Generaly speaking no -- it's good news for architecture if this trend of perciving a building, as your picture of what "cutting edge" architecture looks like, is replace by some real and quality structure. Computers are here to calculate the structure, for you to focus on detail design - the opposite of what Gehry claim is possible with outdated aeroplane design software in fact ; a return to perciving architecture from within and by structure. From that angle ,fancy surfaces are nothing but surface attitude omiting the most important thing, the structure -- and the structure for just anything can be calculated as a 3dh -- now That is a gurantie, that whatever you design, a reliable structure can be generated by a press of a button; allowing you to make the real revolution in architecture, as when what keep it all in the air is simply generated as an assembly framework, then floors at various levels, build-in furniture, whatever you can melt and subtract, is then possible and can be cut from sheet steel by a N.C. cutter.
Gehry just stay with the old perception and omit the structure, and that is not the new perception of the build works.
Per Corell
I also appreciate the first comment at Curbed: Someone in his office figured out that a Frank Gehry building is just a wire mesh inside auto-cad that gets cycled through a three dimension randomizer. Later they slap on a chrome shader. Naturally once this was known they had to do some house cleaning.
they had a similar contraction with the completion of bilboa. won't be the first, won't be the last. this shows the true values of FOG - screw the employees.
I'm sure Frank is protecting his Intellectual Property Rights by shutting down all the computers. Which is kind of funny cause
I'm sure 50 % of those former employees already have the right stuff to carry his method of madness forward in this world, except for the singular most important thing and that is they are NOT FRANK!
So why the hell not treat them like intellectual humans instood of monkey drafting and model making drones?
Maybe building "as using cutting edge" software is simply too expensive.
Not profiting from projecting things , by not doing it on the computers terms is the real problem. --- Staying with a perception of the build works, that mean you only re-write the accounting and logistics as done 60 years ago, into fast computer code, computer code that do things exactly the way things was done before the computer , is the real dead-end that allow no further savings .
Now why do I say so ; I say so becaurse that is how architects software are --- allready Gehry don't need the computer to generate the building compoments, so to profit from new way's to build will be hard to find --- just throwing a sketch and then ask the skilled handymen to fiddle the basic structure to be covered by easy panels can be done with very little or no computer power at all -- so why vaste money on the future, when old methods can be translated into new fast computer pograms , --- still when that is done, when all architect software is made , then how can we become more efficient within that perception.
Now I know you guy's has difficult to read my context , but that is that Gehry sold out when bragging about using cutting edge software and frensh aeroplane design software --- as first the aeroplane software is now near 20 years old , or atleast the perception of buildings as a shell with a tradisional building inside , must be obvious a dead-end.
---- And how can one further refine methods when the dead-end wall is reached ? What I say , is that to efficiently profit from new technology, it's simply not enough, that the houses look fancy and high-tech ; they must by core be cutting edge and newthinking. And I know it is easier to laugh about bad spelling than listen to the words, bur how obvious must it be, before you Romans realise, realise that "painting" a picture , of about how you would expect the computer to profit you all , with wierd forms is not how things must happen , --- throw a sketch and ask the skilled metal workers , who need no computer to make fine works, will not make new jobs using modeling software.
Sorry again but this is my language --- so I try again ; I know it's a hard battle, to enter with a new perception of how to build a house , explain you all these complicated issues about why architecture reached a dead-end. But try read my words as what they are -- you see we need methods to efficient take profit from new production , and that is not what Gehry ever did, Think about who is layoff -- is it the craftsmen who fiddle the sketches , with no use of a computer, into reality ? Then if you don't use the computer for real, don't even try make outdated aeroplane software better, then what do you need skilled modelers for ; if the 3D models is not the basics for further efficient production --- if you realy don't need the advanced models to realy fabricate the building compoments, then what's the need for innovation and newthinking even 3D , when you can just throw a sketch, and ask skilled handymen to fiddle it into reality ?
