🐈
» Forums » Freelancers » Re: Connects System Seems Broken
Page options
noctilucentarts
Community Member

Connects System Seems Broken

I understand the rationale behind the new connects system - in the notion of limiting spam applications - however, it seems broken, due to clients not understanding how connects are determined. 

 

For example, I'm currently looking at a job that specifies it's a one-time press release, but it's also set at hourly ($17 - $39), and the time length as "3 to 6 months", experience set at "Entry Level".  They had one other previous job, paid $49.  

The job is requiring 6 connects to apply.  But from experience, it's clearly more like a 2 connect job, the Client just used some default settings.  It's not at all an ongoing gig, and like many clients do in writing, they used the "hourly rate" to mean the flat-price range (i.e., their top budget level is $39).  So of course, I'm not even going to apply and burn up 6 connects.  I'm seeing more and more jobs like this. 

Some wacky guy a few weeks ago put the budget at "$1,000,000" for a simple one-off press release, which again made that a 6-connect job to apply - but not in reality. 


38 REPLIES 38
robin_hyman
Community Member


- however, it seems broken, due to clients not understanding how connects are determined. 

I agree and wish Upwork had a better way of educating clients before they publish their job post.  One way is a section on connects and how it can affect the number of applicants.  Perhaps a pop-up with a message such as, "Your job post will require freelancers to use 6 connects to apply.  Do you still wish to continue?" + Yes or No buttons

tlbp
Community Member

How would the client know what to change to make it cost less connects to apply? Besides, 6 connects is $0.90. Just consider that the minimum amount to bid and if a job costs less than that it is "on sale." 

ahmetsamsa
Community Member

It's not rocket science. The client can just estimate time to finish the job and select accordingly. 
I see tons of jobs that take less than 1 day and the client selected  15-30h - 3-6 month option. So if they just stop doing this they don't need to know how to make the job cost less to apply. 

 

 

Ahmet: And how do you suggest we get clients to correctly indicate project length? Many can’t fill out the form accurately as it is.


Ahmet S wrote:

It's not rocket science. The client can just estimate time to finish the job and select accordingly. 
I see tons of jobs that take less than 1 day and the client selected  15-30h - 3-6 month option. So if they just stop doing this they don't need to know how to make the job cost less to apply. 

 

 


It's also not rocket science to figure out that it's "not rocked science" for YOU to estimate how long it will take to complete the job because YOU KNOW HOW TO DO THE JOB. The client doesn't, so he/she is hiring an expert. 

 

As someone who has zero design and/or development skills/knowledge, I can tell you that when I hire a developer to make a modification to one of my websites or a designer to create a graphic for me, I literally don't know whether that will take 30 minutes or 20 hours. 

lysis10
Community Member


Matt K wrote:

I understand the rationale behind the new connects system - in the notion of limiting spam applications - however, it seems broken, due to clients not understanding how connects are determined. 

 

For example, I'm currently looking at a job that specifies it's a one-time press release, but it's also set at hourly ($17 - $39), and the time length as "3 to 6 months", experience set at "Entry Level".  They had one other previous job, paid $49.  

The job is requiring 6 connects to apply.  But from experience, it's clearly more like a 2 connect job, the Client just used some default settings.  It's not at all an ongoing gig, and like many clients do in writing, they used the "hourly rate" to mean the flat-price range (i.e., their top budget level is $39).  So of course, I'm not even going to apply and burn up 6 connects.  I'm seeing more and more jobs like this. 

Some wacky guy a few weeks ago put the budget at "$1,000,000" for a simple one-off press release, which again made that a 6-connect job to apply - but not in reality. 



Popularity is also a factor, so if there are several proposals it will probably require 6 connects.


Jennifer M wrote:

Matt K wrote:

I understand the rationale behind the new connects system - in the notion of limiting spam applications - however, it seems broken, due to clients not understanding how connects are determined. 

 

For example, I'm currently looking at a job that specifies it's a one-time press release, but it's also set at hourly ($17 - $39), and the time length as "3 to 6 months", experience set at "Entry Level".  They had one other previous job, paid $49.  

