very rare for me. It happens, but its rare. In terms of contact vs. appointment, probably looking at a 75% conversion rate across the board, EXCEPT for the $175 week.

Daltx-- You make assumptions without knowing anything about my business model. I actually RAISED my rate to conduct this experiment-- nowhere in my thread did I say that I would raise it back up to that level again. It was more to prove a point than anything. I'm generally most comfortable between 140 and 160. Its not just about the money-- its also about the personality of the people I'm dealing with. I've found most of the gents that are shopping in that range are quite pleased to find a girl who is attractive, intelligent, and not out to rip them off.

Peanut-- I did show my rate as $125 as opposed to the XXX off. It was intentional as I see on the boards the TGTBT philosophy.

In terms of reviews-- the MAJORITY of my reviews over the 12 months I've been in DFW have been with my rates between $130 and $150. There are a few above that but the vast majority are at low rates for the DFW market-- I had no reason to think that the $125 rate would put up red flags when I have an excellent track record at $140ish.

In terms of "time of month" that I ran each rate-- The $200 rate and the $140 rate both got "prime time" slots. I'm generally busier the first 2 weeks of any given month. I intentionally ran the $125 during a low point in an effort to pull responses from those who perhaps are lower on hobby funds. A man who can consistantly spend over $200 is not as likely to go for $125 as one who has a more limited budget.

Could I play with the experiment some more? Certainly. Some ladies I'm sure are feeling that I've vindicated the "less work, more money" theory. But in reality, that wasn't what I was looking for. I was looking at the pure numbers. I am the sort of person who would rather have my available time slots booked than to make more per appointment, but have to wonder if I'm going to even have an appointment. So, take the data with a grain of salt and a shot of tequila. Will I return to the $200 rate? Probably not. I'm in school, so I have a finite number of appointments that I can reasonably take in a week--- I'd rather have the comfort of filling those times up than worrying. Not a popular viewpoint I'm sure-- but then again-- nobody else is paying my bills.

Oh-- and Anonone-- yes, the data is real. I was actually surprised how poorly the $125 weeks performed. I had a hunch that it would not be my best slot, but I thought it would be a close 2nd.

Oh-- one more thing that I was remiss in mentioning.

Although my post is cetered on pricing, my actual intent with this "study" was volume. I figured I should clarify this for those who make the "high volume" comments. My maximum for any given day is 2. On occasion I may throw a regular in there and make it 3 but thats VERY rare. The objective of my study was to try to find the "sweet spot" at which my 8-10 open spaces per week were consistently filled. I don't have much free time, so I have to make it count if I'm going to step away from the books, etc. I added the price matrix into this post as a response to all of the "well just lower your rates" posts that have been popping up. Its not as simple as that. Some ladies can lower their rates and be flooded-- others wouldn't make much of a ripple. When you drop your rates, you are essentially marketing to a different crowd and often its much like starting over. Some ladies market well to a new crowd and others won't.

I can only speak to my hobby habits, when looking for new friends I will look for rates that are lower at times because the information in a review only talks about the opinion of the reviewer and the services offered. For me to be a repeat customer I need to find the connection it is not the same with every girl. But I do use special rates to visit new prospects in hopes of finding a steady friend.

December - interesting thread. Its always good to compare to see what works best for you & your clients. Good thinking


I agree about the discount for your ATF's "regular schedule" rate. I do this for a cpl of my regulars that see me once a week - they appreciate me setting time aside for them every week & I enjoy offering them a very *special* rate.


XOXO,
ItalianaPrincess

By itself, the data set is a bit small. However, the results are exactly what would be projected by any number of tools used to predect pricing curves. As the results are what would have predicted ahead of time, that seems to validate her results. The hard part comes in when trying to use the data to acheive the goals she wants.

DecemberLove sorry if I misconstrued or misread something, my intent was not to offend. I actually really appreciate your transparency with all of this. I can't remember every seeing this kind of thread exactly before. I also appreciate the fact the you communicate with the others that posted here and come off bright and with good personality. I sincerely wish you the best of luck.

I also should clarify that I know the results would have been a bit clearer with a longer "sample" time, but I could not risk several rough weeks in a row if thats how it fell. I can handle a week or two at 400-500 dollars-- but a month at that would put me in a bind. I had originally considered a month of each-- but with the holiday season upon us I felt it would also mess with what I was trying to accomplish.

As it stands-- I believe I'm going to return to near what my original rates were (145), with a significant discount for returning clients. I may be totally off on my thought process-- but it seems that perhaps this will be the best solution based off the data I have.

December. One thing I think ladies looking in to your research may want to consider seriously is relative activity levels. Because you are a fairly low volume provider you may have very different results from a lady who might see significantly more men. For your desired level of activity price fluctuations are probably going to have a great deal less impact than a lady seeing 2-4 times as many men.

For example, a lady hoping to see 20 guys a week may have no trouble getting the first 8 appointments booked at any reasonable price point. But how many of the hoped for other 12 are booked may be greatly impacted by rate. Additionally, the word-of-mouth from a higher volume provider is likely going to be greater, whether that is a god or a bad thing.

Just an observation from a guy who tends to over-analyze everything.

I take a 2nd look at a provider, I have not seen, when she has a special.
Spending $$$ and not click is a bummer

The rate is the rate....I want, and will always be attracted to the woman behind the rate. December you fall into that category...smart, obviously intelligent and thoughtful.

Are your dependent variables consistent?
Did you advertise in the same media outlets, ECCIE and BP, BP only, ECCIE only?
Did you place your ad the same time and day each time?
Did your ad get bumped to the second page faster one week than another?
Were the targeted consumers distracted by other entertainment options such as Playoff baseball, Texas State Fair, College football games?
Although your data may provide some insight to buying habits and price points, there are to many independent variables affecting your data collection.
Worthy try to settle a question that never seems to go away around here.