[lwhi]

99designs exploits naivety and exploits economic hardship.

I can't see how the system is different to a pyramid scheme. The majority of the participants will see no benefit by submitting an 'entry'.

Crowdsourcing has the potential to be enormously beneficial to society - but the crowdspring / 99design model is unfair.

[webwright]

"I can't see how the system is different to a pyramid scheme. The majority of the participants will see no benefit by submitting an 'entry'."

Just like startups. Or RFPs. With these, the rewards are HUGE so it's worth it to roll the dice. Unfortunately for Western designers, the amount of money regular designers are making on 99Designs IS huge for offshore designers.

For speculative work like spec design, startups, or RFPs it's all about the math-- Cost of Effort * Chance of Winning = Worth it.

[ultrasaurus]

For the amount of work many organizations expect you to put into RFPs, and then print 5 copies (in colour and bound if you want to win) and ship them at your own expense, only to find out that they had really pre-selected a vendor but their policies require them to at least pretend to open it up to outside vendors... I think the comparison might be a little unfair to 99designs.

[lwhi]

Imo, it's not like a startup or a RFP at all - because in these cases those involved are taking risks which will hopefully lead to BIG gains.

In a contest like this, the participants are simply competing for the chance to be paid.

I cannot fathom how this scenario can possibly be fair.

[roel_v]

What a bunch of whining about 'fair'. It's simply the market at work - nobody owes you anything, not a certain amount of money per hour, not a certain amount of work, nothing. As long as there are people who want to do the work for the payout they get, the system works. If you find you can't make enough money on 99designs, you're free to get a job at McDonalds.

RFP's don't lead to BIG gains either - there are many contracts with a cost plus model. And most startups fail or whither on for years, with no real prospects. That's just how it works - don't like it? Feel free to do something else.

[lwhi]

I'm a capitalist, because I feel it's the best system we have. However, there's obviously a wide spectrum of views that can be ascribed to capitalist philosophy.

I'm quite happy to be able to state my politics places me at the opposite end of the spectrum to you.

--

"That's just how it works - don't like it? Feel free to do something else."

I'm happy to argue to my case - and to disagree with practices that I feel are unjust or unfair.

Logically and morally - this type of crowd-sourcing involves exploitation. If you carry out work for someone - logically they DO owe you something.

[webwright]

I think you might be missing the core of my point. They ARE big gains for some people... Just not professional designers in Western countries. Globalization at work.

Check out the top designers in the system ( http://blog.99designs.com/tag/top-designers/ ). Note the nationalities and the cost-of-living in those countries. These guys aren't entering hundreds of these contests out of desperation-- they are making a great living. It looks like the good ones are winning 12-20% of the contests they enter.

[lwhi]

I might be wrong, but I don't think many professional designers in western countries take part in 99designs.

Perhaps the prize is worth comparatively more in 'developing' countries, but the base argument still stands.

People are competing for the chance to be paid. The vast majority of people will gain nothing.

[nsfmc]

you make it sound like the swoopo of design!

[lwhi]

It's very much the Swoopo of design ;)

The majority of effort (cost) expended is provided by the crowd - one person (the contest holder) gets to monopolise on this spread cost, while the majority of the people who take part in the competition end up with no payment or benefit whatsoever.

It's an inconvenient truth - one which many people who use 99designs try to overlook.

[treo]

The big difference is that on Swoopo you lose your investment if you don't win. But on 99designs you can still keep the design and get the feedback that it wasn't the right thing, and what was. Even if you don't get the job, you still get the practise and feedback. So I think there is at least some benefit.

[lwhi]

You're not competing for the job - you're provided with the job when you enter.

You're competing for payment. There's a big difference.

I think expecting participants to be grateful for the opportunity to practice stretches credulity a little.