Two words: "View Source"
How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
41–50 of 62 posts
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's easy to forget about revisions, it's not unusual for a simple project to go through 3 iterations and several meetings -- all of which sap up time. In a healthy crowdsourcing process, failed bids aren't all that different from thrown out iterations and dead-end meetings (in the long term).
They are different - because some companies are left with the task of only creating iterations (for which there's no payment)
Hence the "healthy" part (I agree with the general tone of the comments that this instance seems a little less than healthy).
In general (like an average 99designs user) a long term process where you win 10% of the bids can be entirely fine. Especially if the trade off is towards spending more time designing and less time in meetings.
(Worth noting too, many designers submit slight variations of the same design to multiple contests)
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#43Would anyone care to explain the prevalence of comments from designers complaining about "spec work"? I had never heard this term applied in a derogatory manner before. Is the idea that because you are an "artist" you are somehow exempt from the economics of competitive pricing?
It's not about competitive pricing - it's about working for free. Spec work involves doing a unit of bespoke work for a company, for the chance of payment. It's not fair - and there aren't many industries which operate this way. I totally abhor the concept.
I'm guessing many of the designers on those sites are from developing countries, where even the chance of landing a $3000 contract would mean a great deal to themselves and their families. So yes, it is competition: somebody is willing to do the same work for less.
I can see how this rankles the establishment, to which I say, Welcome to the 21st century. You don't get a free pass any more simply because you live in the first world.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about competitive pricing - it's about working for free. Spec work involves doing a unit of bespoke work for a company, for the chance of payment. It's not fair - and there aren't many industries which operate this way. I totally abhor the concept.
I'm guessing many of the designers on those sites are from developing countries, where even the chance of landing a $3000 contract would mean a great deal to themselves and their families. So yes, it is competition: somebody is willing to do the same work for less. I can see how this rankles the establishment, to which I say, Welcome to the 21st century. You don't get a free pass any more simply because you live in t…
This isn't creating some brave new world - levelling the playing field for all .. if you believe that you're quite simply bonkers :)
The injustice isn't that some people are being paid less - it's that some people aren't being paid at all.
On top of this there's one person, or company, who is wholly benefiting from the situation, while another takes a cut of the proceeds.
Logically, the system works because some people are willing to work for free. It's rotten.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Actually no it isn't because he got exactly what he paid for: A template-like design and a mess of code worth $2K-3K tops.
Instead of saving $22K what he actually did was waste time running an ego-stoking circus for two weeks.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
A good designer would treat it as an actual design project rather than merely a "make it pretty" project. A good designer would step back and examine the actual business and functional problems and evaluate ways in which design could solve them. They'd work with the client to translate those problems and solutions into a visual and functional design. Rather, in this project, it sounds like this Andrew.Tweed (the OP)…
The part that's so frustrating is that thomvest (and lots of other companies) is in the business of creating relationships and yet they don't understand how having a relationship with a designer/agency will benefit them.
I completely agree.
If a company treats the people involved in its business relationships as cheap, expendable commodities - the company is not going to shine.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#47I 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…
Let's make another comparison. Most of us pour everything we've got into our startups. The only difference is nobody asked us to build them, the rest of the story is the same - most people are going to waste a lot of their time and money.
Why would Johnny Designer deserve guaranteed money in this of all communities where we gamble years of our lives in the hope of getting paid? Like us he's chosen a route that only rewards a lucky few.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing many of the designers on those sites are from developing countries, where even the chance of landing a $3000 contract would mean a great deal to themselves and their families. So yes, it is competition: somebody is willing to do the same work for less. I can see how this rankles the establishment, to which I say, Welcome to the 21st century. You don't get a free pass any more simply because you live in t…
This isn't creating some brave new world - levelling the playing field for all .. if you believe that you're quite simply bonkers :) The injustice isn't that some people are being paid less - it's that some people aren't being paid at all . On top of this there's one person, or company, who is wholly benefiting from the situation, while another takes a cut of the proceeds. Logically, the system works because some peo…
This is what I was getting at in my original post: why do so many people feel the need to render a moral judgement on the behalf of others? If it's rotten, don't participate. Everyone using those sites does so of their own free will.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#49I 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.
The difference is that the company actually used your ideas.
Re: How we made a $25,000 website for $3,000
#50Inline styles, tables, 344 validation errors, no meta descriptions and 88 objects (coming in at 800kb/page) loading. 25,000?
Also why is the blog homepage a single post?