http://www.dexigner.com/product/announcements.html
Winning designer will receive a US$1000 Cash prize and will be offered an employment opportunity at our company. > Non-winning designs, which are utilized by our company, will be paid a fee of US$200.
$200
wow…what a rip off.
thank you for posting this. after reading this and similar extortive competitions and job posts by firms, it is time to advertise the cheapness of these firms. since quality and identity are such critical issues of firms in these times, lets formulate a list of firms who practice these low-ball tactics. it’s unlikely these firms will change tactics from such a list, however, it will help make designers aware how demoralizing and greedy these firms are.
sad how designers are not valued and often taken advantage of. Let’s not let it happen by capitulating.
Crazy, it was just updated. Now it says that “Non winning designs which are utilized by company, will be paid a fee of US$400.”
Did you happen to research that the group organizing the competition, Guvana Watch Industries Ltd, is located in Hong Kong? So even if your design is manufactured, it will function like a piece of shit.
This competition looks like a total sham.
Based on the guidelines…
“Create a visual design of a functional quartz timepiece. Designs must include standard hour, minute and seconds hands only. Designs that use digital, Chronograph and Date will be void, and will not qualify to compete.”
I would be willing to bet that this group in China is sitting on boxes and boxes of a standard timepiece. Any design manufactured is probably going to have this second-rate component as the basis for the watch.
$200 exclusivity; The new reality of Chinese OEM manufacturers trying to break into the design business.
This is unethical according to the AIGA.
I’d like to know more about the offer to “employ” the winner.
AIGA’s design ethics guide says:
“A designer shall not undertake any
work for a client without adequate
compensation, except with
respect to work for charitable or
nonproÞt organizations.
A designer shall not undertake
any speculative projects, either
alone or in competition with other
designers, for which compensation
will only be received if a design is
accepted or used. This applies not
only to entire projects but also to
preliminary schematic proposals.
A designer shall work only for
a fee, royalty, salary or other
agreed-upon form of compensation.
A designer shall not retain
any kickbacks, hidden discounts,
commission, allowances or
payment in kind from contractors
or suppliers.”
http://www.aiga.org/resources/content/4/6/0/documents/AIGA_1ethics_.pdf
ethics? with so much pirated software being used in China? who we kidding?
Designers need to be saavy to this–especially the young “undiscovered talent” they’re targeting.
kinda why i posted this thread. didnt figure anyone would say this was a great opportunity.
but like most things now days, it’ll be the pathetic compensation - not the ethics - that will limit the entries. but there WILL be entries. and ethical issues probly wont factor in to why they enter.
btw, anyone catch “Boston Legal” last Sunday. selling out was the theme of the show. pretty good one too.
of course there will be entries.
all one has to do is think about what US$200 would get you … IN China.
that’s a given (see old S&T threads about 3D models for sale). but i’m betting they get entries from everywhere. Europe and US included.
god…youse guys are so precious. you’re not changing the world with every stroke of your brush. if you wouldn’t get out of bed for $200 dollars…THEN DONT.
someone might (students…itching for experience), or should be humble enough to do it.
the reason this industry is full of graduates wanting big bucks, is people like you lot breeding this attitude with your pretentious crap.
i don’t mean to rant…but seriously, we are not neurosurgeons.
Winning designer will receive a US$1000 Cash prize and will be offered an employment opportunity at our company. Non-winning designs, which are utilized by our company, will be paid a fee of US$400.
The Watch Design Competition is a competition hosted by the Hong Kong based company: Guvana Watch Industries Ltd. Guvana hopes to locate and identify undiscovered design excellence from designers who are influenced by today’s hip-hop culture. The Watch Design Competition will be held twice a year, each ‘spring’ and each ‘fall.’