The job is requiring 6 connects to apply.  But from experience, it's clearly more like a 2 connect job, the Client just used some default settings.  It's not at all an ongoing gig, and like many clients do in writing, they used the "hourly rate" to mean the flat-price range (i.e., their top budget level is $39).  So of course, I'm not even going to apply and burn up 6 connects.  I'm seeing more and more jobs like this. 

Some wacky guy a few weeks ago put the budget at "$1,000,000" for a simple one-off press release, which again made that a 6-connect job to apply - but not in reality. 



Popularity is also a factor, so if there are several proposals it will probably require 6 connects.



Jennifer M wrote:

Matt K wrote:

I understand the rationale behind the new connects system - in the notion of limiting spam applications - however, it seems broken, due to clients not understanding how connects are determined. 

 

For example, I'm currently looking at a job that specifies it's a one-time press release, but it's also set at hourly ($17 - $39), and the time length as "3 to 6 months", experience set at "Entry Level".  They had one other previous job, paid $49.  

The job is requiring 6 connects to apply.  But from experience, it's clearly more like a 2 connect job, the Client just used some default settings.  It's not at all an ongoing gig, and like many clients do in writing, they used the "hourly rate" to mean the flat-price range (i.e., their top budget level is $39).  So of course, I'm not even going to apply and burn up 6 connects.  I'm seeing more and more jobs like this. 

Some wacky guy a few weeks ago put the budget at "$1,000,000" for a simple one-off press release, which again made that a 6-connect job to apply - but not in reality. 



Popularity is also a factor, so if there are several proposals it will probably require 6 connects.


Jenn, do you mean that Upwork's algorithim (or however the hell they work this out) is based on on how popular they think a job will be or that the required number of connects changes based on the number of people that respond to the posting?


Richard S wrote:


Jenn, do you mean that Upwork's algorithim (or however the hell they work this out) is based on on how popular they think a job will be or that the required number of connects changes based on the number of people that respond to the posting?


In that god awful 100 page thread about connects, Valeria says that popularity is a factor. Only way I can think of to identify popularity is number of bids.

tlsanders
Community Member

Did the client actually tell you all those crazy things, or are you just guessing? 

 

I've been writing on Upwork for three years and have done about 150 writing jobs and I have never seen a single client use the hourly rate as a fixed price rate. 

 

I've also seen a lot of clients post a single item and use a longer time range because the gig will be ongoing if the first project works out.

Popularity:

Didn't we hear something along these lines:

 

If a job posting is not attracting sufficient proposals, the number of connects required to bid on the job is automatically lowered.


Preston H wrote:

Popularity:

Didn't we hear something along these lines:

 

If a job posting is not attracting sufficient proposals, the number of connects required to bid on the job is automatically lowered.


oh maybe she did specify. 

Tiffany - I'm just using their posting's info.  I've done 382 jobs on UpWork, all writing, and it's pretty normal for me to bid on the job as an hourly and then ask them to switch it to flat-rate before I accept.  I could post the job links, but that seems rude.  One flatly states it's a one-time announcement, hourly, 3-6 months. 

I've never seen info about the number of connects being dynamic in the FAQ/rules explaining how connects work - https://community.upwork.com/t5/Announcements/Connects-Change-Rollout-Update-and-Frequently-Asked-Qu...  

If jobs with more bids keep increasing in the connects needed to bid, that would mean UpWork has an incentive to allow Clients to post ridiculously high budgets and timelines - because higher budgets = more bids = more connects needing to be purchased by Freelancers.... 


Perhaps a procedure change - 
Since the ideal situation would be Clients only posting jobs with true budgets and experience, so that the connects aren't inflated - what if there were posting fees?  Such as free job posting for "entry level" and under $50 budgets.  A 2% fee for posting intermediate jobs and $100 budgets, a 4% fee for posting $100+ & Expert level jobs.  Because I've worked with plenty of high-paying companies who were used to paying agency fees and happily had the budget and wanted a true expert.

Or if keeping the application/connect algrithm as it is between 2-6 connects required - 

Make connect distribution graduated, something like Freelancers at 60% JSS and below get like 60 free per month, 70% get 70 per month, 80% get 80, 90% get 90.  That way the "margin of error" between Client real budget and job posting intentions and their accidentally posted budgets & experience levels and/or intentionally way too high budgets because they just want to see the response - could be compensated for.  Especially if UpWork is using a dynamic connect system.





