Buying through the "backdoor"....

General art-related discussion.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:55 am

I am interested to hear what people think about this topic. It recently came up in the thread for Shepard Fairey's latest print. For those of you who were not following that monstrosity, here is a brief summary.

So, as we know Shep releases his prints on Tuesday at 2. We also know that due to the insane demand, the site crashes before 2. Then on a regular Tuesday you have to be willing to commit at least 40 minutes to attempting to get through the site. This Tuesday was no different. Except this time 40 minutes went by and nothing, so we all kept trying, then 3 hours later still empty handed and not hearing any success stories, I went home. When I got home I opened up the computer and started going again. Still nothing. Now up to this point I had just been trying to load the "Prints" and the "New Products" page. I was not trying to load pages for the specific prints. However someone said that they managed to get a print by using the address that generally adds something to your basket and then using the marker for the specific print. I have no idea how they figured out the markers. I also did not think it would work. I mean, if the prints are not loading to the site, why would they load to your cart? Well, needless to say, it worked and I ended up being able to purchase the print I wanted using the previously mentioned method.

So, here is what I would like to see talked about:

1.) Assumptions
Simple: (a) there is no right to own a print and (b) demand is alot greater than supply, and (c) like it or not, right or wrong some of these prints will be flipped.

2.) The Artist
Knowing the popularity, does the artist have any obligation to keep his site up to a level reasonably likely to be able to handle the rush? Also, should the artist have to treat the fans "fairly" or would sitting back watching the agony on EB and laughing about it be totally ok (see Emek Decemberists)?

3.) The Consumer
Is what I described above wrong? I mean, if the print is available (it has been put in inventory) is it wrong to use the links to buy it? Is this a back door? Or, given the fact that the artists do not always keep their infrastructure maintained to the level to deal with demand, is this a reasonable way of bypassing all of the "clog" and the "timeouts" especially in the case like the Shep print where he always releases at that time so it was not clear if the print had been officially released or not? Finally, what about when the print had been clearly released (someone had seen the print on a "new products" page). Then, is using the same method mentioned above more or less acceptable? Is it still using a "back door"?

Thanks

Jimmy

Ps. I am leaving for work and will throw up my own thoughts in a bit.
User avatar
sunsetbrew
Art Expert
Posts: 3622
Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 12:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:36 am

Well....evading the bigger question of fairness....

The web is nothing but a series of requests and responses which are quite intentional. Skipping some requests in a web flow is not incorrect in itself if a system allows it. If it was not supposed to happen, then there is a bug in their site that needs to be fixed.

A high percentage of web pages are for navigational and/or informational purposes only and therefore are there for the customer's benefit only... In this case, the catalog navigation, cart summary and payment method selection pages were skipped.

It is not like breaking into a warehouse after dark. It is more like entering a grocery store, going directly to the correct isle and finding the shortest line out with credit card in hand to avoid the question about payment method.
Image
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:46 am

Ok, not sure how many replies this will get but here are my thoughts:

1.) The Artist
Yes, I do believe that the artist has some obligation to be able to meet the demand. I mean lets think about this ... they are making tons of money. They can afford to reinvest into the server so as to be able to handle demand. Or, alternatively, make it a completely random process (1st 300 emails after 2pm get a print). I mean at least that way people are not forced to wait for hours and then maybe or maybe not purchase something that may or may not be available then still have a chance to be refunded because the print sold out.

Second, I do think that the artists should have some obligation to care about the situation they have created. Just like it wouldnt be ok for a retailer to put the one "tickle me elmo" on a top shelf, out of reach, then sit back and watch people hurt themselves trying to climb up and get it, the artists should treat this as a business. That is what they have made it. That is why I do not understand Emek's "updates" during the Decemberists release. Yes, you are super popular. Yes, the level of obsession is a little out of control. But, at the same time, like it or not you have become an industry so at least try and respect the peeps who are wasting hours because they like what you produce.

