🐈 Community
» Forums » Freelancers » 6 connects for Entry level job?
Page options
rolludesig
Member

6 connects for Entry level job?

I just came across a job where client is looking for entry level freelancers but cost of posting proposal is 6 connects??

 

what exactly is going on? why 6 connects for entry level job?

ACCEPTED SOLUTION
rafsun_ug
Member

Upwork needs lots of money even it doesn't a matter to Upwork, if Freelancers doesn't get jobs or clients never hire anyone. Upwork is getting money whatever the Job was granted to anyone or not! You can see, almost every jobs get more than 50 proposals. That means Upwork earns $45 without anything if there needs a 6 connects...if the job granted to anyone, Upwork earns again 20% commission. It's business brother...it's business! But I strongly believe, what is going on here, is not fair!

View solution in original post

68 REPLIES 68
petra_r
Member


Rahul V wrote:

I just came across a job where client is looking for entry level freelancers but cost of posting proposal is 6 connects??


An entry-level job can last for months or years and be worth hundreds or thousands.

What's your point? The algorithm that determines the connects is flawed, but nobody ever suggested it had anything to do with whether the job was entry-level or expert.

 

 

but how can it be worth thousands when client is just asking for 5-10 banner images? and one last thing that needs to be changed is algorithm...

 

life of freelancers will be much easier without algorithm


Rahul V wrote:

but how can it be worth thousands when client is just asking for 5-10 banner images? and one last thing that needs to be changed is algorithm...

 

life of freelancers will be much easier without algorithm


I think what will eventually happen is that Upwork will have to go back to just having a flat connect rate for every project. The difference in price between 2 connects, 4 connects and 6 connects is negligible, but the fact that there IS a difference was bound to lead to lots of complaints about projects being unfairly priced, and I don't see how it's going to be possible to fix this to everyone's satisfaction. Just don't be surprised if they decide to implement a flat rate of 6 connects for every project; be careful what you wish for.

I agree with you, If we have premium Membership and can get 70 connect a month, we can only have 11 bids a month As I have seen almost all Jobs require 6 connects to bid. So I think that flat rate would be better and very helpful for all, As we all know that It's not something that we can get 1 project even after 7 bids.


Ankit J wrote:

I agree with you, If we have premium Membership and can get 70 connect a month, we can only have 11 bids a month As I have seen almost all Jobs require 6 connects to bid. So I think that flat rate would be better and very helpful for all, As we all know that It's not something that we can get 1 project even after 7 bids.


I am sure there are exceptions, but I don't know any successful freelancer who makes 11 bids in a single month.

"I am sure there are exceptions, but I don't know any successful freelancer who makes 11 bids in a single month."

 

Being new to this, it is possible to make 11 or more to land one small project. I agree, once I have more reviews and credentials it should be less, but as a newbie it is tough to get noticed.

I'm working on Upwork from last 10 years and still struggling to get the job even after using 56 connects. I'm seeing that now it's getting hard to survive in freelancing. Hope Upwork will remove this connect system as we are already giving 20% for every project we do.


Tiffany S wrote:


I am sure there are exceptions, but I don't know any successful freelancer who makes 11 bids in a single month.


I consider myself  successful and other than one quick job around the 4th of July, it's been tumbelweeds this month. I was invited for multiple jobs, many I accepted, and zero that I was hired for, only one with any engagement.

 

I've applied for a few jobs, again being very selective, only one interviewed and hired me - he required less than 2 hours of work.

 

Perhaps it's the nature of my work, which is primarily business writing, many of my jobs are completed quickly or are awaiting client input, so I am continually checking job leads so I am busy. 

 

This is a long winded way of saying, for some freelancers it really does require a lot of applications to work enough to make a living. 

 

@Chistine A  --  I think that comes across as a flippant response. It makes an assumption that's not supported by what myself and others have observed.  Each and every proposal I've sought to submit has required 6 Tokens, never less. It's also not reasonable to assume that for many/most projects, with the competition for those projects, that it shouldn't require submitting more than 11 proposals, less if you didn't pay for the so called "Premium Membership" to be "successful" here. So frustrating.


