Let's delay arguments about whether one should change fonts or not [0] and think about crowdfunding applied to design work. We should be more interested in whether this will work, and why or why not.
Last summer, Hyperakt [1] crowd-funded a beautiful radial depiction of the 2010 World Cup brackets [2]. I paid $25 for a great poster [3], and now Deroy has a new fan.
That project worked for the same reason all Kickstarter projects work: if the project succeeds, users and producers exchange money for goods. If the market doesn't validate your project, consumers aren't committed to pay and producers don't reap any benefits. This is a great model for project planning and idea validation.
On the other hand, this project extracts consumer rents immediately. If Fabrizio doesn't hit the $220k goal [4], users only get an option to purchase a license for $100 minus their contribution. No repercussions for the producer--he gets paid regardless. This is fine for licensing an existing font, but it sucks for spec work or otherwise non-existent work.
I'm sure everyone has a few questions about the amount he's charging. [5] However, we should focus on how Kickstarter provides a consumer-friendly market while this project exists on a producer-friendly market. These are some great introductory economic concepts.
EDIT: actually, each market has its own benefits. With Kickstarter, you can obtain market validation for free (or cheap). With IndieGogo, you can guarantee payment on existing products.
-------
[0] I took an hour to switch from Monaco to Anonymous Pro; now I wish I hadn't wasted that hour but at least I'm set for life.
[3] Even more beautiful after La Furia Roja took the Cup!
[4] Btw: ouch.
[5] Are we paying for the 4 years of work he's put in? Hasn't he made money from other licenses already? There are probably some obvious answers I'm missing out on.
I'm at the 50% of the work with PragmataPro, anyone can realize it just by looking at the screenshots.
If I wanted to escape with the loot I would not be so stupid to draw about 1600 glyphs spending 3 years of my life.
Revenue from sales of licenses are not sufficient to cover even 10% of the time I used to arrive here.
Then came the piracy that has stopped the sales.
My dream is to finish this project getting the appropriate reward for my hard work. Am I wrong to dream this?
I mentioned you offer of a discounted license for all contributors if the font isn't open-sourced, and that offer is explicitly stated on the project page. I'm not doubting your trustworthiness at all!
I believe I've been fair in evaluating your decision to sell on IndieGogo instead of Kickstarter. At the same time, you're going to need 22,000 contributions of $10 to open-source your font. That's a non-trivial number, but you're guaranteed to earn money for your hard work because you posted on IndieGogo.
I wish you the best of luck! I can't afford to help you out, but I'd like to analyze your choice of marketplace so other designers can follow your example.
Sorry for being anecdotal, but I've often seen people buy something after failing to pirate it. But whether somebody has uploaded a font for illegal downloading or not should not be able change its fair market value IMHO.
In reality it does, and that is why the market's reaction may be just as unfair as up-front payments. (And I think your initial reply was related to fairness, correct me if I'm wrong.)
Indie music can always fall back on giving away tunes to support a touring and merchandising play, but someone that puts years into a font only to see it pirated isn't exactly given the opportunity to rent a tour bus.
I think that if he can make it work, he deserves our encouragement.
Last summer, Hyperakt [1] crowd-funded a beautiful radial depiction of the 2010 World Cup brackets [2]. I paid $25 for a great poster [3], and now Deroy has a new fan.
That project worked for the same reason all Kickstarter projects work: if the project succeeds, users and producers exchange money for goods. If the market doesn't validate your project, consumers aren't committed to pay and producers don't reap any benefits. This is a great model for project planning and idea validation.
On the other hand, this project extracts consumer rents immediately. If Fabrizio doesn't hit the $220k goal [4], users only get an option to purchase a license for $100 minus their contribution. No repercussions for the producer--he gets paid regardless. This is fine for licensing an existing font, but it sucks for spec work or otherwise non-existent work.
I'm sure everyone has a few questions about the amount he's charging. [5] However, we should focus on how Kickstarter provides a consumer-friendly market while this project exists on a producer-friendly market. These are some great introductory economic concepts.
EDIT: actually, each market has its own benefits. With Kickstarter, you can obtain market validation for free (or cheap). With IndieGogo, you can guarantee payment on existing products.
-------
[0] I took an hour to switch from Monaco to Anonymous Pro; now I wish I hadn't wasted that hour but at least I'm set for life.
[1] http://hyperakt.com/
[2] http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hyperakt/2010-world-cup-...
[3] Even more beautiful after La Furia Roja took the Cup!
[4] Btw: ouch.
[5] Are we paying for the 4 years of work he's put in? Hasn't he made money from other licenses already? There are probably some obvious answers I'm missing out on.