I may have brought this up once already, but I feel inspired to restate it succinctly.
Not being sure what an mEd course costs to produce, I'm just going to use some round numbers to illustrate a point. Supposing the cost is $5000, let's look at two scenarios that make for a successful CP process:
A) 50 customers bid $100 each...it goes into production.
500 customers bid $10 each...it goes into production.
Based on the current structural design of CP, the first scenario (or something like it) is almost universally the one that plays out. The second possibility virtually NEVER has an opportunity to play out.
True enough, some may admit, but so what? The costs have been covered...what does it matter?
Good question.
It matters for this reason:
In scenario A, once the mEd course has gone live and downloaded, there are 50 people who have the course and ONLY 50 who might be inclined/motivated to purchase some of the ADDITIONAL RESOURCES that the course mentions and links to.
In scenario B, there are 450 MORE customers who meet that same description. Cha-CHING!!!
So forget the poor sods who are actually so poor that they can't afford the $100 cost but would happily jump on the $10 price...and the noble thought of giving them an opportunity to participate in getting these courses. That thoughtful and considerate gesture may well be an insufficient motivation to deliberately create opportunity for their participation...
...but MO' MONEY sure ought to motivate their inclusion! Now, I know some will suggest that a person who is too poor to buy in at $100 is not likely to spend much more than the $10 it takes to get the mEd course. I disagree. If you spent $10 rather than $100 to get the same course, you could still spend $40 additional and still pay only half of scenario A. That's how folks with limited funds think.
The upshot? Scenario B generates more revenue AND more people get to enjoy participation in mEd CPs.