Thomas B wrote:

@Chistine A  --  I think that comes across as a flippant response. It makes an assumption that's not supported by what myself and others have observed.  Each and every proposal I've sought to submit has required 6 Tokens, never less. It's also not reasonable to assume that for many/most projects, with the competition for those projects, that it shouldn't require submitting more than 11 proposals, less if you didn't pay for the so called "Premium Membership" to be "successful" here. So frustrating.


If you use the quote function when replying to a specific comment, the conversation is a lot easier to follow.

 

If "each and every proposal" you've wanted to submit cost six tokens, then just budget for six tokens per proposal. Factor it into your business plan. If it doesn't fit, then maybe UW is not worth your while. 

 

I've been on UW for almost exactly three years. During that time, I've submitted 408 proposals. I've never purchased a connect (yet) but even if I had spent six tokens per proposal, purchased at 15 cents each, it would represent an investment of $367 against earnings of more than $70k (on which I've paid UW fees at an avg rate of 9%). I consider that a great ROI, especially since the cost of connects and the UW fees are deductible business expenses.

 

Some of us get flippant around this topic because the constant bellyaching seems to call for it. Everybody needs to put on their big girl/big boy pants and act like business people.


Phyllis G wrote:

Thomas B wrote:

@Chistine A  --  I think that comes across as a flippant response. It makes an assumption that's not supported by what myself and others have observed.  Each and every proposal I've sought to submit has required 6 Tokens, never less. It's also not reasonable to assume that for many/most projects, with the competition for those projects, that it shouldn't require submitting more than 11 proposals, less if you didn't pay for the so called "Premium Membership" to be "successful" here. So frustrating.


If you use the quote function when replying to a specific comment, the conversation is a lot easier to follow.

 

If "each and every proposal" you've wanted to submit cost six tokens, then just budget for six tokens per proposal. Factor it into your business plan. If it doesn't fit, then maybe UW is not worth your while. 

 

I've been on UW for almost exactly three years. During that time, I've submitted 408 proposals. I've never purchased a connect (yet) but even if I had spent six tokens per proposal, purchased at 15 cents each, it would represent an investment of $367 against earnings of more than $70k (on which I've paid UW fees at an avg rate of 9%). I consider that a great ROI, especially since the cost of connects and the UW fees are deductible business expenses.

 


I have been thinking about this, and your point is excellent, however I think part of the issue is the "psychology" of paying for connects vs. paying for a service. I've earned over 20k on the platform, even if I paid for connects for all of the jobs, it wouldn't be a lot. However when I do apply and watch the "ticker of connects available" go down, it heightens my awareness of the "cost." 

 

I believe Upwork would be better served with a subscription type model - no more ala carte connects.  There would be other changes necessary and I don't know how you support freelancers who offer low price services, and I don't have the data to recommend - I just think this whole connects frustration is more about the psychology and less about the money. 

"I just think this whole connects frustration is more about the
psychology and less about the money."

IMO it's not psychology, it has a real financial impact because those of us
who are trying hard to get established here, without the benefit lower
'fees' (10% vs 20%) which is where UW really makes their profit, without
the benefit of being able to submit at least 20 proposals, (now 1/2 that) -
It feels like this marketplace isn't at all friendly towards Sellers,
rather they favor Buyers. I have more evidence for that statement, but
that's off topic, so I won't go there.

I have to say if you submitted 408 proposals over 3 years and made about
20k ($6,666.66 annually,) I'm not sure it's worth it, do you? Perhaps if
it's a part time thing great, but some of newbies who Freelance full-time
at UW came to it with different expectations.


Thomas B wrote:
I have to say if you submitted 408 proposals over 3 years and made about
20k ($6,666.66 annually,) I'm not sure it's worth it, do you? Perhaps if
it's a part time thing great, but some of newbies who Freelance full-time
at UW came to it with different expectations.

Um, I didn't say that I submitted 408 proposals, that was another FL, nor did I say 3 years. 

 

My point was the amount of money I earned makes the amount spent on connects negilble (had I spent any on connects)

I never said I was happy with how much money I'm earning,  I was merely looking at revenue earned vs. theoritical cost to submit (as I earned these jobs under the free connects so far).

 

As others have said, there are costs to running a business and generating leads.  If Upwork has decided it will cost money to submit for jobs, I am recommending they rethink how they charge for it - that's all. I'm done arguing whether they should charge to submit for jobs, that ship has sailed....

