Ok, this really bothered me.

I was directed to a CSSZenGarden design created by Outline2Design that is rather beautiful… I was really impressed, so I looked at their homepage.

Their designs are extremely artistic, and valid XHTML, so I was even more impressed; I wanted to know more about their work and where they manage an office, (mostly to determine if they were a small shop, a front for a larger shop or just “a person.”)  I noticed a copyright link to Zertle, LLC.  Clicking that, I saw that Zertle owns two shop fronts, Outline2Design and PSD2HTML.

That’s when I was absolutely disgusted by the pricing strategy at PSD2HTML.

Deciding How to Charge is Hard

I realize it’s difficult to decide how to price web work; I’ve had that problem before. You kind of have to divide the effort into the creative and the technical – creating HTML, (at least, in my opinion) is the easiest of the two. Creating a brand identity and graphical assets are far more subjective tasks, therefore requiring much more work.

Converting a design to HTML, however, is much easier. You can almost feel how the document flows. Sure, there are elegant and thought-provoking approaches to noodle through, and reusability and accessibility concerns… but the process goes very quickly. Oftentimes, you use tools from your toolbox, like Microformats or common libraries.

At Cerner, when I’m handed a design, it takes me roughly two hours per layout to complete, less if the following location follows a cohesive style, (and they do). So this company promises an 8 hour turnaround time, which I think is respectful, if not aggressive if they have a large workload.

What I find appalling is their package rates and “options.”

You Want to Charge Me For WHAT?!?

Here are a few examples, and an explanation as to why they are shady… I mean, “Used-car Salesman” shady. Throughout the following examples, I’m going to draw an analogy to someone coming to paint your house: you know what color you want, and how you want textures to look, but you don’t really have the time, nor the expertise, to paint it yourself.

How Good a Job are You Willing to Pay For?

Ok, we’re all set to start. Pick a package and price range for them to convert your image into a web page.

Screenshot from PSD2HTML.com

Figure 1 – So… do you want your page done professionally or not?

Asking someone to quantify exactly how professional they want their page is like asking if they’re willing to pay more to get things that a professional should already do. You’re telling me you won’t “pay special attention to Load Speed” if I don’t shell out the extra hundred?

The trouble is, someone who doesn’t really understand the web may not understand what they’re paying for… besides, the developer should do this anyway.

The painters show up with the crew, the paint and the brushes. They’re ready to paint your house, but before they start, they ask:

“Do you want us to tape off non-painted surfaces?  Then you’ll want our Professional Painter’s Package. Do you want us to avoid getting paint splatters on your concrete and bushes?  In that case, you’ll need to upgrade to our Hi-End Painter’s Package. You see, it’s all about what you’re willing to spend.”

These aren’t options: they’re the mark of a professional job.  Cross-browser compatibility, Search Engine Optimization, semantic code, prez-layer separation… these are professional, industry standards. You could get away with asking for more time, but more money?!? C’mon…

Flex Your CSS Muscles

This one, I kind of understand.

Flexible, or “fluid” layouts can be difficult, depending on the style.  You have to decide the widths of each column, how text wraps, and even when items start to drop.  Again, asking for more time is one thing, almost expected… charging more, I could almost condone.

But isn’t this on a case-by-case basis?  Don’t you have to ask some directed, consultative questions about intent and purpose?  And how did you arrive at $29?  It just seems nonsensical to me.

After shelling out more cash, your painting crew has another question:

“Would you like us to hand-paint your house, or can we go ahead and use our sprayers for the larger walls?  You see, when we got your address, we weren’t sure about the texture or composition of your walls, so we can’t tell you right now without looking which would be better, per-se… but we’ll knock $20 off if you let us spray.”

Maybe they’re encouraging a fixed width by offering a $29 discount?  At any rate, it’s a client call, and I just don’t think it can be programmatically determined.

Moving on… because the next one is my favorite.

Nickels and Dimes Add Up to Big Bucks

I’m curious about Advanced Markup Options.

“This option gives you the guarantee…”  Are you kidding me?

You know, in my office, hack-less cross-browser compatibility is a point of pride.  Sometimes, when we do a demo, we like to give the people in the room the choice of which browser we use to demo… no-holds-barred.  We also give the option of a JavaScript-disabled or CSS-disabled configuration.  It’s cool to be challenged, to be able to show our stakeholders that no mainstream browser was ignored, no detail was overlooked.

“I’m sorry, but which side of your house faces the most people?  I mean, people who live next door to the east can’t really see the house wall… their window on that side is pretty tiny.  And most people don’t drive east on the street, so most wouldn’t see the east side.”

“Oh… and should we avoid painting the exterior window fixtures?”

To ask a client to pay more for cross-browser compatibility, or to offer a discount to let it slide, encourages the very attitudes web professionals hate: that only the majority matters… that it’s too hard to code (and test) for 99.9%.  That attitude is what allows Microsoft to continue including proprietary features, (and oftentimes, tolerating omissions): they’re the majority, make your site work in their browser.  It’s unacceptable for a professional web shop to not work in these browsers out-of-the-box.

And, I’m sorry… but $4 for rollovers?!?  Are CSS hover implementations been deemed hard enough that the code to create them is worth $4?  Are you telling me I have to pay you the equivalent of your morning Starbucks Latte for the effort?

The following, though… is unacceptable.  That’s all I’ll say:

What else can I say?

Damn, I’m Sorry, but…

I don’t mean to pick on these guys; I don’t know them from Adam.  They’ve obviously put some thought into how they’re to be paid for their work.  But the strategy is flawed: what they’re charging more for should just be included. They should just state the job will cost between $150 and $300, depending.  As I’ve pointed out, they have more questions to ask once they get the design anyway.

Will they change their pricing “menu” because of this post: probably of course not. But then again, I don’t know how much of a market there is here.  Most web professionals like to be in control of the design.

For someone like me, I’d love it if the client provided me the visual they want; I suck at drawing.  But even if they did, I would still consult with them and provide them with a quality product that another web professional would be able to edit…

… but more importantly, respect.