Hacker News Reader

Comment by tatsuke95 | Hacker News Reader

>"Would you go to a place where 99 chefs, each one, will cook a meal for free so you can choose the one you wanted the best? "

That sounds to me like a great way to choose a chef, no?

When I go to buy a car, I haggle with salesmen and test drive cars, all for free, before I choose one. When I am condo shopping, I go see many buildings, and many different agents give me the sales spiel, free, before I choose which condo I want and provide the commission to that realtor.

I don't understand how this method is in any way bad for the consumer.

As far as this service, it's good idea, but that price point is pretty intense. I'm not very good with PowerPoint, but I can definitely "prettify" more than 4 slides per hour. At that pace, I'm paying you $100 an hour for equivalent work? If you can find enterprise clients willing to pay, that's good stuff for you. But I couldn't pay this.

View on HN

> When I go to buy a car, I haggle with salesmen and test drive cars, all for free, before I choose one. When I am condo shopping, I go see many buildings, and many different agents give me the sales spiel, free, before I choose which condo I want and provide the commission to that realtor.

Yeah, but you're viewing pre-built cars and condos, rather than asking for a completely original work to be created from scratch before you buy.

It's not the car, it's the salesman.

I'm occupying the salesman's time, time he could spend making a sale to someone else. Just like I've used the designer's time by not choosing their design. It's where the term "tire-kicker" comes from. Ask your realtor how they feel when they get clients who they know have no intention of buying. It's part of the job.

Most of us aren't sociopaths. We'll have some empathy for the chef. The reason it works out for the car salesman and real estate agent is that a commission on one sale more than makes up for many lost sales; if they could have more sure sales their commission would surely go down accordingly. This isn't the case for 99 designs or 99 chefs.

>"We'll have some empathy for the chef."

I must have missed the part where the chefs were obligated to participate, rather than out of their own free will in the hopes of winning the contract. God forbid they're forced to demonstrate their skills in the most practical, open way possible: direct competition. If they don't want to, they can get work through the multitude of other, regular channels. That hasn't gone away.

>"Most of us aren't sociopaths."

Let me guess, you're a designer? Do you feel sorry for me when I have to terminate design contracts mid-project, after spending real money, because the designer couldn't pull off what he promised? Or just flaked out and ended communication? Because that happens. Often. Ask anyone who is forced to contract out for work.

I don't think any self-respecting chef WOULD participate in 99 chefs, at least, not for the money. But a better analogy would be the American tip: do you leave her 15%, 20%, or 25%? I literally have to break out a calculator to ensure I'm leaving a 20% tip, I would feel guilty otherwise, and I also don't want to overpay. I hate going to the states because of that.

Again, no self-respecting GOOD designer is going to participate in 99 designers, not with the effort needed to come up with good choices for their clients. At least everything must start with a good faith contract, and then maybe contracts get cancelled sometime for non-performance (but really, the designer might avoid that at all costs even if it means working off clock). Now how would 99 designers change that and make it better?

I'm not a designer, but I work with many (and my partner is one).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com