Something that hasn't been touched on in this thread is the issue of Poser software being the main profit device for Smith Micro in this portion of the market, not Poser content. This directly impacts on the content market state overall and the price point of products available for Poser.

For Smith Micro a large range of inexpensive content acts primarily to broaden their market attraction and "influence" purchases of their key product, Poser software. The viability or price point of content, or the profitability/sustainability of their content creators is totally irrelevant to Smith Micro's overall business plan in this segment. SM may be more inclined to flood inexpensive content into the market segment, which would aid them in their overall brand reach and increase the perceived value of their base software. You could actually go as far as to say it is actually is in their interest to drive down content prices for their own customers in the shorter term. Lots of free/cheap content is awesome for Smith Micro and while this may seem great from a consumer point of view at first, unfortunately it is likely to result in a decline in volume of content produced in the longer term and potentially effect the quality of the content available, as the primary content creator segment is made up from the the hobbyist and amateur pool whom have varying skill levels and specialisations. (No offence to amateurs out their, there is some great talent and serious skills in this group. Unfortunately they are probably a little under supported and under utilised in their overall contribution to the current Poser content market). Under these conditions many content creators who are interested in commercial viability are likely to move on to greener pastures as a result of the low price point established by some market places in this sector which can lead to lower ROI for themselves and their work. Also there is little attraction for new professional content creators to enter into the market sector, especially if their research leads them to a thread such as this one, with statements such as "that can be as low as 5-7c per sale".

The only time low price point per unit can work is when volumes are astronomical, such as with the Apple Software Stores approach. If it sells 100 million copies for 3$, a single dollar return per sale would be sufficient to keep pushing the market along and attract further intellectual investment into the creation of content for that platform. Unfortunately $1 per sale on 100 sales drives the market in the opposite direction.

On the flip side when content is King and the cost of the platform is virtually zero, focus is on putting value into the accompanying content itself and keeping price points stable/viable for content creators and the market as a whole. Under this structure the content creators tend to be better nurtured and looked after as they are a primary resource for this kind of business model, this mentality goes on to influence the design of the platform itself. Of course there is nothing stopping 3rd party markets swooping in to undercut on lower price point basis alone, but generally this kind of business strategy is ultimately at the expense of their own content creators in the short term and to the broader consumer market in the long term with the inevitable resulting downturns in variety and quality of content on offer. Some marketplaces can survive quite well under these conditions as the overall income for themselves is generated by a large pool of sellers, providing the marketplace itself an overall pooled income with decent total volumes behind it.

Ideally content pricing should be aiming for a sweet spot, that should be a fair and reasonable price that offers broad accessibility for customers and decent returns for the creators of that content. While coming in at a low price point as a new creator can be done with some level of success, it also has some dangers attached to it. Undercutting can drive the market price points down across the broader market to unprofitable levels, plus when seeking to normalise pricing later once established as seller it may result in a backlash from customers as they perceive the increase as a trend of increasing prices overall.

Free stuff is also a very positive part of the market and can help to grow the market sector overall as it helps generate interest with no accessibility costs (Other than the cost of Poser for the Poser side of the market). Free Stuff is also a great way for people to cut their teeth with content creation and contribute in a manner they enjoy personally. Sorry for the WOT.