One of the most important aspects of a successful course co-production partnership is determining a fair and profitable commission structure. Since co-producers and course creators contribute in different ways—one focusing on content creation and the other on marketing, sales, and operations—it’s essential to define a revenue-sharing agreement that reflects the value each partner brings.
A poorly structured commission can lead to misunderstandings, financial losses, and even failed partnerships. On the other hand, a well-balanced revenue split ensures long-term profitability and collaboration success. In this guide, we’ll explore how to determine the right commission for course co-production, common revenue-sharing models, and best practices for structuring agreements.
Why Is Commission Important in Course Co-Production?
The commission structure impacts both partners in several ways:
- Ensures Fair Compensation: Each partner gets paid based on their contributions.
- Encourages Long-Term Collaboration: A fair split keeps both parties motivated to grow the course.
- Aligns Incentives: When commissions are structured properly, both partners work towards the same financial success.
- Defines Expectations Clearly: Prevents conflicts by setting upfront terms on revenue distribution.
To set the right commission, consider factors like workload, expertise, financial investment, and long-term scalability.
Factors That Influence Commission Splits
Before deciding on a revenue-sharing model, evaluate these key factors:
1. Workload and Responsibilities
How much work does each party contribute? A producer (course creator) focuses on developing content, while a co-producer handles marketing, sales, and logistics. If one partner takes on significantly more responsibilities, they should receive a larger percentage.
2. Initial Financial Investment
If one partner invests money in course development (e.g., video production, ads, platform fees), they may deserve a larger commission. Some partnerships involve shared investments, leading to equal splits.
3. Brand Authority and Audience Size
A well-known expert with an existing audience may contribute significantly to organic sales. If the producer has a strong personal brand, they may negotiate a larger share. However, if the co-producer is responsible for building the audience, their share should reflect that.
4. Course Pricing and Expected Sales Volume
Higher-priced courses ($500-$2,000) often have lower sales volumes but higher commissions per sale. Lower-priced courses ($50-$200) require more aggressive marketing, which might justify a higher percentage for the co-producer.
5. Long-Term Course Management
If the co-producer is responsible for ongoing tasks like customer support, community engagement, and sales tracking, their revenue share should account for these long-term efforts.
Common Revenue-Sharing Models
There are several ways to structure a commission agreement in course co-production. The best model depends on the contributions of both parties.
1. Equal 50/50 Revenue Split
Best for: Partnerships where both parties contribute equally in effort, expertise, and investment.
In this model, the course creator provides content, and the co-producer handles marketing and operations. Both partners share profits equally, making this a simple and fair approach.
✅ Pros: Encourages teamwork and equal commitment.
❌ Cons: If one partner contributes more than the other, they may feel undervalued.
2. 60/40 or 70/30 Revenue Split
Best for: Situations where one partner takes on a larger workload or financial risk.
- 60/40 Split: The majority share goes to the more active partner (e.g., the co-producer if they handle marketing and sales).
- 70/30 Split: Common when one partner handles almost all responsibilities, such as a co-producer funding marketing and managing course growth.
✅ Pros: More flexibility to reflect workload differences.
❌ Cons: May require strong negotiation to ensure fairness.
3. Fixed Fee + Commission Model
Best for: When a co-producer prefers guaranteed payment in addition to performance-based earnings.
Example:
- The course creator pays the co-producer a fixed fee (e.g., $5,000 for marketing setup).
- The co-producer then earns a lower commission (e.g., 30% of revenue).
✅ Pros: The co-producer gets upfront compensation, reducing risk.
❌ Cons: The course creator takes on more initial financial risk.
4. Flat Commission per Sale
Best for: When a co-producer only wants a percentage per course sale without profit sharing.
Example:
- The co-producer earns $50 per course sold, regardless of price fluctuations.
✅ Pros: Easy to calculate and manage.
❌ Cons: Limits earning potential for the co-producer.
5. Tiered Revenue Share Model
Best for: Scaling partnerships where commissions increase as sales grow.
Example:
- First 100 sales: 40% to the co-producer.
- Next 200 sales: 50% to the co-producer.
- Beyond 500 sales: 60% to the co-producer.
This rewards performance and ensures the co-producer is incentivized to scale sales.
✅ Pros: Motivates both parties to achieve higher sales.
❌ Cons: Requires detailed tracking and agreement adjustments.
Best Practices for Setting Course Co-Production Commission
1. Define Roles Clearly Before Negotiating
Outline exactly what each partner will do (content creation, marketing, sales, support) before discussing revenue shares.
2. Consider a Trial Period Before Committing to a Long-Term Split
Start with a short-term test partnership (e.g., first 3 months) before finalizing a permanent revenue split.
3. Use Contracts to Prevent Disputes
Create a written agreement specifying:
- Revenue split percentage.
- Duration of the partnership.
- Responsibilities of each partner.
- Payment frequency (monthly, quarterly).
- Exit strategy if the partnership ends.
A simple legal contract ensures clarity and avoids conflicts.
4. Reevaluate Commission Over Time
If sales increase significantly or responsibilities change, renegotiate the commission structure to reflect the new dynamics.
5. Track Sales and Payouts Transparently
Use platforms like Kajabi, Teachable, and ThriveCart to automate revenue tracking and payments. Providing real-time access to sales data helps maintain trust.
Final Thoughts
Choosing the right commission structure in course co-production is essential for long-term success. A fair agreement ensures both the producer and co-producer are motivated, fairly compensated, and aligned toward growth.
Before finalizing a revenue-sharing model, consider workload, financial investment, and sales expectations. Whether you choose a 50/50 split, tiered revenue model, or a flat commission, make sure it reflects the value each partner brings.
Are you ready to establish a profitable course co-production partnership? Use these guidelines to negotiate a fair and effective commission that benefits both parties!