4 Connects for a $50 job?

tkgnewseed · ‎11-13-2020

Seriosly, 4 connects submit a proposal for a $50 job to help a client fix an error?

tlbp · ‎11-13-2020

Eddie K wrote:
Seriosly, 4 connects submit a proposal for a $50 job to help a client fix an error?

If you adopt the mindset that every proposal will cost 6 connects, then 4 connects will seem like a deal.

jeremiah-brown · ‎11-13-2020

Yup, I see it everyday. There are loads of 6 connect jobs from clients who post and just let the ad expire too.

wlyonsatl · ‎11-14-2020

Eddie,

Upwork has heard user complaints and says change is coming to the connects policies and procedures:

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Freelancers/Connects-Policy-What-Change-Is-Coming/m-p/830551#M509843

lysis10 · ‎11-14-2020

Will L wrote:
Eddie,

Upwork has heard user complaints and says change is coming to the connects policies and procedures:

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Freelancers/Connects-Policy-What-Change-Is-Coming/m-p/830551#M509843

This thread makes me LOL and think "be careful what you wish for." lol

feed_my_eyes · ‎11-14-2020

Jennifer M wrote:
Will L wrote:
Eddie,

Upwork has heard user complaints and says change is coming to the connects policies and procedures:

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Freelancers/Connects-Policy-What-Change-Is-Coming/m-p/830551#M509843

This thread makes me LOL and think "be careful what you wish for." lol

Yeah, hopefully it'll just be a flat rate from now on.

lysis10 · ‎11-14-2020

Christine A wrote:
Yeah, hopefully it'll just be a flat rate from now on.

I think so too but I'm just a droplet in the sea of freelancers. One thing I've learned is that freelancers just want Upwork to change things so that they can be employees, not business owners. Then they force Upwork to do something (ahem.....communication only on Upwork) and then they are surprise pikachu face when a change is made and they lose money. No forward thinking at all.

wlyonsatl · ‎11-14-2020

Jennifer,

I'm glad to hear you are so easily amused. Laughter really is the best medicine.

But Upwork didn't say the change in connects policy was due solely to freelancer complaints.

Upwork did mention "user dissatisfaction" (and you do know both freelancers and clients are Upwork "users", right?).

And Upwork, freelancers and clients can all benefit if Upwork is able to reverse connects-related policies that Upwork says "negatively impact fill rates". Everybody wins if Upwork can "improve fill rates."

The only real mystery here is why making a change in the connects policy might "have a negative impact" on Upwork's revenue, which implies that Upwork currently makes more money from selling connects that don't result in a freelancer being hired than it would make if freelancers were hired for more projects instead of clients posting those projects not hiring freelancers at all.

And that implies that the complaining users Upwork is responding to in considering a change are clients, not freelancers. But we will likely never know for sure.

feed_my_eyes · ‎11-14-2020

Will L wrote:

The only real mystery here is why making a change in the connects policy might "have a negative impact" on Upwork's revenue, which implies that Upwork currently makes more money from selling connects that don't result in a freelancer being hired than it would make if freelancers were hired for more projects instead of clients posting those projects not hiring freelancers at all.

Upwork does indeed work in mysterious ways. Why would they make a change if they think that it'll result in less revenue?

lysis10 · ‎11-14-2020

Will L wrote:
Jennifer,

I'm glad to hear you are so easily amused. Laughter really is the best medicine.

But Upwork didn't say the change in connects policy was due solely to freelancer complaints.

Upwork did mention "user dissatisfaction" (and you do know both freelancers and clients are Upwork "users", right?).

And Upwork, freelancers and clients can all benefit if Upwork is able to reverse connects-related policies that Upwork says "negatively impact fill rates". Everybody wins if Upwork can "improve fill rates."

The only real mystery here is why making a change in the connects policy might "have a negative impact" on Upwork's revenue, which implies that Upwork currently makes more money from selling connects that don't result in a freelancer being hired than it would make if freelancers were hired for more projects instead of clients posting those projects not hiring freelancers at all.

And that implies that the complaining users Upwork is responding to in considering a change are clients, not freelancers. But we will likely never know for sure.

Upwork is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get.

I think you're right that they would change it if clients complain. If I had a guess, I would think Upwork wants every job to have 15-25 bids. Conceptually that seems like enough for clients to choose from without flooding them. All the changes always have to do with limiting bids and trying to get quality bids in the mix. The problem is people making money regularly aren't sitting in the marketplace clicking refresh every 5 seconds.

jodypm · ‎11-15-2020

It's hard work finding good freelancers, just as it is finding jobs - but I think it's harder to find good freelancers. When the freelancer has to invest something in the process, from the client-side, they are usuall more serious and ofen more qualified (not always, but often).

