The structure that works
Two blocks, in this order: what you make, and what the brand may do with it. Keeping them visibly separate is the whole point, because it establishes before any negotiation that the licence is a priced item rather than a courtesy.
- Deliverables with a starting price — Short-form video, product video, photo set, bundle. Use 'from' pricing so the card qualifies budget without committing you to a number before you have seen the brief.
- Usage rights, priced by tier — Organic only, paid social by duration, whitelisting, broader media, perpetual buyout. Each as a separate line or an uplift on the base.
- What the base rate includes — Revision rounds, turnaround time, formats and aspect ratios delivered, and concept development if you do it.
- Add-ons with prices — Extra revisions, rush turnaround, raw footage, additional aspect ratios, exclusivity, extra talent, props above a threshold.
- Terms — Deposit policy, payment terms, and your cancellation position. One line each.
- A date — An undated rate card is one a brand can hold you to eighteen months later.
Pricing usage rights as tiers, not a toggle
The most common structural failure is a single 'usage rights: +X' line. Usage has four independent dimensions — duration, media, territory, and exclusivity — and collapsing them into one number means you are either overcharging for a modest ask or badly undercharging for a broad one.
The practical version for a rate card is a short ladder of named tiers with an uplift on each. It stays readable, and it makes the expensive asks visibly expensive before anyone starts negotiating. A brand asking for a perpetual worldwide buyout should be able to see, on your own document, that it costs a multiple of the organic rate rather than a small surcharge.
The line that protects you
Put 'Rates are for the usage tier stated. Any use beyond the agreed tier, duration, or territory is a separate licence' on the card. It costs nothing, and it converts an awkward later conversation into a reference to something the brand already read.
What to leave off
Your follower count, unless the deal genuinely includes posting on your own channel. Putting it on a UGC rate card invites the brand to price you by reach, which is the wrong model and almost always produces a lower number than pricing by production and licence.
Hourly rates. UGC is bought by deliverable, and an hourly rate punishes you for getting faster while making the total unpredictable for the brand — the worst of both.
Every possible service. A rate card listing fourteen deliverable types reads as unfocused and does not get read. Lead with the three or four you actually want to sell.
Discounts, as a printed feature. A card advertising bulk discounts anchors the conversation on getting the price down before it has started.
Public card or sent on request?
Both work, and they trade off differently. A public card qualifies budget before anyone writes to you, saves an email round-trip, and reads as confident. The cost is that you cannot price by client — a well-funded brand and a small one see the same number, and you lose the ability to charge more where more is available.
A card sent on request keeps that flexibility and lets you tailor the tiers to the brief. The cost is a delay at exactly the moment a brand is deciding whether to bother, and some of them do not bother.
A middle path most creators land on: publish a starting rate publicly — 'from X per video, usage priced separately' — and send the full tiered card once you have seen the brief. You qualify budget without capping your ceiling.
Keeping it current
Rate cards go stale in a specific way: you raise your prices in conversation but the document still says the old number, and then a brand quotes your own card back at you. Whatever format you use, there has to be one version that is the real one.
This is the practical argument for a live link over an attached file. A PDF you emailed to thirty brands is thirty frozen copies of an old price. A link updates in place, and the version they have is always the version you have.