The Watch Design competition is fully financed and patronized by Guvana Watch Industries Ltd. Founded in Hong Kong in 1981, Guvana Watch Industries Limited is one of the leading watch manufacturers and exporters in Hong Kong. The company produces an average output of 1 Million watches a month, with offices located in London, Dubai, Panama, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and the head office in Hong Kong. The company is subcontracted by numerous global brands to carry out watch production. For more information on Guvana please visit > www.guvana.com
Well 1,000,000 a month and Guvana ain’t too broke to be fair neither…or maybe they are all neurosurgeons in all those offices and deserve cheap labor
“i don’t mean to rant…but seriously, we are not neurosurgeons.”
neither are:
if the issue were compensation appropriate to human need, then explain those in comparison to:
i’ve seen “neurosurgeon” angle posted here before. it lacks substance.
Do neurosurgeons design watches? If they do, I bet they are not very good at it!
When I drive by the local neurosurgeon school up the street all the neurosurgeon kidds are all hanging out front smoking - they look like they are up to no good!
That was a very good follow up to the squid that frequently posts the ‘neurosurgeon’ garbage. Very well executed I must say…
If design was a hobby instead of a career, then you’d be right to say that.
But this competition is admittedly and SPECIFICALLY PREYING on designers who are hungery, and this hurts the entire industry. YOU in fact are degrading the industry with the above post.
Here’s some more elaboration courtesy of the AIGA ethics guideline:
What About Design Competitions
and Spec Work?
There are differing views on these
two closely related subjects. Some
designers are absolutely opposed
to design competitions and
speculative work. Period. Others
are open to them, provided they
are compensated fairly for their
work (i.e., according to the
market value of the work).
The design competitions being
discussed here are those that
require design Þrms to do original
work for a company in an effort
to get that companyÕs businessÑ
not the kind held by nonproÞt
professional organizations,
such as AIGA, for the purpose of
recognizing design excellence.
Consider this real-world scenario:
A multibillion-dollar, publicly
held global corporation with huge
brand awareness surveys the work
of several dozen graphic design
Þrms for the purpose of selecting
one to design its annual report.
After narrowing the field to a
half-dozen candidates, the
company offers each design firm
$25,000 to provide it with a mock
design of the report, issuing
well-deÞned design parameters.
Assuming the compensation
reflects the effort required (it
did), this isn’t an unreasonable
way to approach the selection
process. And many designers
would opt to participate. Yes,
speculation is involved, but so
is reciprocal valueÑup front.
Real though it is, however, this
scenario isn’t the norm. There
aren’t that many multibilliondollar
companies, for one thing.
For another, few companies cast
such a wide net in search of
design. The more common
speculative scenario includes
noncompensated competitions
and work that’s commissioned
but paid for only upon approval.
In either case, the situation
is the same: little or no value
is placed upon the designer as
a professional, as someone
whose purpose is to give trusted
advice on matters significant
to the company.
I think this would be a very different story if:
The company donated all proceeds of the winning entry to charity (ie. not profit from it, other than the publicity of the competition.)
There was a fair royalty, not a flat-fee associated.
Entries remain in the ownership of the designers
my position is simple. but know many wont understand it.
Guvana is a big company. international. this is no humane project intended to improve life for poor people. this is a MONEY-MAKING venture. w specific Marketing angle: hip hop. and appears to be competition for designs intended for American markets. or non-starving consumers elsewhere able to afford an American hip hop-looking fashion accessory.
i’ve no problem w a single Grand Prize. monetary award and job offer is cool. its all the other entries. maybe hundreds. maybe thousands. why retain rights to those that get pittance and no job offer? why not specify X number of alternates will be offered $xxx.xx and offer to license? that might be fair. but Guvana isnt interested in that imo. you enter. they pick yours - alternate #497 - and own the design (i didnt see much legalistic stuff on their Entry guideline so blade might cut both ways).
your alternate might be sold internationally. make the non-neurosurgeon managers millions. at $200 (or $400) a pop, they’ve taken alot of risk and cost out. and did it by taking advantage of designers. now how many designers lost their job in the process? designers w families. and bills to pay. and no where did any money pay for someone’s brain surgery i bet.
the ethics are tied up in putting someone out of work. but my point is it’ll cost you down the road. so for the students out there thinking this is so great, look up the phrase “reap what you sow”. it’s lasted a long time. for good reason.