When is "free" implied?
Yesterday I was in my car listening to the radio when I heard a commercial for life insurance. I’ve probably heard the same commercial 50 times before, but for some reason I actually listened to the words this time. I heard “call now for a no obligation free rate quote.”
What?
Was there ever a time when you had to pay someone to ask how much what they’re selling will cost?
Imagine walking into a store and seeing a shirt you like. There’s no price tag on it, so you bring it up to the counter. You ask the price, but instead, the cashier says “pay me $20 and I’ll tell you how much it costs.”
To me, pricing information doesn’t cost anything. It just doesn’t make any sense. Simply telling me how much you’re selling something for shouldn’t cost me a dime. In all of my experience in market transactions, this has just never happened.
So maybe the “free rate quote” line is just something of a marketing buzz phrase. Perhaps the creators of the radio ad tried two versions of the ad in front of focus groups and found that those who heard “free rate quote” called 5 times more than those that did not. Sure, it’s redundant and unnecessary, but if the line is effective, I understand what you’d add it.
To me, the question isn’t why the advertiser put “free” in an ad for something largely expected to cost nothing. The real question is: what do we expect to be free?
Free On The Web
Looking at the products and services I use on the web there are a few different pricing models:
1. Free- Twitter is the best example here for me. A service that is completely free with no ads and no premium version. It is truly a free and open service that asks nothing of its (U.S.) users.
2. Free but with ads- gmail is a good example of a free service supported by advertising. gmail gives users lots of storage and a great service, and users need only tolerate a few ads.
3. Free at first- Many of the email list management services give users a free trial. After a certain time or use limit, users are required to pay for membership.
4. Freemium- Flickr and Basecamp are my favorite examples of freemium services. Flickr gives everyone a free account, but if you need more storage space or want to add new sets of photos, you’ll need a pro account. Basecamp is a great piece of small project management SaaS, but you’ll need to pay to access premium features.
5. Always Pay- Some of the business intelligence sites are membership-only and make users pay to access their information.
So do the examples scale? If you were launching a twitter competitor tomorrow, would you be forced to offer the service for free based on perceived user expectation? Has twitter’s free service defined the business model for other microblogging platforms simply based on the fact that users associate the service with the model?
And thinking back to that commercial I heard, let me ask you this: If you were tasked with creating a commercial campaign for twitter (or any free web service) would you emphasize the fact that it is free?
Filed under: Uncategorized
I’ll bet that a lot of people targeted by those life insurance type ads aren’t in the habit of getting consultations on things and maybe would be reluctant to talk to someone unless they are reassured that they won’t get roped into something or be obligated to buy something like the lipstick at the Lancome counter for the “free” makeover. I’m not saying there isn’t still a certain level of deception or trickery there just by dropping the “free” word a lot since of course the people calling WILL be pressured, but I can definitely see how it might allay a concern with listeners that they’ll have to pay just to talk to somebody.
As for twitter, I’m personally apprehensive about free goodies (maybe because I’m like the people I speak of: lower middle-class background, not a lot of money, sure there’s a price tag attached, etc.). I love twitter and want it to be around forever; I just don’t think it’s realistic to expect it to be totally free and be able to sustain itself in a usable manner. In fact, it kind of ANNOYS me that they haven’t monetized it with ads. Free is not as important to me as USEFUL, and if we need ads to keep away the fail whale, then I’m all for them.
I think you can reverse the process. It’s not easy but its all about the image you create. One thing that comes to mind is red bull. Why did people start paying $3 for a can of stuff that didn’t even taste that great? Why did they start mixing it with vodka for $6-8 a drink? Sodas are still around and are half the price and its not like they don’t have sugar and caffeine.
Red Bull spent years developing their brand as cool, trendy and edgy. People then started paying high prices for something that in the end wasn’t much different then buying a pepsi that was probably 3 times the size.
It’s all about what your image is. If you create a desirable image you can charge for whatever you want. Maybe the next trend of the super trendy stores will be charging you to find out the price because if you have to ask they don’t want you there. Haha, well lets hope not but I think stuff like that is always possible.