 

 

 

 

Dear - I don't recall addressing my comments to you directly. Agreed that ship has sailed. If UW had exercised nearly half the brains they think they have, than they would have offered a free market where anyone can bid on projects, and buyers are held to account for their actions (or lack thereof) no less then sellers. 


Thomas B wrote:
"I just think this whole connects frustration is more about the
psychology and less about the money."

IMO it's not psychology, it has a real financial impact because those of us
who are trying hard to get established here, without the benefit lower
'fees' (10% vs 20%) which is where UW really makes their profit, without
the benefit of being able to submit at least 20 proposals, (now 1/2 that) -
It feels like this marketplace isn't at all friendly towards Sellers,
rather they favor Buyers. I have more evidence for that statement, but
that's off topic, so I won't go there.

I have to say if you submitted 408 proposals over 3 years and made about
20k ($6,666.66 annually,) I'm not sure it's worth it, do you? Perhaps if
it's a part time thing great, but some of newbies who Freelance full-time
at UW came to it with different expectations.

I've earned over $70k (not sure where you got 20k). I'm a full-time freelancer but UW accounts for only part of my business. It's absolutely worthwhile for me to be here. (And would be, even if my overall earnings did come to $20k. I'm not in a position to sneeze at $6k/year.)

 

UW is not a great fit for everybody. For instance, a FL whose business consists exclusively (or even primarily) of one-off projects under $500 will rarely climb past the 20% fee level. Unless you are really great at landing projects and knocking them out fast, it might be hard to subsist here. If what you do lends itself to working with some at least some of your clients on a long-term basis, and you have the business and client management skills to build a base here, then it's a great platform. You can save vast amounts of time on administrative stuff (marketing, invoicing). 

 

I would be very interested in seeing profitability data across different segments of FLs defined by project size, number of projects, skill category, etc. I don't buy the argument that UW makes most of their profit on the 20% fee tier (setting aside the fact that the company has yet to actually turn a profit). UW takes $100 on a $1,000 contract. It takes five $100 contracts to generate $100 in fees. Who thinks it's cheaper to service five small contracts than a single $1,000 contract? And that's before you factor in consumption of customer support resources. I would bet half my current balance of connects that the FLs earning the least money in the smallest increments require more CS attention. 

 

Granted, it's more challenging to get established here now than it used to be. But IMO there's a case to be made that it should never have been as easy as it was. The platform is completely awash in FLs who are not equipped to work as independent contractors. Some will learn how to do it, others won't and those are the ones who need to figure out sooner, rather than later, that they're better off doing something else someplace else. 


Miriam H wrote:

Phyllis G wrote:

Thomas B wrote:

@Chistine A  --  I think that comes across as a flippant response. It makes an assumption that's not supported by what myself and others have observed.  Each and every proposal I've sought to submit has required 6 Tokens, never less. It's also not reasonable to assume that for many/most projects, with the competition for those projects, that it shouldn't require submitting more than 11 proposals, less if you didn't pay for the so called "Premium Membership" to be "successful" here. So frustrating.


If you use the quote function when replying to a specific comment, the conversation is a lot easier to follow.

 

If "each and every proposal" you've wanted to submit cost six tokens, then just budget for six tokens per proposal. Factor it into your business plan. If it doesn't fit, then maybe UW is not worth your while. 

 

I've been on UW for almost exactly three years. During that time, I've submitted 408 proposals. I've never purchased a connect (yet) but even if I had spent six tokens per proposal, purchased at 15 cents each, it would represent an investment of $367 against earnings of more than $70k (on which I've paid UW fees at an avg rate of 9%). I consider that a great ROI, especially since the cost of connects and the UW fees are deductible business expenses.

 


I have been thinking about this, and your point is excellent, however I think part of the issue is the "psychology" of paying for connects vs. paying for a service. I've earned over 20k on the platform, even if I paid for connects for all of the jobs, it wouldn't be a lot. However when I do apply and watch the "ticker of connects available" go down, it heightens my awareness of the "cost." 

