Introducing 14k Gold, read more on the blog.

The Shapeways Blog: 3D Printing News & Innovation

Shapeways Blog

Gold Plated Stainless Steel is Back


Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

That's pretty reasonable pricing ;-)

Now I have to make something bigger...
#1 Madox (Homepage) on 2010-07-07 12:53 (Reply)
I thought one of the Shapeways goals was to have a self explaining pricing model (unlike the apparently common practice of proprietary and undisclosed pricing formula). Now with this new one I think it's safe to say it is gone, at least for gold plated stainless steel !

Don't forget that linear pricing (or linear with fixed startup fee) has the big advantage for the creator to be able to know the price immediately while designing.
#2 fx2 on 2010-07-07 13:57 (Reply)
Yes, we would like to be as clear as possible so we thought about this long and hard.
We got some comments in the past that the community did not like the start-up cost price model as they do not get anything in return for the start-up cost. So we listened.

In addition we then had to make the choice, if we stick with a very simple model, we had to up our Gold Plated Stainless Steel to a very high start-up cost and only 1 $-price/cm3, which overall meant that small models would become relatively a lot more expensive.
So in the end we decided that using this slightly more complex model means we could offer you better prices, which we felt to be more important than the very straightforward model. To make sure we keep it very transparent though, we have tried to explain our new model by releasing the exact formula and by giving you some samples - see

But I do enjoy feedback, so am very happy you wrote the above comment.
#3 Jo De Lange on 2010-07-07 15:02 (Reply)
Eh, it really looks like a full disclosed pricing structure, it just contains a few rules to reduce the price as the volume increases (take it as a volume discount, like when you buy photocopies), programming a calculator for such a structure is completely trivial, here i precalculated some values in a graph for you to see: :-)
#4 Jose Romero on 2010-07-07 15:09 (Reply)
Hey guys,

Thanks for being clear about the pricing structure of gold plate.

I understand that there is a process for the gold plating that happens after the model is made and that this should be paid for. While your pricing structure is clear, the accuracy of how it reflects the amount of work that goes into a gold model compared to a stainless model is not so clear.

That's why I am asking (just asking), why a model like this wouldn't be more appropriate:

gold model costs = the equivalent stainless steel model costs + gold plating costs.

where, gold plating costs = $X + $Y

where X=the cost of gold plating 1cm3 or less

where Y=a sliding scale based on volume above 1cm3

#5 Whystler on 2010-07-07 18:26 (Reply)
probably main reason why we do not do this is because when we came up with the stainless steel pricing we did not yet have the option of the non-linear pricing model. I would always prefer it if large models become relatively cheaper, as that reflects our own costs.
#6 Jo De Lange on 2010-07-07 19:14 (Reply)
Nice you added examples, because the explanation and table looks like an 11cm3 item would be 99, typical bulk rate, not 123, accumulative sliding rate.
#7 Alicia's Bunny on 2010-07-08 02:40 (Reply)
In reality, the actual cost of gold-dipping per item is really a function of surface area, not actual volume. Take for example Bathsheba's Gyroid (no longer available for some odd reason), which I delightedly ordered gold-dipped during the trial period for US $92.22. The entire model is full of tiny perforated holes, which reduces volume considerably whilst greatly increasing surface area. Although I'm not sure how feasible it would be to implement a surface area calculator, it would much better reflect the gross added cost of gold-dipping than any sort of volume-based scale would.
#8 StarDust on 2010-07-08 07:09 (Reply)
I find it interesting that if I have a model of 1 cm3 it costs $20, if I increase it to 1.5 cm3 it costs $16.50. hmmmmmm
#9 Robert Carlsen on 2010-07-08 22:09 (Reply)
stardust: true and false. the cost of the gold is based on the surface area. there is an additional cost of someone sitting there sticking the parts on hooks and dipping them.

I'm with you on that Robert. This scale is fine, except if you have a really small part. The best result for me would be to put 6 pairs of small earrings into one file. i realize that is kind of like screwing shapeways because you really have to dip 12 things, not 1. but it's also hard to rationalize a part costing $2-3 in steel and $20 when dipped in gold since it does have a lot less actual gold than the larger part. could there be a viable solution that is somewhere in between?
#10 Erica Schwartz on 2010-07-09 01:30 (Reply)
ok i take back my previous comment. it's totally fair, just confusing. I didn't understand at first. the chart is not clear. it needs to include the words "for the first cm3" for "for the next x cm3" etc. it's not $9 per cm3 for a model 9cm3 or larger, which would mean the gold would be CHEAPER than the stainless steel. according to the first chart, that would be the case.
#11 Erica Schwartz on 2010-07-09 01:39 (Reply)
Sorry for the confusion Erica

when we say > 10cm³ = $9/cm³ we mean for every cm³ over 10cm³ is $9 per cm³
#12 Duann on 2010-07-09 01:48 (Reply)
Hi Robert,
"1 cm3 it costs $20, if I increase it to 1.5 cm3 it costs $16.50", this is not completely the case 1cm3 = $20 and 1.5cm3 = 1*$20 + 0.5*$11 = $25.5.
#13 Anonymous on 2010-07-14 07:22 (Reply)

Add Comment

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

The Shapeways Blog: 3D Printing News & Innovation

Learn More »