Where the design community meets.
Hi! I saw this on Hacker News and I thought it would be nice to discuss. What do you think about this? Do you like the bussiness model? (the price seems to increase with each sale, which doesn't make sense to me...).
That's actually the fun part of it. It make this project different. It reminds me highscore.money.
If you like one of his logos you better hurry up :)
Yeah, for the designer is fun, but is it for the buyer? In the end, you're buying a logo for using in a project, and the people who will see it doesn't care how you bought it.
But my true question, since we're designers is: is it good to a business to buy a logo that wasn't specifically made for it?
I don't think it's good for anyone's business. It endorses the concept that design is about commodities and not an involved service. If he sold these as stock illustrations and people decided to use them as logos that would be different, but a logo ought to be considered based on the needs of the business, their consumers, and the market. He's not necessarily harming design by doing this, but this type of enterprise does enable businesses to skip the design process and thereby eliminate the actual value design has to offer business. What you'll likely find on the other end of these transactions are a bunch of businesses who've implemented a logo without much consideration beyond "I like that", which is where a designer would typically offer guidance on branding and implementation.
I don't think it's as simple as good vs bad.
If you're small, can't afford much, and just need some kind of mark to represent your horse-selling business, get the freakin' horse image if that fits you.
If you're a big spender, and you need something that perfectly fits your product(s) and is future/growth-proof, yeah sure, this will probably be a pretty crappy solution.
In business, perfect != the best. Perfect = the most efficient.
I agree, and although I would think it would be wise to allocate appropriate resources to design from the get-go, that's not very realistic for the smallest businesses. One consideration is that for the costs highlighted here (and even more so once the prices grow) one could likely hire an affordable designer or student, which may not offer as polished of a result, but at least the result would be considered to the needs of their business, and in that case it would be the most perfect and efficient by your suggestion. As a side note: I was careful not to say it was "bad" because I don't think that's necessarily the case, but I did say I personally don't believe it to be "good" because in my mind for it to equate to the value of a personalized and considered logo it would require a large amount of luck or expertise on the part of the purchaser.
It's not just the $500 though - it's also time spent managing and time spent waiting to get the end result. Especially with inexperienced designers :)
That is very true, but I do think dedicating a little time and focus on branding from the beginning should help even the smallest, stretched company! Plus, with the assistance of even an inexperienced designer implementation should be more efficient than something which is off-the-shelf, especially if the customer doesn't have much technical know-how.
I see it's increasingly at a slower rate at each sale than before. Was $40, I believe, now $20.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.