2.) The Consumer
First, I am not sure how I feel about the method I described for getting the Fairey prints. When I was doing it I wasnt thinking of it as a backdoor. Essentially, I thought the site sucked and was broken and that the insane traffic was what was preventing me from getting the print. So, whe I used the links that people had posted I thought it was just a way to avoid so many time outs. That said, in retrospect it is a little more suspect. If it wasnt for the fact that Shep's prints go onsale on Tuesday at 2, I would question it. However, history told us the prints were on sale, Obey did nothing to contradict that, and the prints were in inventory and able to be purchased. So, in my honest opinion I didnt do anything wrong and neither did anyone else. That said, I do not think it is always ok. For instance, if that method was used to obtain a print on say Monday, when it is clear that they were not intended to be sold, then I think it is probably over the line.

So, based on that answer, I do not have a problem with people using shortcuts. If the artists are not going to take the effort to make their site reasonably able to stand up to demand, then I do not see anything wrong with doing what you can to get through the quagmire that has been created. However, I only think this is ok where the artist has intended the prints to be available.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:48 am

sunsetbrew wrote:Well....evading the bigger question of fairness....

It is not like breaking into a warehouse after dark. It is more like entering a grocery store, going directly to the correct isle and finding the shortest line out with credit card in hand to avoid the question about payment method.
I think that this is a very good analogy. But, what about the question of fairness? I mean clearly with every print there are people who do not get one that want it. So do you think that going to the "correct aisle" is fair?
User avatar
Codeblue
Yaks 2 Much
Posts: 56011
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:00 am
Location: Expresso Beans

Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:13 pm

Doesn't Obey encourage its "followers" to question the system?
RupertPupkin wrote:I live by this rule and this rule alone: people are drymounting idiots.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:23 pm

Codeblue wrote:Doesn't Obey encourage its "followers" to question the system?
Good point...
User avatar
MJBuck
Art Expert
Posts: 4342
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:00 am
Location: Portland, OR

Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:38 pm

I posted this in another forum but it also applies here.

I think people have been using this system for a while to be perfectly honest. If it works, why wouldn't you just keep trying it?

Anyone who has been ordering obey prints for the last year+ has used links. I know I have to get around their retarded system. We're always asking for the product numbers, the checkout link has been around forever. The only difference I see is we figured a way around the shopping cart (which makes no sense at all) and got straight through to paypal. That is the only thing that makes me feel somewhat underhanded.

One thing that I thought was interesting is when you got to paypal you had no idea how much money you were sending obey until you got back to the confirm your order screen.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
out and perfect.
norelation wrote:quit with the sniveling and just sell the damn poster. i don't care about your life story, we all got problems. just tell me about bent corners, or if your cat has used it for target practice.
mistersmith wrote:That means I'm going to touch you.
User avatar
ryefish75
EB Team Emeritus
Posts: 7851
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Sub-Canadian North America

Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:48 pm

sunsetbrew wrote: The web is nothing but a series of requests and responses which are quite intentional. Skipping some requests in a web flow is not incorrect in itself if a system allows it. If it was not supposed to happen, then there is a bug in their site that needs to be fixed.
This comes down to web savvy, being savvy does not make one unethical. If you can get what you want online via a "back-door" then power to ya'.

I don't believe Fairey has any obligation to anyone. He's an artist, and he has his IT people who are to blame for failures in this area. He's no more responsible for his site crashing than he would be for a poorly managed or operated gallery featuring his work.

I've got more thoughts on this, but I think this issue shoud be addressed point-by-point.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:53 pm

ryefish75 wrote:
I don't believe Fairey has any obligation to anyone. He's an artist, and he has his IT people who are to blame for failures in this area. He's no more responsible for his site crashing than he would be for a poorly managed or operated gallery featuring his work.

I've got more thoughts on this, but I think this issue shoud be addressed point-by-point.
Ok, I see what you are saying and understand. But, then take it a step further back ... does an artist have any obligation to hire people that will take care of his problem? I mean it isnt this the first time that OG has gone comatose. So, he has to know about it. At that point should he make a change? I mean if he an artists presented at a poorly managed gallery and things went bad, then did it again, and again, when does he have some obligation to switch?