Matt K wrote:

Perhaps a procedure change - 
Since the ideal situation would be Clients only posting jobs with true budgets and experience, so that the connects aren't inflated - what if there were posting fees?  Such as free job posting for "entry level" and under $50 budgets.  A 2% fee for posting intermediate jobs and $100 budgets, a 4% fee for posting $100+ & Expert level jobs.  Because I've worked with plenty of high-paying companies who were used to paying agency fees and happily had the budget and wanted a true expert.

 

Aside from the obvious and often-discussed problems with charging clients at all (upshot: we want them to post jobs here. They have plenty of free options. Most will just go elsewhere.), your structure incentivizes low-budget postings when, of course, Upwork and freelancers both benefit from high-end postings. In your scenario, the jobs Upwork does not want will be free to post and the ones it most wants will come with a disincentive to posting.

 

Budgets will likely also become entirely useless, since a lot of clients will post jobs as $50 (for instance, breaking out one blog post when they want 20 in order to create a free posting), making it harder for freelancers to assess jobs. 

 

Or if keeping the application/connect algrithm as it is between 2-6 connects required - 

Make connect distribution graduated, something like Freelancers at 60% JSS and below get like 60 free per month, 70% get 70 per month, 80% get 80, 90% get 90.  That way the "margin of error" between Client real budget and job posting intentions and their accidentally posted budgets & experience levels and/or intentionally way too high budgets because they just want to see the response - could be compensated for.  Especially if UpWork is using a dynamic connect system.

Everyone used to get 60 free connects. It was a horrible spam fest and paid connects were introduced to cut back on that (as you say you understand). Most of the freelancers Upwork most wants to keep happy and working using a very small number of connects each month--many use none at all. 

 

I do agree, though, that the number of connects required to bid on jobs seems almost arbitrary, and it is definitely creating a lot of stress for freelancers. I think the ideal solution would be for all jobs to cost the same to bid on. I don't care what that cost is, but I definitely think that the variation should be eliminated.


 


Tiffany S wrote:

Matt K wrote:


Everyone used to get 60 free connects. It was a horrible spam fest and paid connects were introduced to cut back on that (as you say you understand). Most of the freelancers Upwork most wants to keep happy and working using a very small number of connects each month--many use none at all. 



The inference here is that using connects somehow makes you less of a priority; less successful on this platform.

 

The freelancers Upwork most wants to keep are those that are earning money. I mean, it can’t be any simpler than that. This idea that freelancers who use very little or no connects really needs to stop. Freelancers who use little to no connects are not any better than those who do it’s just a matter of which business model we choose. In fact, those of us that do use connects are dealing with the job feed on a daily basis and gaining much more knowledge of what’s really out there than a freelancer with repeat/long-term clients who don’t use connects.

 

Furthermore, if Upwork prioritized freelancers who don’t use connects there wouldn’t be any more $5 jobs, and since most of the feed jobs are just that indicates that Upwork is relatively indifferent as to where it gets money from. Prior to paid connects I blew threw my 60/month allotment in 30 days without blinking an eye. Since then, I’ve used about 20 in six months. Using less connects didn’t make me a better freelancer, nor did it earn Upwork any more money; the only thing it managed to accomplish is less money in both our pockets.


Anna T wrote:

Tiffany S wrote:

Everyone used to get 60 free connects. It was a horrible spam fest and paid connects were introduced to cut back on that (as you say you understand). Most of the freelancers Upwork most wants to keep happy and working using a very small number of connects each month--many use none at all. 



The inference here is that using connects somehow makes you less of a priority; less successful on this platform.

 

The freelancers Upwork most wants to keep are those that are earning money. I mean, it can’t be any simpler than that. This idea that freelancers who use very little or no connects really needs to stop. Freelancers who use little to no connects are not any better than those who do it’s just a matter of which business model we choose. In fact, those of us that do use connects are dealing with the job feed on a daily basis and gaining much more knowledge of what’s really out there than a freelancer with repeat/long-term clients who don’t use connects.

