Comments on: Silly Feud of the Year: crowdSpring vs. Threadless vs. “Spec Work is Evil” http://chicagotechnews.com/commentary/silly-feud-of-the-year-crowdspring-vs-threadless-vs-spec-work-is-evil Your Technology Business News Source For Chicago Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:14:03 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3 hourly 1 By: Jeff Bach http://chicagotechnews.com/commentary/silly-feud-of-the-year-crowdspring-vs-threadless-vs-spec-work-is-evil/comment-page-1#comment-159 Jeff Bach Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:44:45 +0000 http://chicagotechnews.com/?p=260#comment-159 One bit that is either missing or I missed in this article is anything about how this business model has made an "RFP" irrelevant. A "Request For Proposal" used to be how companies made their desires known - how they got the "word" out. Back in the day, entire pages (paper mind you) of the Seattle Business Daily were covered with RFPs. Our office had a secretary whose sole job was reading the SBD and finding RFPs that the company could bid on. To me, it looks like crowdSpring is merely removing one more friction point in the business cycle. Most importantly, the whole thing is dependent upon the companies that know about crowdSpring and the designers who also know about crowdSpring. In both cases, I think a certain fraction of the general community is going to know or discover this style of mating customer with designer. Old school (aka big rich clients) are unlikely to EVER do anything with this part of the marketplace. So what we have here are the little companies with no-to-low budgets trying to find a similarly scaled designer who will/can work for peanuts. This is not bad, it is just a specific part of a large market. The danger is thinking that Fortune 500 companies will ever involve themselves at this level of business. For small companies and small designers it might just be perfect, assuming of course that discovery happens and participation follows. my .02 Jeff PS - Is Craig's List really any different? If I were crowdSpring, I would be nervous about CL deciding that they should start posting designer piecework on the CL site. One bit that is either missing or I missed in this article is anything about how this business model has made an “RFP” irrelevant. A “Request For Proposal” used to be how companies made their desires known – how they got the “word” out. Back in the day, entire pages (paper mind you) of the Seattle Business Daily were covered with RFPs. Our office had a secretary whose sole job was reading the SBD and finding RFPs that the company could bid on. To me, it looks like crowdSpring is merely removing one more friction point in the business cycle. Most importantly, the whole thing is dependent upon the companies that know about crowdSpring and the designers who also know about crowdSpring. In both cases, I think a certain fraction of the general community is going to know or discover this style of mating customer with designer. Old school (aka big rich clients) are unlikely to EVER do anything with this part of the marketplace. So what we have here are the little companies with no-to-low budgets trying to find a similarly scaled designer who will/can work for peanuts.

This is not bad, it is just a specific part of a large market. The danger is thinking that Fortune 500 companies will ever involve themselves at this level of business. For small companies and small designers it might just be perfect, assuming of course that discovery happens and participation follows.
my .02
Jeff
PS – Is Craig’s List really any different? If I were crowdSpring, I would be nervous about CL deciding that they should start posting designer piecework on the CL site.

]]> By: not quite fair http://chicagotechnews.com/commentary/silly-feud-of-the-year-crowdspring-vs-threadless-vs-spec-work-is-evil/comment-page-1#comment-113 not quite fair Fri, 29 May 2009 23:15:33 +0000 http://chicagotechnews.com/?p=260#comment-113 "You’re submitting a design against ~50 people for a client you’ve never interacted with in hopes of winning a contract." I don't think that is a fair assessment of Crowd Spring. For most contests on Crowd Spring, most of the submissions come from 3-4 people. They will make an initial submission, then make many additional, modified, submissions based on feedback from the buyer. It is nothing like doing the whole job, then being stuck in a lottery with 50 other people. There is significant interaction between the creatives and the buyers. Yes, there is a lot of "wasted" work. However, it isn't as bad as your article implies. “You’re submitting a design against ~50 people for a client you’ve never interacted with in hopes of winning a contract.”

I don’t think that is a fair assessment of Crowd Spring. For most contests on Crowd Spring, most of the submissions come from 3-4 people. They will make an initial submission, then make many additional, modified, submissions based on feedback from the buyer. It is nothing like doing the whole job, then being stuck in a lottery with 50 other people. There is significant interaction between the creatives and the buyers.

Yes, there is a lot of “wasted” work. However, it isn’t as bad as your article implies.

]]> By: Handicapping the 2009 ITA CityLIGHTS Awards | Chicago Tech News http://chicagotechnews.com/commentary/silly-feud-of-the-year-crowdspring-vs-threadless-vs-spec-work-is-evil/comment-page-1#comment-74 Handicapping the 2009 ITA CityLIGHTS Awards | Chicago Tech News Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:40:43 +0000 http://chicagotechnews.com/?p=260#comment-74 [...] in controversy on the ethics of working on-spec and for what many (including myself) consider a punk-league ambush of Threadless at SXSW.  Options City has been lining up it’s vendor agreements in the last 6 months and is [...] [...] in controversy on the ethics of working on-spec and for what many (including myself) consider a punk-league ambush of Threadless at SXSW.  Options City has been lining up it’s vendor agreements in the last 6 months and is [...]

]]>