To the professional designers here, how much guaranteed prize money would it take for you to participate in crowdsourcing contests for app design?
Sites like Folyo are a good idea, and I'm happy to see so many designers on HN, but as someone who's worked with crowdsourcing sites and pro designers one-on-one, it's much better as a client to have multiple designers working on your idea simultaneously based on a single crowdsourcing design brief than finding good designers on Dribbble/Folyo, building relationships with individuals who may or may not be a good fit, and then managing relationships with the candidates who happen to be available and oh they want to get paid $150/hr up front for work that isn't guaranteed to work for you, be on time, on budget, etc.
I would much rather pay $10,000 guaranteed if it meant having Folyo level designers compete to deliver something based on a design brief. Overall, I think crowdsourcing is a much better arrangement than pay 'N pray. It leads to a wider range of options, more creativity, and ultimately gives clients better results.
It might be helpful to turn this around, and compare it to working in some other field. For example most programmers would not want to work like this, constantly under time pressure, competing with others without time to gather requirements properly or interact with the client, and accepted or rejected for unknown reasons at the end. For a small hackathon or other little competition, it'd be fun, but who would want to work this way all the time, with no dialogue, and the possibility of your work not being paid for but being harvested for the best ideas which are then farmed out to the cheapest bidder? I'd fire the client for even suggesting it.
This sort of process implies a lack of respect for the design process, a belief that it's just a veneer, and a lack of trust in your designer. Most design isn't just about firing off a brief and receiving some stuff back, and then judging which is best based on the client's instincts, it affects flow, functionality, and most importantly of all is based on a dialogue with the client and moulded by ideas extracted from the client; it's not piece work.
Most good designers would respectfully decline an invitation to a race to the bottom, except if the work is really well defined, like a logo, and could be viewed as a small fun sideline or a way of boosting profile. I'd never work professionally this way, would you? Why should they participate in this sort of bargaining for any amount of money if other clients take what they do seriously? Design is a collaborative process, and getting to the real requirements is actually not dissimilar to say website or app development - it requires time, patience and commitment from both sides. If you can call this process "pay and pray" you are (both) doing it wrong.
I actually think the SO competition was a good idea, and they ended up with a nice logo which suits them, but for work larger in scope than say logos (like app design, or almost any other design job) it doesn't make sense, and even logos are better done as part of a larger process about the whole brand.
Big agencies often 'pitch' for million [dollar|pound|euro|...] jobs. These are competitions too.
There is always a cost to following up on some job. Not just money, costs... but time, pain, opportunity costs etc.
Reduce the cost for the worker, and reduce the cost for the consumer to lower than what they could do together, and you have a good sustainable business. If you can just reduce the cost for one of the parties, then you'll probably still do well. Reduce just one type of cost, and there is even probably some good business for you :)
Those big agencies also get a retainer just for trying. If you're talking about a million dollar campaign, you pitch, but you get a retainer that pays for your time. It's not even remotely the same thing. Moreover, you compete against one -- maybe two -- other agencies.
for $10k-$15k and good brief, you could get let's say 5–8 freelancer designers to do a PAID creative pitch (there's your difference between spec work and 'normal' creative pitch), get multiple high quality (and relevant) options, and give the job (and the rest of the money) to the designer you like most.
Basically, you pick few designers, who you think will fit the job most (looking through their portfolio) and will pay them for the time pitching to you. That's it.
Sites like Folyo are a good idea, and I'm happy to see so many designers on HN, but as someone who's worked with crowdsourcing sites and pro designers one-on-one, it's much better as a client to have multiple designers working on your idea simultaneously based on a single crowdsourcing design brief than finding good designers on Dribbble/Folyo, building relationships with individuals who may or may not be a good fit, and then managing relationships with the candidates who happen to be available and oh they want to get paid $150/hr up front for work that isn't guaranteed to work for you, be on time, on budget, etc.
I would much rather pay $10,000 guaranteed if it meant having Folyo level designers compete to deliver something based on a design brief. Overall, I think crowdsourcing is a much better arrangement than pay 'N pray. It leads to a wider range of options, more creativity, and ultimately gives clients better results.