 

Furthermore, if Upwork prioritized freelancers who don’t use connects there wouldn’t be any more $5 jobs, and since most of the feed jobs are just that indicates that Upwork is relatively indifferent as to where it gets money from. Prior to paid connects I blew threw my 60/month allotment in 30 days without blinking an eye. Since then, I’ve used about 20 in six months. Using less connects didn’t make me a better freelancer, nor did it earn Upwork any more money; the only thing it managed to accomplish is less money in both our pockets.


Inferences are not implications. I use connects. I buy the max packs every month or so. I check my customized feeds and a couple of categories daily. And it's still true that I use relatively few connects compared to the claims of some people here who complain about burning through connects with no return. There's no absolute number of connects that's right or wrong, and no number of connects makes us or our business models better or worse. It is, however, only good business sense to spend as much money as one needs to attract as much business as one wants. That's about the effectiveness of one's bidding, not about number of connects or even absolute number of dollars we invest month to month.

 

Upwork has been pointing out for years that it is not at all indifferent to where its contractor revenue comes from, and has been taking steps to shape the market accordingly—from its effective finders fee on new contracts to the current iteration of the connects system. From Upwork's point of view, small, short jobs are expensive. At best, Upwork tolerates them. Large, long-term jobs are lucrative, and this is where Upwork sees the path to eventual profitability.

If bidding less gets us fewer jobs, it's not the number of bids that is responsible. It's how strategic those bids are—including knowing, or learning, where to find our personally most profitable market. When we do that, everyone wins.

I agree that the use of connects themselves does not indicate successful users. But people complaining about having to use them at all - like complaints about having to apply versus getting invited - or that it basically costs a $1 to apply, to me indicate someone who isn't really aware of how they operate as a business and what are viable business costs and what aren't. If it's not a viable business cost to purchase connects if an indiviudal FL needs to, then it's just not the right platform for that FL. 


Conversations about what Upwork should or shouldn't do are moot. It's their business and they will run it in a way that they find advantageous. We can give feedback on the service they provide, but if we don't like the service, we are not being forced to use it. And I think these complaints would fall less on deaf ears if FLs who are impacted simply explained how it impacted their individual earnings instead of suggesting blanket, generalized changes to Upwork policy that would be detrimental to almost everyone but that person. And I know that's not a popular opinion. Some people think they are entitled for it to work the way they believe it should. 


Anna T wrote:

Prior to paid connects I blew threw my 60/month allotment in 30 days without blinking an eye. Since then, I’ve used about 20 in six months. Using less connects didn’t make me a better freelancer, nor did it earn Upwork any more money; the only thing it managed to accomplish is less money in both our pockets.


That's the whole point; Upwork doesn't want you to throw away your connects without blinking an eye. They want freelancers to put more thought into their bids and stop spamming clients. And how do you know that they have less money in their pockets just because you're bidding less? 

 


Christine A wrote:

Anna T wrote:

Prior to paid connects I blew threw my 60/month allotment in 30 days without blinking an eye. Since then, I’ve used about 20 in six months. Using less connects didn’t make me a better freelancer, nor did it earn Upwork any more money; the only thing it managed to accomplish is less money in both our pockets.


That's the whole point; Upwork doesn't want you to throw away your connects without blinking an eye. They want freelancers to put more thought into their bids and stop spamming clients. And how do you know that they have less money in their pockets just because you're bidding less? 

 


I understand what you and most others in this forum are trying to say.  I just don't agree with it. I happen to enjoy quick projects.  They are my preference.  Consequently, I am capable of using quite a few connects because that is how many it takes given the fact that most projects I apply for are abandoned by their clients.  So, I do not think it's fair to say I was throwing them away.  Nor was I spamming clients.

 

With regard to less money in my pockets, it was supposed to be that paid connects would reduce spammers which would eventually have some sort of a corresponding increase in ROI.  Personally, I haven't seen that; and if I haven't seen that, neither has Upwork - at lease not from my till anyway.

And shorter projects tend to mean less money per client which we know Upwork is moving away from smaller grossing projects. It's fine that you refer shorter gigs, but we know Upwork is gearing policies to discourage those, which is why the new connect system has a deeper effect on you.