Please -- try read my homepage ; it do explain how to engage the future, and how to make a revolution in architecture, --- but you has to accept that I am danish :
per, i lose brain cells trying whenever i try to decipher your text...it's like some ancient lost language in which people only understand 50% of the vocabulary...
btw, gehry had from what i've heard close to 150 people working at it's peak...i think the general rule of thumb is that if a firm doesn't have projects in either china or dubai/abu dabi, well..they're pretty much screwed
if you're speaking of just designers/architects, then gehry had less than 150 people...with assistants, accounting, and gehry technologies, about 250 people total. also, they had 2 projects in china and the guggenheim abu dhabi that i hear is coming back into the office. all i have to say is that if this office is having problems, other offices must be in worse condition.
The problem is, that not enough investment gone into the real issue ; to develob new building methods, from the new production methods that was avaible with N.C. controlled manufactoring.
No further savings are possible , without a paragime shift in construction methods, in how to use the 3D model to fabriate the building compoments. These new compoments --- if any newthinking gone into it -- has to look and work different, different from the tradisional materials and methods Gehry uses.
Reson I point to my homepage is, that there you can read about a method that uses none of the tradisional materials except sheet material, and building like that is such a paragime shift -- one that involve the intire building and projecting, one that percive a structure in a compleatly different way. And only by changing everything, it is possible to make those savings ; but more important, only by doing so, it is possible to profit from the real efficiency the computer offer. making a direct-link , from projected 3D drawing to manufactored building compoment.
"this shows the true values of FOG - screw the employees"
- so ... assuming this layoff is true ... say the average variable cost per employee (salary, payroll taxes, benefits, etc.) is $60k, the cost to carry these folks would be on the order of $5,000,000 per year. If FOG doesn't have the revenues, are they just supposed to eat $5,000,000 while they wait on a new project?
Firms hate layoffs just as much as employees do. Unfortunately, staff reductions sometimes are necessary. Firm's that don't cut costs when revenues decline don't stay in business for very long.
I believe we're going to see a lot more of this over the next year. Get you resumes and savings accounts ready.
So how are those laid off supposed to feel? Like they're talented enough that they should have kept their jobs but the economic conditions just weren't right?
Not sure I know how they're "supposed to feel" -- I don't suppose they're "supposed to feel" any particular way -- layoffs suck -- so does going out of business because revenues didn't exceed costs. More people lose when businesses fail than when firms must make unpleasant decisions to stay afloat.
Those of us who've been around this particular block a few times understand that this is the nature of the business we've chosen -- there are expansions and there are contractions. During contractions, bad things can happen to good people. After witnessing this cycle a few times, most professionals modify their spending and savings patterns to reflect that reality.
While there is no direct connection, this is the flip side of the past 2-3 years when candidates for new employment beat the brains out of firms during salary negotiations. Many of those people demanded - and received - compensation that simply was not sustainable from a productivity perspective. Now that a contraction has begun, those on the negative side of the cost/productivity relationship probably have something significant to worry about.
Don't get me wrong -- I feel deeply for those who lose their jobs. I felt bad when it happened to me, and to my architect wife, during the early years of our marriage. I also felt terrible when I had to lay off a few people several years back. Those are memories you never, ever forget. If you're halfway compassionate, they're also memories you work exceedingly hard to never, ever repeat.
Last year we had to drop about half of our staff. It sucked letting people go. Now our office is very lean.
We all do some things that we did not to before - such as phones and filing. On the upside for those who remained received more compensation and a lot more opportunities for overtime.
It depends. The BS Arch 4 year interns fresh out of school w/ no experience require a lot of training. Probably two years to be productive. It is hard to justify $36K when the JC is having the intern redo and redo and redo…
The JC taking the exam – is worth every bit of the 50-60K.
The PM doing the work of a JC at 80K plus. Not so valuable.
treekiller -- I wasn't just referring starting salaries -- wage inflation took place all across the board the past few years.
While I appreciate the gist of your comment, it's not a question of "parity with other professions" -- the economics of architecture simply are profoundly different from the economics of the law or medicine. We can't keep jacking up wages without a corresponding increase in productivity and/or fee levels. IMO, productivity is not increasing to any significant degree (it may be declining) nor are fee levels keeping pace with wages -- at least not on a sustainable basis.
This is a recipe for economic disaster and, regrettably, firms increasingly will be motivated to shed unproductive salaries (read "people") whenever the need arises.
