The article is informative, but I don't find this approach really "ethical".
I'd second that. It's not about saving $22K, it's about getting people to give things away and devalue themselves as professionals.
No, actually it's about saving $22K.
How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
11–20 of 62 posts
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#12I have a big problem with this because it takes advantage of people who need the money, otherwise they wouldn't be participating in this kind of contest. It's one thing if you have ten participants and you pay the winner the equivalent of 10x the value of one site. But that's not happening here. If there are ten sites worth of work being done, only one site worth of pay is being spent.
Let's make a comparison:
Let's say a day's worth of yard work is worth $100. Ten home owners in a neighborhood need yard work done. They get ten unemployed people to each do the work on their homes. These people really need the money. At the end of the day, the person who does the best job gets the $100, and the rest get nothing. Ten houses worth of yard work has been done, but only one day's worth of pay is given out.
Yeah, you can get away with it, but it's because you're taking advantage of people. Just because you can ask for it and just because you'll find people to do it doesn't make it right.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#13That's a pretty shady approach for a VC firm. Do they deal with startups in this way too?
In what way, specifically, is it shady? Is using a crowdsourced design service inherently shady?
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#14The article is informative, but I don't find this approach really "ethical".
I don't understand this viewpoint at all. No one is holding a gun to the designers heads. When I first got started in marketing and SEO, I did a lot of work for free. The confidence and references it gave me let me get paid work very soon after. Are you saying I shouldn't be allowed to do that?
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#15That's a pretty shady approach for a VC firm. Do they deal with startups in this way too?
I wouldn't say its shady ... its just human nature to try and commoditize anything that costs money ... its up to designers to try and resist this ... plus you should be blaming the people that fall for it and are actively helping the (commoditization) process along.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#16I have a big problem with this because it takes advantage of people who need the money, otherwise they wouldn't be participating in this kind of contest. It's one thing if you have ten participants and you pay the winner the equivalent of 10x the value of one site. But that's not happening here. If there are ten sites worth of work being done, only one site worth of pay is being spent. Let's make a comparison: Let's…
Most of the complaints I hear about crowdsourced design services come from people who don't participate in them (just for the record, I don't either). It seems kind of presumptuous to say the designers are desperate and being taken advantage of. Maybe the long-term value is worth it for them (e.g., winning 10% of contests)? Maybe they find it a fun way to build experience?
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#17I have a big problem with this because it takes advantage of people who need the money, otherwise they wouldn't be participating in this kind of contest. It's one thing if you have ten participants and you pay the winner the equivalent of 10x the value of one site. But that's not happening here. If there are ten sites worth of work being done, only one site worth of pay is being spent. Let's make a comparison: Let's…
What is the difference beween this and when I was just starting to learn online marketing, and I worked for free? The designers choose to enter the contest, they know how much their time is worth.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#18Spec work controversy aside, they make a statement at the end I find ironic:
The one big drawback is that it is a time-consuming endeavor, and to manage a good contest takes a decent amount of planning and focus.
Managing a "good contest" takes anything but a decent amount of planning and focus, and is not time consuming.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#19Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#20I have a big problem with this because it takes advantage of people who need the money, otherwise they wouldn't be participating in this kind of contest. It's one thing if you have ten participants and you pay the winner the equivalent of 10x the value of one site. But that's not happening here. If there are ten sites worth of work being done, only one site worth of pay is being spent. Let's make a comparison: Let's…
I think painting the people who partake in these 'contests' as victims is a bit hyperbolic ... they simply should know better.
Maybe if designers redirected their efforts from pouring opprobrium on the people who follow natural human tendency of wanting good work done on the cheap to educating members of their profession on the dangers of partaking in spec work ... things might be different.