 

I believe Upwork would be better served with a subscription type model - no more ala carte connects.  There would be other changes necessary and I don't know how you support freelancers who offer low price services, and I don't have the data to recommend - I just think this whole connects frustration is more about the psychology and less about the money. 


Re. the psychological reflex vs actual cost: agree completely. Re. a subscription model: no cottonpickin' way, thanks just the same. Opportunities ebb and flow, it's not unusual for me to go weeks at a time without seeing a single viable project here, followed by a flurry, followed by more doldrums. Why should I pay a subscription for periods of dead air, to accommodate people who can't recognize and budget for a business expense? Plus, once a FL has gained enough traction to live mainly off invitations, why should that person have to subsidize others who need to flog proposals constantly?

 

I hate seeing the connects ticker wind down, too, and sometimes have to remind myself each one costs 15 cents and a proposal requiring six costs 90 cents. My monthly broadband bill is about $90. It's not going to be connects that put me in the poorhouse.


Phyllis G wrote:


Re. the psychological reflex vs actual cost: agree completely. Re. a subscription model: no cottonpickin' way, thanks just the same. Opportunities ebb and flow, it's not unusual for me to go weeks at a time without seeing a single viable project here, followed by a flurry, followed by more doldrums. Why should I pay a subscription for periods of dead air, to accommodate people who can't recognize and budget for a business expense? Plus, once a FL has gained enough traction to live mainly off invitations, why should that person have to subsidize others who need to flog proposals constantly?

 

I hate seeing the connects ticker wind down, too, and sometimes have to remind myself each one costs 15 cents and a proposal requiring six costs 90 cents. My monthly broadband bill is about $90. It's not going to be connects that put me in the poorhouse.


Good point about monthly ebb and flow. Maybe something else is packaged with it? 

Otherwise I would rather see each job be two connects and each connect be .50 cents or whatever.  It was just simpler when it was all two connects, I can't explain it - it's not even the money, it's the arbitary nature of the algorithim (which is already established as wonky - being nice here).

Late to the discussion here, but I just wanted to say that you have a point when you say it's about the 'psychology'. Although, I find it's about both, the actual cost and the impression you get from the mismatch of projects and connects in some cases. 

 

Being a 'freerider' because I don't have a subscription, I accept the need to pay for the leads I get, yes, absolutely. And I can price in any costs for the connects when I charge my client (or write it off as marketing expenses). No problem with that. I also understand that jobs are assigned connects prices (2 to 6 etc.) according to a simple algorithm ensuring the smooth running of the platform. Fine by me. 

 

But has anyone considered the effect a price of whopping 6 connects has on my actions as a 'consumer'? (And you don't need game theory to discover those.) Assuming it's a small job worth no more than a few bucks (e.g. 'translate 1,000 words') and given the fact that I am 'competing' against numerous agencies or freelancers and may not even get a chance to chat with the client, why should I invest? 

 

While previously I would have added my humble profile to the list on offer to the client (for 2 connects), I will now refrain from trying to make contact if the relationship between the amount of connects required and the type of project is something I have to think twice about. The client won't get to see my profile ('recommended' or otherwise, which wasn't always helpful either, by the way) and will have a smaller range to choose from. Not what I call providing consumer choice (neither for me nor the client).

So now you know. (*sulk*)

freelancing is basically having your own little business. Just think about the connects as a business expense. it's cheaper than gas for sure.

I have joined UpWork around two months ago after selling my business and getting bored out of my mind. I have made over $9K in less than 2 months. I send proposals and buy as many connects needed to keep going and put myself out there. I currently apply for U.S jobs only and it has been going great.

Before I sold my creative agency I used to hire dozens of freelancers on UpWork, the paid connects system has really helped reducing the amount of amateur freelancers, it used to be ridiculous.

So in my opinion the connects system is not perfect but it's ok, I see lots of people complaining about it and about upwork in general and they forget no one forced them to be here, if one's not happy, he shouldn't be doing this.

At the end of the day, UpWork is a business, it is a great platform, definitely not perfect but if it takes me $12 to land a $200-$400 quick job, I'm good with that.

Just my personal opinion based on my own experience here.

They should implement bids as other platforms do.  That will solve the connects problem.  1 bid for every type of job.

 

But as you said then the number of bids will be less.