A long time ago a friend of mine worked in Paul Roudoph's office. They were soaring along on a project which went kaput! I don't recall the number of people working in the office but overnight they shrunk
to three people. Paul his partner and my friend. So anything can happen and most likely will. However on the up note play close attention to what Berkshire Hathaway is up to. Warren is going on a spending spree.
I worked for another architect who hedged the swing of the Architectural world by purchasing solid stocks and Art work.
It seemed to work well for him.
I just got home from a Gehry lecture when one of the students in the audience asked him how he became such a "badass businessman" (this was not even close to the most cringeworthy question asked - oh the shame.)
Gehry laughed it off and deflected, but later did make a brief comment about the economy being terrible right now.
This whole thread is mostly off topic now anyway so... My boss and his partner used to have a firm with two offices and around 100 employees. In the 80's (and this is no 80's, not yet anyway i guess we will see where it goes) they tried not to layoff a large amount of employees. Things went bad quick and one day the whole office got canned and they both lost everything pretty much. While good intentioned they sort of ended up screwing everyone, themselves included. Now they won't have an office over 10 people, take pretty much any work and take too little for the work. Needless to say the 80's was scaring for them. They should have begun cutting the office down slowly to keep a better balance and allow people more opportunity to figure out what they were going to do. but hindsight is 20/20
Gehry layoffs?
Did they really layoff 80 people?
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2008/04/curbedwire_big.php
good, my local java joint needs trainable monkeys to make elegant coffee.
Per- great comment over at Curbed!
Generaly speaking no -- it's good news for architecture if this trend of perciving a building, as your picture of what "cutting edge" architecture looks like, is replace by some real and quality structure. Computers are here to calculate the structure, for you to focus on detail design - the opposite of what Gehry claim is possible with outdated aeroplane design software in fact ; a return to perciving architecture from within and by structure. From that angle ,fancy surfaces are nothing but surface attitude omiting the most important thing, the structure -- and the structure for just anything can be calculated as a 3dh -- now That is a gurantie, that whatever you design, a reliable structure can be generated by a press of a button; allowing you to make the real revolution in architecture, as when what keep it all in the air is simply generated as an assembly framework, then floors at various levels, build-in furniture, whatever you can melt and subtract, is then possible and can be cut from sheet steel by a N.C. cutter.
Gehry just stay with the old perception and omit the structure, and that is not the new perception of the build works.
Per Corell
I also appreciate the first comment at Curbed:
Someone in his office figured out that a Frank Gehry building is just a wire mesh inside auto-cad that gets cycled through a three dimension randomizer. Later they slap on a chrome shader. Naturally once this was known they had to do some house cleaning.
they had a similar contraction with the completion of bilboa. won't be the first, won't be the last. this shows the true values of FOG - screw the employees.
Thank's for not mentioning my promotion for 3dh -- but when the chance is there..... I hope it make some meaning even without the promotion.
i love how you can tell it's per by his broken english. i don't know if i've ever met anyone who actually writes with an accent.
Per, tell me more about 3dh.
I'm sure Frank is protecting his Intellectual Property Rights by shutting down all the computers. Which is kind of funny cause
I'm sure 50 % of those former employees already have the right stuff to carry his method of madness forward in this world, except for the singular most important thing and that is they are NOT FRANK!
So why the hell not treat them like intellectual humans instood of monkey drafting and model making drones?
Architecture is an industry subject to economic fluctuations just like any other. Layoffs happen.
What's your point? It still has its effects.
so sad... they got rid of a lot of really bright people
"they are NOT FRANK!"
"Layoffs happen."
Maybe building "as using cutting edge" software is simply too expensive.
Not profiting from projecting things , by not doing it on the computers terms is the real problem. --- Staying with a perception of the build works, that mean you only re-write the accounting and logistics as done 60 years ago, into fast computer code, computer code that do things exactly the way things was done before the computer , is the real dead-end that allow no further savings .
Now why do I say so ; I say so becaurse that is how architects software are --- allready Gehry don't need the computer to generate the building compoments, so to profit from new way's to build will be hard to find --- just throwing a sketch and then ask the skilled handymen to fiddle the basic structure to be covered by easy panels can be done with very little or no computer power at all -- so why vaste money on the future, when old methods can be translated into new fast computer pograms , --- still when that is done, when all architect software is made , then how can we become more efficient within that perception.