Anna T wrote:

Tiffany S wrote:

Matt K wrote:


Everyone used to get 60 free connects. It was a horrible spam fest and paid connects were introduced to cut back on that (as you say you understand). Most of the freelancers Upwork most wants to keep happy and working using a very small number of connects each month--many use none at all. 



The inference here is that using connects somehow makes you less of a priority; less successful on this platform.

 

The freelancers Upwork most wants to keep are those that are earning money. I mean, it can’t be any simpler than that. This idea that freelancers who use very little or no connects really needs to stop. Freelancers who use little to no connects are not any better than those who do it’s just a matter of which business model we choose.

 

I'm sorry that you've taken this so personally, but the fact is that Upwork has explicitly said in multiple contexts that it has a strong preference for long-term, higher-dollar freelancer/client relationships over numerous smaller jobs. 

 

The only possible way to conclude that your angry assertion that Upwork is just as interested in freelancers who pursue tons of small jobs as those who maintain long-term relationships and do large, high-value projects is accurate is to assume that for some reason Upwork has lied to us, investors, shareholders, and the press about its goals and preferences.


 

I often see new clients posting a job and then posting another job a little later, which is actually just a revised version of the first post.

 

I saw a case of this today. The interesting thing was that the client changed the job from Intermediate to Expert, and the number of connects went DOWN, from 4 to 2. Both were hourly, less than 30 hrs/week, less than a month. Both have 5-10 proposals. Apart from small changes in the description, the only differences I can see are...

 

1. The Intermediate job had a rate range of $22-$35. The expert job had no range.

 

2. They had different job category and skills. This was probably the significant difference.


Matt K wrote:

Tiffany - I'm just using their posting's info.  I've done 382 jobs on UpWork, all writing, and it's pretty normal for me to bid on the job as an hourly and then ask them to switch it to flat-rate before I accept.  I could post the job links, but that seems rude.  One flatly states it's a one-time announcement, hourly, 3-6 months. 

 

This doesn't really reflect what you initially claimed, though, which was that the clients were posting fixed-rate jobs as hourly and using the hourly rate as their fixed-price budget. I also frequently ask clients who have posted jobs as hourly to switch to a fixed-price contract, but never with any relationship between their posted hourly rate and the price I quote. 


I've never seen info about the number of connects being dynamic in the FAQ/rules explaining how connects work - https://community.upwork.com/t5/Announcements/Connects-Change-Rollout-Update-and-Frequently-Asked-Qu...  

If jobs with more bids keep increasing in the connects needed to bid, that would mean UpWork has an incentive to allow Clients to post ridiculously high budgets and timelines - because higher budgets = more bids = more connects needing to be purchased by Freelancers.... 

No, you're mixing two different things: higher budgets automatically result in higher connect requirements--unless few freelancers bid, and then the amount required may be lowered. Conversely, if a low-budget job gets a huge number of proposals, the number of proposals required to bid on it may increase.

 

The idea that Upwork makes decisions about job postings based on the ability to draw in an extra $10 in connects versus the likelihood that a freelancer will land the job, build a long-term relationship with the client and pay Upwork hundreds or thousands of dollars in fees seems pretty silly.


 

People's philosphies and strategies for applying to jobs aside - does UpWork increase the connects required with an increase of applications?  Where is that policy written?  

researchediting
Community Member

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


YUP. 


Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


What if a client isn't receiving quality proposals and one of the reasons is because the # of connects is deterring qualified freelancers from applying?  If the client knew by changing one field from 3-6 months or 6+ months to a one-time project (a more accurate timeline) would reduce the number of connects from 6 to 4, wouldn't they do it? 


Robin H wrote:

Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


What if a client isn't receiving quality proposals and one of the reasons is because the # of connects is deterring qualified freelancers from applying?  If the client knew by changing one field from 3-6 months or 6+ months to a one-time project (a more accurate timeline) would reduce the number of connects from 6 to 4, wouldn't they do it? 


Good freelancers aren't deterred from applying for six-connect projects, as long as the budget is reasonable. I've certainly never read a project description and thought to myself, "If only it cost 30 cents less to apply for this, I'd be all over it." From what I've seen, high-quality projects are still getting 20-50 bids within an hour of being posted.

I consider myself a “good freelancer” and I think twice before I apply to jobs costing 6 connects. Maybe I am in the minority then...


