Absolutely the worst advice. I've worked for multiple small companies and consulting firms that got screwed because they didn't have a contract. Do not do this. A contract is not bulletproof, sure, but not having one just means that nobody thinks they have to pay you.
The reason it's terrible advice is because they are selling the alternative to contracts. Why in the world this gets voted up is beyond me, it's clearly an advertisement. The immediate placement of a signup form before the fold above the main content should have been the first clue.
It's also rather disingenuous that they hide their advertisement in an URL that suggests it is a blog.
It's terrible advice no matter what they're selling. Don't work without a contract. Contracts do more than help ensure you'll get paid; they also protect you from other bad things.
It is true, a proper contract from a lawyer is expensive. But you will be surprised how often it comes in handy. In my experience so far there are only two kinds of contractor: the ones that can tell a story about struggling to get paid, and the ones that have not been paid yet.
One of my favorite contract clauses is the one about how, if you have to sue the client for payment, they'll cover your legal costs. Try getting that kind of leverage without a contract, via firm handshakes or obsequious bowing and scraping or whatever.
The story should be titled 'Ditch the contract (and use Hourglass).
All in all fairly terrible scaremongering about the alleged pitfalls of using an agreement. An agreement does not have to be complex to make it clear that for example, no assignment of rights will take place prior to full payment.
Also, taking actions in small claims courts is relatively straightforward (at least here in the UK) particularly where a debt is involved, such as an unpaid invoice.
I imagine Hourglass probably has some fairly full terms and conditions which apply to the usage of the service also.
In general a shame, because on a brief glance, Hourglass could be complementary to those using an agreement. There's simply no need to attempt to undermine and attack the usage of agreements.
It sounds kind of interesting, but before actually making any attempt to explain what it means it ends with "Sign up to our thing to get the answer". Not even a whisper of "An alternative way".
This article is horrible advice. When I started in 1997 I paid a lawyer about $600 to draw up my "standard contract", since then I've had to attempt to recover fees from non paying clients a number of times. Twice it was in amounts enough to sue -- $77,000 and $13,000. In both cases I recovered the full amounts, in no small part thanks to a signed agreement.
I wanted to find out more about what Hourglass actually was, how much it costs, and how it might benefit me, but clicking on any links in the menu and especially the "show me the way" call to action, all lead me to their solitary sales page that wants me to sign up to get the guide. So I filled out my name and email so I could get the guide and instead was signed up to their email list, which required a confirmation, which left me sitting there starring at their sales page, without any guide to read. No offense, but your whole message is about clear communication, and your website's interactivity is very confusing and got me going in circles without any actual communication. My impression is now negative and I will likely forget about your service, let alone mention it to anyone else. Better get everything working first and actually deliver on your promises before blowing your horn.
12 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 30.2 ms ] threadIt's also rather disingenuous that they hide their advertisement in an URL that suggests it is a blog.
http://vimeo.com/22053820
The crater will be visible from space.
It is true, a proper contract from a lawyer is expensive. But you will be surprised how often it comes in handy. In my experience so far there are only two kinds of contractor: the ones that can tell a story about struggling to get paid, and the ones that have not been paid yet.
One of my favorite contract clauses is the one about how, if you have to sue the client for payment, they'll cover your legal costs. Try getting that kind of leverage without a contract, via firm handshakes or obsequious bowing and scraping or whatever.
All in all fairly terrible scaremongering about the alleged pitfalls of using an agreement. An agreement does not have to be complex to make it clear that for example, no assignment of rights will take place prior to full payment.
Also, taking actions in small claims courts is relatively straightforward (at least here in the UK) particularly where a debt is involved, such as an unpaid invoice.
I imagine Hourglass probably has some fairly full terms and conditions which apply to the usage of the service also.
In general a shame, because on a brief glance, Hourglass could be complementary to those using an agreement. There's simply no need to attempt to undermine and attack the usage of agreements.
So, just an advertarticle.