FAQ

Put simply, you will own all work product. More broadly, if you are retaining my services for a comprehensive project which may involve the licensing of assets (e.g. graphics, imagery, software solutions, etc.), any required or utilized—in final work deliverables—rights and licenses will be included and ownership will transfer upon final project payment (as with all IP in the standard contract agreement). It is important to note that, in the case of licensed assets (like stock photography or soundtracks), you will own the right to display such work but not the underlying rights to the work itself and ability to sell or resell the asset (i.e. you may utilize, in perpetuity, the assets, but you may not charge others or attempt to claim ownership from actual IP owner them/itself). The standard contract I issue will contain provisions to indemnify your organization in the case that the licensing of assets was done improperly.

The short version is, it depends. Given that my work straddles a wide variety of industries and sub-sectors, some are areas of frequent client throughput and consistent business. As such, it is infeasible and inadvisable for me to regularly offer clients exclusivity of services within a specific industry or sub-sector—if I did such, I would soon not have a client base to begin with—however, under certain conditions, this can be arranged in select project environments where exclusivity makes most sense (i.e. if launching a product in a new category and desiring exclusive rights versus the known—and limited—competition field). The specifics—such as time period, direct competitor embargo versus industry-wide, etc.—can be discussed and oftentimes, accommodated, however, it is important to note that this is not offered regularly, is evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and comes at cost.

While I do not offer complete exclusivity in a standard capacity, it should be made clear that your private, proprietary business information is not, cannot, and will not, be utilized in the advancement of any rival, industry-peer, or any other capacity which does not involve your business.

Of course, all contracts I issue prevent the utilization or distribution of any proprietary information unrelated to the regular course of my work (i.e. I cannot—and of course, would not—provide your direct competitor with your proprietary internal metrics or private sales figures, etc. Such activity is not only unethical and improper, it would—rightfully—open me up to serious legal liability).

While there is a wide range in pricing for the industry—and I am able to provide clients with options from sweeping, comprehensive strategies to more narrowly-defined output—I do provide professional services, which carry a commensurately professional price-tag. I always attempt to work with my clients to find an ideal solution for their business, project, and budget, however, I’ve found it to be challenging to generate meaningful partnerships when businesses approach a project from the guiding perspective of “avoiding losses”—in capital outflow & expenditure—rather than seeing a project as an investment in their future growth—concerned more with end results and driving a sizable impact than simply maintaining the status quo. By beginning from this cautioned standpoint of needing minimal work accomplished at minimal cost, it indicates a fundamental lack of faith in the business’ ability to grow and pessimistic expectations for possible results; where, by contrast, those who view a project as an investment in future growth, expect far more out of such an investment, concerned mostly about potential impact and achievable results.

Of course, every business has a budget and I always attempt to find the right solution within a client’s given range, however, it is the mindset itself—of business pessimism—rather than the actual budget figure, which generates a difficult atmosphere for a professional partnership designed to garner results. If you are severely constrained in what is feasible, I would recommend not pursuing anything immediately—either with me or another provider—and waiting until a time when you are able to properly accomplish your intended project goals.

The cost of investing poorly—even at a low-price sunken cost—is far more expensive than the cost of investing right—even for a high-ticket item with a sizable price tag. The biggest folly is evaluating on cost and not value — the price tag of an investment isn’t just what you pay upfront in the moment, it is the lasting value you get for that price and the future costs you will have to pay down the line. After all, if you pay to have something done for a low-cost, sweetheart deal and then end up having to redo it all over again a few months later—this time, paying an actual, quality professional—are you really “saving” any money? Many clients have told me this same story and it is why I recommend businesses to either commit to quality work or to wait, but not anything in between.

As that the ordinarily amount due upfront—for new clients with whom I have not had a prior business relationship—can be prohibitive for small businesses, given the unique nature of SMB operational cash flow needs, I am able to offer select payment deferral options to small businesses, on a case-by-case basis. While payments are usually structured by milestone or by monthly retainer, in the case of a large upfront fee (i.e. in the situation of a comprehensive rebrand initiative) which is materially-restrictive, conditions can be arranged to reduce the initial payment amount by spreading out the fee over the duration of the other project milestones. To discuss such an option, please submit a request with further information on my contact form.