Gawd, you are exactly why I have not been on one of these community boards in so long. I cannot stand when people are this unnecessarily nasty when no one was talking to them directly. IF you don't want to answer the question, then just don't. There was absolutely no reason you had to be that hostile with the "what's your point?" response to him. Six connects is a lot for an entry-level job. A job that may pay $12 an hour should not have the same connects as one that pays $30 an hour. Even if both last a long time, the pay will never match. THAT WAS HIS POINT!

I m currently in the same predicament. I haven't gotten any gig on Upwork. I have just 8 connects left and I saw a role that required 6 connects. I didn't apply

Hi Oma,

 

Please know that all freelancers get 10 free Connects every month plus 10 free Connects for every interview, so you can continue to apply to job posts! If you need more Connects sooner you can also purchase them. For some great tips on writing proposals that win jobs, check out this article.

 

~Andrea
Upwork

Life of freelancers would be much easier if the managers would not think about just filling up their wallets and value other's opinion in their decision-making.


ziad a wrote:
Life of freelancers would be much easier if the managers would not think about just filling up their wallets

You know that Upwork is a business, right?



You know that Upwork is a business, right?


Dimitri, it's a business, that's why they cut 20 percent of our income, right? To apply and not get the job means 1 dollar lost. Imagine how many people are applying, at times even more than 50. And only 1 is being hired. Get my point?


ziad a wrote:
Life of freelancers would be much easier if the managers would not think about just filling up their wallets and value other's opinion in their decision-making.

So, you think that Upwork should continue to lose millions of dollars every month to appease people who are not making it any money and are customers it does not want? Can you explain why?



So, you think that Upwork should continue to lose millions of dollars every month to appease people who are not making it any money and are customers it does not want? Can you explain why?


You are very naive. Upwork was making millions of dollars before and they have doubled that now. What have we gained? They are not appeasing anyone by cutting 20 percent of our income. Now they are hungry for more. Got your explanation?

Where can I see that Upwork is losing millions?

"The algorithm that determines the connects is flawed"

Yes it is - VERY FLAWED. When do you folks plan to fix it so it goes back to the 2 Tokens per proposal? It seems at just about every turn upwork makes it very difficult to succed within this marketplace. 


Petra R wrote:

Rahul V wrote:

I just came across a job where client is looking for entry level freelancers but cost of posting proposal is 6 connects??


An entry-level job can last for months or years and be worth hundreds or thousands.

What's your point? The algorithm that determines the connects is flawed, but nobody ever suggested it had anything to do with whether the job was entry-level or expert.

 

Petra, what's the point of your argument? There must be reasons behind the current connects application policy, it must have something to do with something (?) and if that something is not do with the level of freelancer required, then it seems very, very odd.

 

Surely there is some reasoned logic behind it rather than being (as currently appears to be the case), completely arbitrary.

 

Just set a flat rate cost for every job and all of this becomes completely superfluous.

 


 


Richard S wrote:

Petra R wrote:

Rahul V wrote:

I just came across a job where client is looking for entry level freelancers but cost of posting proposal is 6 connects??


An entry-level job can last for months or years and be worth hundreds or thousands.

What's your point? The algorithm that determines the connects is flawed, but nobody ever suggested it had anything to do with whether the job was entry-level or expert.

 

Petra, what's the point of your argument? There must be reasons behind the current connects application policy, it must have something to do with something (?) and if that something is not do with the level of freelancer required, then it seems very, very odd.

 

Surely there is some reasoned logic behind it rather than being (as currently appears to be the case), completely arbitrary.

 

Just set a flat rate cost for every job and all of this becomes completely superfluous.

 


 


In fairness to you, the original announcement thread about the cost of connects is now several tetrazillion pages long, so it's reasonable you might have missed UW's purported logic for pricing proposals. We're told the number of connects required depends on the value of the project as evidenced by the budget and expected duration indicated in the job post. That's why it's such a hot mess--many (in some categories, most or even virtually all) clients don't know what the project is going to cost or how long it's going to take. They may try to estimate those variables in their job post, or may just throw in placeholders and/or whatever default answer comes to hand. Further confounding the whole thing, if a job post does not attract enough interest from FLs, UW will discount it. So, theoretically, different FLs could be required to spend different amounts of connects to apply to the same job.