Now I know you guy's has difficult to read my context , but that is that Gehry sold out when bragging about using cutting edge software and frensh aeroplane design software --- as first the aeroplane software is now near 20 years old , or atleast the perception of buildings as a shell with a tradisional building inside , must be obvious a dead-end.
---- And how can one further refine methods when the dead-end wall is reached ? What I say , is that to efficiently profit from new technology, it's simply not enough, that the houses look fancy and high-tech ; they must by core be cutting edge and newthinking. And I know it is easier to laugh about bad spelling than listen to the words, bur how obvious must it be, before you Romans realise, realise that "painting" a picture , of about how you would expect the computer to profit you all , with wierd forms is not how things must happen , --- throw a sketch and ask the skilled metal workers , who need no computer to make fine works, will not make new jobs using modeling software.
Sorry again but this is my language --- so I try again ; I know it's a hard battle, to enter with a new perception of how to build a house , explain you all these complicated issues about why architecture reached a dead-end. But try read my words as what they are -- you see we need methods to efficient take profit from new production , and that is not what Gehry ever did, Think about who is layoff -- is it the craftsmen who fiddle the sketches , with no use of a computer, into reality ? Then if you don't use the computer for real, don't even try make outdated aeroplane software better, then what do you need skilled modelers for ; if the 3D models is not the basics for further efficient production --- if you realy don't need the advanced models to realy fabricate the building compoments, then what's the need for innovation and newthinking even 3D , when you can just throw a sketch, and ask skilled handymen to fiddle it into reality ?
Please -- try read my homepage ; it do explain how to engage the future, and how to make a revolution in architecture, --- but you has to accept that I am danish :
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
i accept that per is danish
Can I work for you ?
what is that as a percentage of gehry's office? i always assumed gehry's office was only about 60-80 people.
they had about 150 people in the main office (the only one? off of jefferson between the 405 and marina del rey) last time i checked
per, i lose brain cells trying whenever i try to decipher your text...it's like some ancient lost language in which people only understand 50% of the vocabulary...
btw, gehry had from what i've heard close to 150 people working at it's peak...i think the general rule of thumb is that if a firm doesn't have projects in either china or dubai/abu dabi, well..they're pretty much screwed
see there you go...i just made a grammatical mistake...damn you per =)
if you're speaking of just designers/architects, then gehry had less than 150 people...with assistants, accounting, and gehry technologies, about 250 people total. also, they had 2 projects in china and the guggenheim abu dhabi that i hear is coming back into the office. all i have to say is that if this office is having problems, other offices must be in worse condition.
1deviantC .
The problem is, that not enough investment gone into the real issue ; to develob new building methods, from the new production methods that was avaible with N.C. controlled manufactoring.
No further savings are possible , without a paragime shift in construction methods, in how to use the 3D model to fabriate the building compoments. These new compoments --- if any newthinking gone into it -- has to look and work different, different from the tradisional materials and methods Gehry uses.
Reson I point to my homepage is, that there you can read about a method that uses none of the tradisional materials except sheet material, and building like that is such a paragime shift -- one that involve the intire building and projecting, one that percive a structure in a compleatly different way. And only by changing everything, it is possible to make those savings ; but more important, only by doing so, it is possible to profit from the real efficiency the computer offer. making a direct-link , from projected 3D drawing to manufactored building compoment.
Import, so was it really 80 out?
Hi-jack
Hi- jack-ed~
does that mean they halved their staff of designers/architects?
- so ... assuming this layoff is true ... say the average variable cost per employee (salary, payroll taxes, benefits, etc.) is $60k, the cost to carry these folks would be on the order of $5,000,000 per year. If FOG doesn't have the revenues, are they just supposed to eat $5,000,000 while they wait on a new project?
Firms hate layoffs just as much as employees do. Unfortunately, staff reductions sometimes are necessary. Firm's that don't cut costs when revenues decline don't stay in business for very long.
I believe we're going to see a lot more of this over the next year. Get you resumes and savings accounts ready.
Diller, Scofidio, and the other guy just let off a large chunk of their workforce too. Its the end of an era! Down with gratuity!
