Comments on: Spec Work is a Ponzi Scheme

By: andrewhyde

andrewhyde — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:29:07 +0000

A band makes a personal work of art to sell. They don't make a
finished song with direction and lyrics built in. They are making a
good that can be sold 100,000+ times. Spec work would be if the
finished album could only be sold once. There is a lose money point,
a break even point and a get rich point. This is why they do it. Spec
only has a possibility of break even.

I think companies should hire one team to do one job. Contract it and
price it competitively.

Nobody wins design contests.

By: andrewhyde

andrewhyde — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:29:07 +0000

By: Tromtrom

Tromtrom — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:24:06 +0000

I disagree with your comparison.

In what way is a spec really different from a music demo? All bands that are not signed make loads of demos, sending them to record companies – how is that different from an architect firm competing for jobs – or graphic designers competing with specs?

What it is all about is that creative people have to compete fiercely to get potential employer's attention – that might be hard and UNPAID work, but is there any other way to handle this?

Is your main point with this, Andrew, that companies should hire graphic designers instead? Like record companies employ bands and publishers employ writers…? (Which they never do, in fact you misunderstood the ironi.)

By: andrewhyde

andrewhyde — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:31:15 +0000

Musicians make the album they want to make to try to sell to an audience. Spec is if they had to record an album at the direction of each fan for the chance that each fan would buy their version.

Big difference.

By: tromtrom

tromtrom — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:41:15 +0000

What I don't understand is this: Musicians, architects, writers, freelancers of all kinds – everyone do “spec work”. Why shouldn't web designers? It's not that I don't see your points, but I guess there are perhaps 200.000 thousand times more strugling musicians than designers out there, pushing demos, getting nowhere. I feel pity for them, but it's not the mucis business' fault. They can't sign all of them.

By: andrewhyde

andrewhyde — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:49:27 +0000

Keep working on that thinking thing.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 06:10:59 +0000

That is a very, very weak link. Ponzi schemes are so much more than that. That is like saying, “Deer hunters are bank robbers. They both have guns.” Keep working on those analogies!

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:24:39 +0000

At this point, all I think you are saying is “Spec work is bad, and oil down a drain is bad, so spec work must = oil down a drain.” When you make an analogy, there really needs to be a stronger link between the two. Likewise you said that “Spec work is a Ponzi Scheme” when there is only a very, very weak link between the two. All I'm saying is that you really need to work on you analogy skills. Saying “ is ” with very little link is unprofessional regardless of what your cause is.

By: andrewhyde

andrewhyde — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:03:50 +0000

lotto based economics never work, especially when masked with competition.

Disruptive markets that you talk about are very real and true, but are sustainable in themselves, which spec is not. Spec, as you are seeing, implodes.

It is oil down the drain.

And you think that it is cool.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 04:50:54 +0000

That didn't really answer my question. You're saying above that “low wages for creatives” = “oil down drain”. But historically, low wages only meant that there was an oversupply of workers. After some of those workers changed to other fields, wages went back up. So I think you are assigning moral overtones to something that is simply economic evolution. Study economic history for the last century, and you will see that this has happened over and over again to different groups, and each group gets upset and says it is a moral issue. But after the passage of time, it becomes apparent that it was just economic change.