I agree a flat rate would be better. Meanwhile, if everyone will just budget for six connects/proposal, they can redirect the complaining to other issues.

If the amount of connects per job is based on the worth and length of the whole project, and clients don't know what it will be - then the project should be closed after running its course by reaching the value indicated in the initial proposal.

 

That is: if a project value has a placeholder worth of $5 written in it, then applying for it should cost 1 connect. And milestones no bigger than 5$ in total (whether 5x 1$ or 1x 5$) should be allowed in it. After reaching $5 the client can choose to resubmit the job proposal for others to apply again.


Pavlo L wrote:

If the amount of connects per job is based on the worth and length of the whole project, and clients don't know what it will be - then the project should be closed after running its course by reaching the value indicated in the initial proposal.

 

That is: if a project value has a placeholder worth of $5 written in it, then applying for it should cost 1 connect. And milestones no bigger than 5$ in total (whether 5x 1$ or 1x 5$) should be allowed in it. After reaching $5 the client can choose to resubmit the job proposal for others to apply again.


You think it's a bright idea to penalise people who post projects for several thousand dollars with a placeholder of $5? You want people's earnings restricted to the lowest amount possible? So if this was a book (for example) you think it would be a bright idea to change writers after every few words?

 

If such a system were in operation, what sane person would bid?


Kim F wrote:

Pavlo L wrote:

If the amount of connects per job is based on the worth and length of the whole project, and clients don't know what it will be - then the project should be closed after running its course by reaching the value indicated in the initial proposal.

 

That is: if a project value has a placeholder worth of $5 written in it, then applying for it should cost 1 connect. And milestones no bigger than 5$ in total (whether 5x 1$ or 1x 5$) should be allowed in it. After reaching $5 the client can choose to resubmit the job proposal for others to apply again.


You think it's a bright idea to penalise people who post projects for several thousand dollars with a placeholder of $5? You want people's earnings restricted to the lowest amount possible? So if this was a book (for example) you think it would be a bright idea to change writers after every few words?

 

If such a system were in operation, what sane person would bid?


I do hope you have read what Phyllis wrote about Upworks position (taken from the "tetrazillion pages long" thread about the cost of connects): the amount of connects is in a strict connection to the project length and worth.

 

To address your concerns: it is my belief, that after running a 5$ job (while not knowing the length of the project), and stumbling upon a freelancer who shows promise (which can be proved by him completing the 5$ task); the same job can then be again published, with a reasonable worth and length, while being worth 5 or even 6 connects.

And naturally, the person with whom the client was impressed will have a great chance to get the job immediately, without his income being restricted, or "the author of the book" being changed.

 

Being that many jobs require a test assignment or even testing period - this could be a way of making sure that it is a paid test, just as the Upwork rules demand. And being forced to place jobs over and over again may get the clients to put more thought into the project length before posting it.

I am getting ahead of myself, but this may produce a whole new category of job "castings" to replace the old testing system. Those "castings" could then go into the portfolio as the test assignment with the freelancers answers, which other clients can see. Those could be written texts or graphics, as well as audio files or even video material, captured by the Upwork desktop app.


Pavlo L wrote:


I do hope you have read what Phyllis wrote about Upworks position (taken from the "tetrazillion pages long" thread about the cost of connects): the amount of connects is in a strict connection to the project length and worth.

 

To address your concerns: it is my belief, that after running a 5$ job (while not knowing the length of the project), and stumbling upon a freelancer who shows promise (which can be proved by him completing the 5$ task); the same job can then be again published, with a reasonable worth and length, while being worth 5 or even 6 connects.

And naturally, the person with whom the client was impressed will have a great chance to get the job immediately, without his income being restricted, or "the author of the book" being changed.

 

Being that many jobs require a test assignment or even testing period - this could be a way of making sure that it is a paid test, just as the Upwork rules demand. And being forced to place jobs over and over again may get the clients to put more thought into the project length before posting it.

I am getting ahead of myself, but this may produce a whole new category of job "castings" to replace the old testing system. Those "castings" could then go into the portfolio as the test assignment with the freelancers answers, which other clients can see. Those could be written texts or graphics, as well as audio files or even video material, captured by the Upwork desktop app.