I know that OG is no different than other artist that has been slammed lately. I dont mean to single him out. Just the most fresh in people's minds.
User avatar
ryefish75
EB Team Emeritus
Posts: 7851
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Sub-Canadian North America

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:08 pm

stereoface wrote: ... does an artist have any obligation to hire people that will take care of his problem? I mean it isnt this the first time that OG has gone comatose. So, he has to know about it. At that point should he make a change?
Of course he does, we all do, but good help is hard to find. Sometimes an artist's "friends" who took a class in web design in junior college have greater clout within an organization than a new and costly professional web help. I'm not saying this is the case, but you know how things go.
This being said, I'm sure he knows about the problems, but Fairey doesn't exactly come off as a ball-buster if you've ever seen him at events. Changes are a comin', no doubt about that, I think the last couple sales demonstrate an attempt to change things. Hopefully these failures, like most in life, will result in a better website down the road.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:12 pm

ryefish75 wrote:
stereoface wrote: ... does an artist have any obligation to hire people that will take care of his problem? I mean it isnt this the first time that OG has gone comatose. So, he has to know about it. At that point should he make a change?
Of course he does, we all do, but good help is hard to find. Sometimes an artist's "friends" who took a class in web design in junior college have greater clout within an organization than a new and costly professional web help. I'm not saying this is the case, but you know how things go.
This being said, I'm sure he knows about the problems, but Fairey doesn't exactly come off as a ball-buster if you've ever seen him at events. Changes are a comin', no doubt about that, I think the last couple sales demonstrate an attempt to change things. Hopefully these failures, like most in life, will result in a better website down the road.
I agree with that. Hopefully the problems lead to a better product. I just find it odd ... I reently tried to get a couple Banksy prints. I had such an easier time getting those. I mean I do not think the traffic would be any lighter. Just a better system.
User avatar
Grateful69Phish
Art Freak
Posts: 12752
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:41 pm
Location: Nirvana

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:15 pm

What gets my goat is, he has more than enough money to buy the support. I also have issues with "short cuts" for those cuts, might just be adding to the server problems for anybody who understands server traffic.

Anybody thinking different has just had the wool pulled over their eyes.

In addition, I can think of dozens of ways to reduce server traffic with "buying rules" such as:

Buy and Ban program- you buy one, you dont get a chance at the next, unless it doesnt sell out on the release ect.

As long as an artist gets their money, why should they care who actually gets it? They dont care now...........
User avatar
ryefish75
EB Team Emeritus
Posts: 7851
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Sub-Canadian North America

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:17 pm

stereoface wrote: I agree with that. Hopefully the problems lead to a better product. I just find it odd ... I reently tried to get a couple Banksy prints. I had such an easier time getting those. I mean I do not think the traffic would be any lighter. Just a better system.
Don't Banksy's sell for exponentially more on their site than Obey prints? I'm not informed at all on Banksy, but I thought they sold for far more than $35 from the artist. If that's the case, that weeds out a lot of potential customers.
stereoface
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 584
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:00 am

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:19 pm

ryefish75 wrote:
stereoface wrote: I agree with that. Hopefully the problems lead to a better product. I just find it odd ... I reently tried to get a couple Banksy prints. I had such an easier time getting those. I mean I do not think the traffic would be any lighter. Just a better system.
Don't Banksy's sell for exponentially more on their site than Obey prints? I'm not informed at all on Banksy, but I thought they sold for far more than $35 from the artist. If that's the case, that weeds out a lot of potential customers.
True, but they also sell for alot more in the aftermarket so I think that lends to alot of people willing to put their CC up for it.
User avatar
ryefish75
EB Team Emeritus
Posts: 7851
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Sub-Canadian North America

Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:30 pm

stereoface wrote:True, but they also sell for alot more in the aftermarket so I think that lends to alot of people willing to put their CC up for it.
Still, the higher intro price discourages a lot of buyers. I'd be dead meat if I tried to justify a CC purchase like those, regardless of the secondary market potential.
Post Reply