Robin H wrote:
I consider myself a “good freelancer” and I think twice before I apply to jobs costing 6 connects. Maybe I am in the minority then...

I hate to pay 6 connects (though I sometimes do), just because I enjoy the feeling of not having had to buy any connects yet, and I'd like that to last for as long as possible. (I started the new system with 120 connects and I still have 71 of those left.) It's not really about the money. It's just a nice (if irrational) feeling I get from not having bought any connects yet. Smiley Happy

 

My problem is not connects but a shortage of suitable jobs to apply for.

tlbp
Community Member


Robin H wrote:

Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


What if a client isn't receiving quality proposals and one of the reasons is because the # of connects is deterring qualified freelancers from applying?  If the client knew by changing one field from 3-6 months or 6+ months to a one-time project (a more accurate timeline) would reduce the number of connects from 6 to 4, wouldn't they do it? 


What kind of quality freelancer isn't willing to bet $0.90 on their ability to land a gig? 


Robin H wrote:

Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


What if a client isn't receiving quality proposals and one of the reasons is because the # of connects is deterring qualified freelancers from applying?  If the client knew by changing one field from 3-6 months or 6+ months to a one-time project (a more accurate timeline) would reduce the number of connects from 6 to 4, wouldn't they do it? 


We have enough trouble expecting or getting clients just to describe the scope and specs of their jobs accurately. Publicizing the internal workings of Upwork's business or ours, and adding an arbitrary variable and additional thought and effort to their process, would both add a pain point for them and be unlikely to yield satisfactory results for us.


Robin H wrote:

Douglas Michael M wrote:

I can't think of a single reason why a client should ever need or want to think about the connects system.


What if a client isn't receiving quality proposals and one of the reasons is because the # of connects is deterring qualified freelancers from applying?  If the client knew by changing one field from 3-6 months or 6+ months to a one-time project (a more accurate timeline) would reduce the number of connects from 6 to 4, wouldn't they do it? 


Good freelancers don't care about the connects.

 

Bring onnnn the hate replies hehe (but it's true)

vhalthor
Community Member

hey, i DO NOT agree with this paid connects system

previously 60 free 2 for each job apply = 30 postulations

now 0 free, and all the jobs i am interested in, cost 6 connects so almost 1$ for each postulation, 27$ a month. and in my experience 95% of this goes to waste, they dont even reply, of the 5% that does 0.01 results in a job. call me a crappy designer or what ever, the thing is i would have to spend like 100$ to get a job under this conditions each month, nonsense. THIS IS THE ONLY THING i dont like about upwork right now, CHANGE IT. iv been for years working here, this paid connects thing will get me trying other webs...


Victor A wrote:

hey, i DO NOT agree with this paid connects system

previously 60 free 2 for each job apply = 30 postulations

now 0 free, and all the jobs i am interested in, cost 6 connects so almost 1$ for each postulation, 27$ a month. and in my experience 95% of this goes to waste, they dont even reply, of the 5% that does 0.01 results in a job. call me a crappy designer or what ever, the thing is i would have to spend like 100$ to get a job under this conditions each month, nonsense. THIS IS THE ONLY THING i dont like about upwork right now, CHANGE IT. iv been for years working here, this paid connects thing will get me trying other webs...


Your work is good (though you should add more to your portfolio). Why don't you put your hourly rate up to at least $35, then that'll easily cover the cost of connects? It looks like you've got ongoing projects since 2017, so you could ask for an increase on those as well, if you haven't already. 

 

Victor, I agree with Christine. Your rate is much too low. If you were charging a more reasonable rate and choosing the jobs you bid on accordingly, you would likely have a higher response rate and not have to bid on so many jobs. 

garrek
Community Member

The system was broken to begin with. There's no reason anyone should have to pay to get a job...

florydev
Community Member


Garrek R wrote:

The system was broken to begin with. There's no reason anyone should have to pay to get a job...


It's not a job, it's a client. If you can get them without paying you absolutely should.

 

Personally I have found Upwork to be a fairly easy and sustainable way to find clients.  I would gladly pay more for more and better oppurtunities. The minor cost of connects is absolutely nothing to the cost in time it takes to bring in a client.

Latest Articles
Featured Topics
Learning Paths