the online preception that EVERYTHING is free, is to REQUIRE payment for your work.

> As someone who deals with writers and those
> who are not too familiar with Internet
> marketing, I am well aware of the mindset
> that you should be paid for everything you
> do.

Then if you are aware of it, you should also be aware that it is becoming more prevalent. If you want my work, pay me for my work.

> However, this is not how it works online
> (or, I would suggest, in the real world).
> Very few websites/ezines indeed would pay
> someone for a contribution; and I am
> personally unaware of any marketers that
> have paid people to contribute to their
> ebooks.

You also suggest this is how it works in the rel world??? What rock have you crawled out from under? There isn't a real magazine or newspaper in the REAL WORLD that DOESN'T pay its major contributors.

And the only way WE, the authors, will change the preception of website/ezine/newsletter is to DEMAND payment for our work.

> JVs are based on mutual win-win-win
> situations where the service/product owner,
> list owner and customer are all better off
> than they would have been had the JV not
> been formed.

JVs may be based on this precept, but that doesn't mean they are always win-win-win propositions. Are you releasing your lists to the service/product providers? Or are they taking on faith that your list is relevant to their product/service?

And what happens if they get zero response from your list? How have they been compensated, then?

And are you absolutely certain your customers REALLY want to hear about Bobby Bonehead's Bulge Builder?

> I have assets (a list and those who also
> have lists of targeted prospects), the
> contributor has a service or product that
> the ebook presells for them by virtue of
> their contribution.

See my preceeding comment.

> So, for 5 mins - 30 mins work they are
> likely to gain much more in sales and/or
> subscribers than they lose in time.

"Likely to gain" does NOT mean a return on investment. You gain, but that doesn't mean your customers or your contributors gain a thing.

> I guess it comes down to whether you want a
> quick sale or an investment with an at least
> as good return or more. I'm reminded of that
> woman who sold the rights to a certain song
> for $300 and could have made millions with
> it (it was bought and used by the Cola
> Company).

No. It comes down to whether or not you want to pay for the work others contribute or if you want to piggy-back on the work of those NOT willing to ask for the money.