Personally, I don't mind spending connects and buying them again. Their cost is minimal and just BAU.

I think that if freelancers could submit jobs with very few connects every time, and they had a good pool of connects, clients would be flooded with the old 'copy-and-paste' cover letters and proposals.

I don't know what would be best, but hopefully a balance can be achieved as there still seems to be dissatisfaction on both ends.

It does seem unfair to freelancers who take on small jobs, however, but that may be the point.

petra_r · ‎11-15-2020

Jody P wrote:

It does seem unfair to freelancers who take on small jobs, however, but that may be the point.

It probably is. Small jobs are not in Upwork's interest and haven't been for a long time.

geri_kol · ‎11-15-2020

If that´s the case, why doesn´t Upwork simply set a low threshhold for the least amount of what "small jobs" can offer in terms of payment?

I am of the opinion that small jobs do have value for Upwork, but they ought to require 1-2 connects at most, and not 4-6. Also, perhaps connects for certain parts of the world should be priced differently, because $0.15 for a person in India or Kenya has a different value than $0.15 for someone in the U.S. or Europe.

lysis10 · ‎11-15-2020

Gergana K wrote:
If that´s the case, why doesn´t Upwork simply set a low threshhold for the least amount of what "small jobs" can offer in terms of payment?

I am of the opinion that small jobs do have value for Upwork, but they ought to require 1-2 connects at most, and not 4-6. Also, perhaps connects for certain parts of the world should be priced differently, because $0.15 for a person in India or Kenya has a different value than $0.15 for someone in the U.S. or Europe.

They've already said small jobs cost them the most. Look at all the meltdowns over escrow disputes on here. Usually it's for small amounts.

feed_my_eyes · ‎11-16-2020

Gergana K wrote:
If that´s the case, why doesn´t Upwork simply set a low threshhold for the least amount of what "small jobs" can offer in terms of payment?

I am of the opinion that small jobs do have value for Upwork, but they ought to require 1-2 connects at most, and not 4-6. Also, perhaps connects for certain parts of the world should be priced differently, because $0.15 for a person in India or Kenya has a different value than $0.15 for someone in the U.S. or Europe.

Freelancers who live in parts of the world where the cost of living is cheap are able to undercut freelancers who don't, so they have that huge advantage. So they can't say, "it's fine for us to charge more competitive rates because of where we live" and at the same time say, "but we can't pay the same rates for connects because that's a lot of money where we live". Pick one. This is a global marketplace - there's nothing to stop everyone from charging a rate that will cover their expenses. And if people think that it's possible to start a profitable small business without investing even a small amount of their own money, then they should go ahead and do that - nobody's forcing them to use Upwork.

But I do agree with you that if Upwork really wanted to rid themselves of these supposedly unprofitable small jobs, then it would be pretty easy to do something about it. Clearly, they do want to keep a huge pool of cheap freelancers available for clients, which is undoubtedly why they're making changes to the connects policy.

wlyonsatl · ‎11-16-2020

All freelancers on Upwork have to reconcile themselves to working in a global market, just as US and European textile workers and auto workers have had to do as their jobs moved to low-cost of production countries. There is no reason for Upwork to introduce some sort of virtual walled-off area for freelancers from one part of the world to be separated from freelancers from another part of the world. That certainly wouldn't be something clients would want, and clients rule in that respect.

And this particular issue isn't even about low cost of living freelancers versus high cost of living freelancers, it's about whether low-cost projects on Upwork are worthwhile for any freelancers.

If I understand the economics correctly:

On a $50 project Upwork takes a fee of 20%, leaving $40 for the freelancer as income.

If a freelancer wins one $50 project per 20 proposals submitted and each proposal requires 6 connects at $0.15 apiece, this means the freeancer has paid an additional $16 to win that project.

This leaves $24 as the freelancer's net income with Upwork's total fees at $26 (52% of the total value of the project).

If the freelancer has to submit 40 proposals for every project won and "only" 2 connects are needed for each proposal, the freelancer nets $28 on a $50 project and Upwork's total fees are $22 (44%).

At any rate, maybe we'll soon see whether more changes are coming to Upwork's recently-changed connects policy.

geri_kol · ‎11-16-2020

So if your analysis is fundamentally correct, Will - which I think it is - I don´t understand why people are saying that "small jobs" are not profitable for Upwork or that it wants to discourage people from applying for them. It´s obvious that the opposite is true: they are highly profitable for Upwork, as long as there are people willing to waste (sorry, "spend") 6 connects applying for them.

wlyonsatl · ‎11-16-2020

Hi, Gergana.

All claims otherwise notwithstanding, no one who posts on this board knows whether $50 projects are, as a whole, profitable for Upwork. That is not public information.