Here's a better idea: Why not just accept the fact that most good jobs will cost 6 connects, and increase your hourly rate slightly, in order to cover your costs? 


Christine A wrote:


Here's a better idea: Why not just accept the fact that most good jobs will cost 6 connects, and increase your hourly rate slightly, in order to cover your costs? 


I do hope you have read the quite short text of the initial thread, in which the author demands to know - why the bidding fee for an entry level job is 6 connects. Taking this and all the following answers into account renders your idea from its "betterness".

I understand how the connects calculation works. What you describe would make bidding much more expensive.

 

Applying for the $5 project would cost 1 connect. Completing a $5 project would often be worth more than $5 and so cause the freelancer to lose money. Then they’d have to spend 5-6 connects to apply to the same project again.

 

> Being that many jobs require a test assignment or even testing period

 

And many don’t. Even if they do, the test is often worth far more than $5.

 

> And being forced to place jobs over and over again may get the clients to put more thought into the project length before posting it.

 

However hard a client thinks, they can’t know what they don’t know. Hence a placeholder bid for freelancers to suggest a rate. You can’t force clients to place jobs over and over again. They’ll simply go elsewhere.

 

> I am getting ahead of myself, but this may produce a whole new category of job "castings" to replace the old testing system. Those "castings" could then go into the portfolio as the test assignment with the freelancers answers, which other clients can see.

 

Apart from the fact that this removes the freelancer’s power to decide what goes into their portfolio, how can terms of NDAs then be met?

 

The only sensible answer to the situation when someone doesn’t know how much a project is likely to cost is to allow a ‘don’t know’ or ‘open to negotiation’ option. As that isn’t currently possible, a placeholder has to be used.


Kim F wrote:

I understand how the connects calculation works. What you describe would make bidding much more expensive.

Well, why not describe it to us in your own words? This would clear the question asked in this thread much-much sooner.

 

Applying for the $5 project would cost 1 connect. Completing a $5 project would often be worth more than $5 and so cause the freelancer to lose money. Then they’d have to spend 5-6 connects to apply to the same project again. 

If the suggested system would be in place - no freelancer would be willing to complete more than $5 worth work for a project which is worth $5, provided correct Indication in the User Interface is in place when a job is accepted or a milestones is negotiated.

 

Right now all entry level jobs are worth 6 connects. And there is no solution offered for the issue of "placeholder job worth". What would your solution be, if you don't like what I have suggested?


> Being that many jobs require a test assignment or even testing period

 

And many don’t. Even if they do, the test is often worth far more than $5.

I don't know what you are trying to prove by taking a phrase out of context and stating the obvious. Maybe you have a solution to replace the discarded test system? If a test is worth more - it will be valued as being worth more.

 

But, in my point of view, taking part in a "casting" or "test" could be done apart from the jobs; to which, I might add, the casting and test-assignment system seem to be glued at the moment. Furthermore - it could be done outside of the connects system or the tests would be worth something like 1 connect, if anything.

 

However hard a client thinks, they can’t know what they don’t know. Hence a placeholder bid for freelancers to suggest a rate. You can’t force clients to place jobs over and over again. They’ll simply go elsewhere.


Right now freelancers like Active Member Luis B below says he won't accept jobs on Upwork unless they "fix the system". What good is that to the client? Or to Upwork? My suggestion is to address the matter of clients not knowing and freelancers paying 6 connects for a 5$ or a $500 job. Maybe you have another solution in mind, or you don't see that as a problem?

Apart from the fact that this removes the freelancer’s power to decide what goes into their portfolio, how can terms of NDAs then be met?


Now this is quite silly. When the test have been in place you could hide the results you didn't want showing up. I hope you didn't write this just to create a stack of arguments, however viable, to put against me. Or that it isn't because you haven't been here long enough to know, because arguing about new implementations with a new person doesn't seem worthwhile to me.

If such a task would be set - there would be ways to meet NDA's requirement. But if you can't see further than the fuctionality that was already present when I joined Upwork - then I don't see the point of dwelling into it.

 

I have no reason to think that those threads are being read or taken seriously. Or that they will be taken into account when developing Upwork in order to grow further. But if so - I am ready for a test assignment 😉