So how are those laid off supposed to feel? Like they're talented enough that they should have kept their jobs but the economic conditions just weren't right?
Not sure I know how they're "supposed to feel" -- I don't suppose they're "supposed to feel" any particular way -- layoffs suck -- so does going out of business because revenues didn't exceed costs. More people lose when businesses fail than when firms must make unpleasant decisions to stay afloat.
Those of us who've been around this particular block a few times understand that this is the nature of the business we've chosen -- there are expansions and there are contractions. During contractions, bad things can happen to good people. After witnessing this cycle a few times, most professionals modify their spending and savings patterns to reflect that reality.
While there is no direct connection, this is the flip side of the past 2-3 years when candidates for new employment beat the brains out of firms during salary negotiations. Many of those people demanded - and received - compensation that simply was not sustainable from a productivity perspective. Now that a contraction has begun, those on the negative side of the cost/productivity relationship probably have something significant to worry about.
Don't get me wrong -- I feel deeply for those who lose their jobs. I felt bad when it happened to me, and to my architect wife, during the early years of our marriage. I also felt terrible when I had to lay off a few people several years back. Those are memories you never, ever forget. If you're halfway compassionate, they're also memories you work exceedingly hard to never, ever repeat.
Last year we had to drop about half of our staff. It sucked letting people go. Now our office is very lean.
We all do some things that we did not to before - such as phones and filing. On the upside for those who remained received more compensation and a lot more opportunities for overtime.
blueG- FOG has a history of layoffs where they immediately hire new staff to refill those positions. Maybe that isn't the case this time.
candidates for new employment beat the brains out of firms during salary negotiations
do those rising starting salaries really reflect an imbalance or are they finally pushing architecture salaries into parity with other professions?
It depends. The BS Arch 4 year interns fresh out of school w/ no experience require a lot of training. Probably two years to be productive. It is hard to justify $36K when the JC is having the intern redo and redo and redo…
The JC taking the exam – is worth every bit of the 50-60K.
The PM doing the work of a JC at 80K plus. Not so valuable.
treekiller -- I wasn't just referring starting salaries -- wage inflation took place all across the board the past few years.
While I appreciate the gist of your comment, it's not a question of "parity with other professions" -- the economics of architecture simply are profoundly different from the economics of the law or medicine. We can't keep jacking up wages without a corresponding increase in productivity and/or fee levels. IMO, productivity is not increasing to any significant degree (it may be declining) nor are fee levels keeping pace with wages -- at least not on a sustainable basis.
This is a recipe for economic disaster and, regrettably, firms increasingly will be motivated to shed unproductive salaries (read "people") whenever the need arises.
A long time ago a friend of mine worked in Paul Roudoph's office. They were soaring along on a project which went kaput! I don't recall the number of people working in the office but overnight they shrunk
to three people. Paul his partner and my friend. So anything can happen and most likely will. However on the up note play close attention to what Berkshire Hathaway is up to. Warren is going on a spending spree.
I worked for another architect who hedged the swing of the Architectural world by purchasing solid stocks and Art work.
It seemed to work well for him.
I just got home from a Gehry lecture when one of the students in the audience asked him how he became such a "badass businessman" (this was not even close to the most cringeworthy question asked - oh the shame.)
Gehry laughed it off and deflected, but later did make a brief comment about the economy being terrible right now.
This whole thread is mostly off topic now anyway so... My boss and his partner used to have a firm with two offices and around 100 employees. In the 80's (and this is no 80's, not yet anyway i guess we will see where it goes) they tried not to layoff a large amount of employees. Things went bad quick and one day the whole office got canned and they both lost everything pretty much. While good intentioned they sort of ended up screwing everyone, themselves included. Now they won't have an office over 10 people, take pretty much any work and take too little for the work. Needless to say the 80's was scaring for them. They should have begun cutting the office down slowly to keep a better balance and allow people more opportunity to figure out what they were going to do. but hindsight is 20/20
news for you kids:
L.A.'s Grand Avenue project snags on loans
tons of highrise projects are snagged on loans here too
oh its a ghery project, value engineer i, make a BOX ;)
why do so many people spell Gehry as Geary or Ghery? Are they just typos, or wrong spellings, or is it some subtle attempt to undermine him?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.