But Upwork has yet to report earnings to its shareholders and I'd expect the company would shed any part of its business that is not profitable or has no prospect of becoming profitable.

I would also expect such low-priced projects have proportionately higher administrative costs for Upwork than higher-priced projects due to the proporationately higher costs of dealing with complaints and payment problems from both freelancers AND clients on these projects. Upwork's high fees on these projects may be necessary to keep this sector profitable for Upwork.

It will be interesting to see how the connects policy is changed (again).

jodypm · ‎11-16-2020

Hi Will,

Your points are clear and appreciated, but I can tell you that Upwork has reported revenue for earnings since November of 2018. Most recently, on November the 4th of this year (Q3).

In the last three months, Upwork's share price has more than doubled - at one point, as low as $13.54 per share. As of the date of this message, UPWK is at $30.21.

I think that this may be a good indication that Upwork's recent moves have proven fruitful in regards to smaller contracts. Many other factors are involved of course (most notably, Covid-19 and more workers at home), but we may be able to glean some insight about Upwork's apparent stance on smaller jobs from their reports - especially Q3.

Best regards,

Jody

wlyonsatl · ‎11-16-2020

Hi, Jody.

Revenue and earnings are completely different numbers. Upwork has repeatedly reported higher revenues from quarter to quarter, which is a very good thing, but the company has not reported net income (aka earnings) in any recent quarter, as far as I remember.

No one who is legally buying or selling Upwork's shares in the open market knows whether "Upwork's recent moves have proven fruitful in regards to smaller contracts." That is not public information.

Most analyst commentary on Upwork I've seen is excited about Upwork's shares on the assumption that working remotely will continue to be a growing trend in the US or global labor markets.

jodypm · ‎11-16-2020

Will L wrote:
Hi, Jody.

Revenue and earnings are completely different numbers. Upwork has repeatedly reported higher revenues from quarter to quarter, which is a very good thing, but the company has not reported net income (aka earnings) in any recent quarter, as far as I remember.

No one who is legally buying or selling Upwork's shares in the open market knows whether "Upwork's recent moves have proven fruitful in regards to smaller contracts." That is not public information.

Most analyst commentary on Upwork I've seen is excited about Upwork's shares on the assumption that working remotely will continue to be a growing trend in the US or global labor markets.

Hi Will,

Thanks for your reply, but I am just joining in the conversation to be helpful. And part of investing is obtaining insight from one's own knowledge, the market, or that of others.

Forgive me, but I did not say, "Upwork's recent moves have proven fruitful in regards to smaller contracts." I said, "I think that this may be a good indication that Upwork's recent moves have proven fruitful in regards to smaller contracts. Many other factors are involved of course (most notably, Covid-19 and more workers at home), but we may [sic] able to glean some insight about Upwork's apparent stance on smaller jobs from their reports - especially Q3."

Thanks,

Jody

feed_my_eyes · ‎11-16-2020

Gergana K wrote:
So if your analysis is fundamentally correct, Will - which I think it is - I don´t understand why people are saying that "small jobs" are not profitable for Upwork or that it wants to discourage people from applying for them. It´s obvious that the opposite is true: they are highly profitable for Upwork, as long as there are people willing to waste (sorry, "spend") 6 connects applying for them.

I don't think that one-off small jobs are profitable, especially since those cheapskate clients are frequently awful and/or the freelancers who take those jobs are inexperienced, which leads to refunds or disputes that Upwork ends up settling out of their own pocket (and our pockets). That category of client and freelancer are undoubtedly also the ones who need lots of hand-holding and attention from customer service, which also costs money. The profits probably only come in when big-money clients want to hire a huge number of low-cost freelancers on a long-term basis.

I can see the case for paid connects because there's such a huge number of freelancers who are simply not up to the mark; they don't make any money and will never make any money, even on small jobs, yet they hang around spamming clients - sometimes for years - unwilling to take a hint. So if Upwork wants to get rid of or reduce the price of connects, then they should go back to limiting the number of connects you can spend per month; or, if a freelancer goes for more than say, six months without making any money, they are gently shown the door.

jodypm · ‎11-16-2020

Christine A wrote:
Gergana K wrote:
So if your analysis is fundamentally correct, Will - which I think it is - I don´t understand why people are saying that "small jobs" are not profitable for Upwork or that it wants to discourage people from applying for them. It´s obvious that the opposite is true: they are highly profitable for Upwork, as long as there are people willing to waste (sorry, "spend") 6 connects applying for them.
I don't think that one-off small jobs are profitable, especially since those cheapskate clients are frequently awful and/or the freelancers who take those jobs are inexperienced, which leads to refunds or disputes that Upwork ends up settling out of their own pocket (and our pockets). That category of client and freelancer are undoubtedly also the ones who need lots of hand-holding and attention from customer service, which also costs money. The profits probably only come in when big-money clients want to hire a huge number of low-cost freelancers on a long-term basis.

I can see the case for paid connects because there's such a huge number of freelancers who are simply not up to the mark; they don't make any money and will never make any money, even on small jobs, yet they hang around spamming clients - sometimes for years - unwilling to take a hint. So if Upwork wants to get rid of or reduce the price of connects, then they should go back to limiting the number of connects you can spend per month; or, if a freelancer goes for more than say, six months without making any money, they are gently shown the door.

Hi Christine,

I would say that you hit the nail on the head - especially in your second paragraph. In a way, they are already shown, not to the door, but to the corridor that leads to the door.

Posts like this, which I'm sure you've read your share of, are amusing examples:

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Freelancers/upwork-hide-my-profile-because-I-do-not-earn-money/td-p/...

Anyway, thanks for summing it all up nicely, and not sugarcoating it. Too much sugar is never good.

Best regards,

Jody

feed_my_eyes · ‎11-16-2020

Jody P wrote:
Hi Christine,

I would say that you hit the nail on the head - especially in your second paragraph. In a way, they are already shown, not to the door, but to the corridor that leads to the door.

Well yes - paid connects are the corridor that leads to the door (at least at the moment). So when people get upset and say that connects are too expensive or connects should be refunded, they're missing the point - Upwork wants unprofitable freelancers to get frustrated, give up and leave. But I guess that it's been working a little TOO well.

jeremiah-brown · ‎11-22-2020

Sure, but I also feel that if a client closes out a job posting without hiring anyone, that those connects should be refunded to those who have submitted them.

lysis10 · ‎11-16-2020

Gergana K wrote:
So if your analysis is fundamentally correct, Will - which I think it is - I don´t understand why people are saying that "small jobs" are not profitable for Upwork or that it wants to discourage people from applying for them. It´s obvious that the opposite is true: they are highly profitable for Upwork, as long as there are people willing to waste (sorry, "spend") 6 connects applying for them.

They said small jobs cost them too much back when they introduced 20% commission on the $500 per client change. That's why you pay more for small jobs. It's been a long time since that happened and I even want to say Garnor is the one who posted the change and said that.

atreglia · ‎11-16-2020

Gergana K wrote:
So if your analysis is fundamentally correct, Will - which I think it is - I don´t understand why people are saying that "small jobs" are not profitable for Upwork or that it wants to discourage people from applying for them. It´s obvious that the opposite is true: they are highly profitable for Upwork, as long as there are people willing to waste (sorry, "spend") 6 connects applying for them.

Because there is a mindset here in the forum that equates small jobs with cheapskate clients and whining freelancers. However, IME this couldn't be further from the truth and agree with you that small jobs are quite profitable for UW - Especially jobs below the arbitration amount of $275(?) because those jobs are pretty much a straight shot toward a hefty 20% cut for UW.

lysis10 · ‎11-16-2020

Christine A wrote:
Gergana K wrote:
If that´s the case, why doesn´t Upwork simply set a low threshhold for the least amount of what "small jobs" can offer in terms of payment?

I am of the opinion that small jobs do have value for Upwork, but they ought to require 1-2 connects at most, and not 4-6. Also, perhaps connects for certain parts of the world should be priced differently, because $0.15 for a person in India or Kenya has a different value than $0.15 for someone in the U.S. or Europe.
Freelancers who live in parts of the world where the cost of living is cheap are able to undercut freelancers who don't, so they have that huge advantage. So they can't say, "it's fine for us to charge more competitive rates because of where we live" and at the same time say, "but we can't pay the same rates for connects because that's a lot of money where we live". Pick one. This is a global marketplace - there's nothing to stop everyone from charging a rate that will cover their expenses. And if people think that it's possible to start a profitable small business without investing even a small amount of their own money, then they should go ahead and do that - nobody's forcing them to use Upwork.

But I do agree with you that if Upwork really wanted to rid themselves of these supposedly unprofitable small jobs, then it would be pretty easy to do something about it. Clearly, they do want to keep a huge pool of cheap freelancers available for clients, which is undoubtedly why they're making changes to the connects policy.

This is what annoys me. I can accept that freelancers in cheaper places can charge less. I'm willing to accept that but then don't cry over 15 cents being too much money. You need to pick one. The global marketplace goes both ways.

richard_wein · ‎11-15-2020

Jennifer M wrote:

Upwork is like a box of chocolates.

Maybe a Whizzo Quality Assortment? (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2odo4b)

lysis10 · ‎11-15-2020

Richard W wrote:
Jennifer M wrote:

Upwork is like a box of chocolates.
Maybe a Whizzo Quality Assortment? (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2odo4b)

lol what do you know a Monty Python skit for my Forrest Gump quote. 😄