Reply
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply

Do you bother applying/bidding at a higher rate than the client says is their budget?

mrdanielprice
Community Guru
Daniel P Member Since: Aug 15, 2014
1 of 24

As the title suggests, I'm curious as to how many people bid higher than the job's supposed budget. If so, have you ever had a client accept your bid?

 

I just applied for a job that's budget was $20. My rate would be $55 for the amount of work they're wanting, so I decided to bid at that, anyway.

lysis10
Community Guru
Jennifer M Member Since: May 17, 2015
2 of 24

Yep, I do it all the time and I'm not hurting for contracts. I don't even pay attention to the ranges anymore from other bidders. For the most part, only a few people are actually qualified for the job, so I know that the guy might fight the urge to pick me and even might try to find someone cheaper, but if you want someone with experience and hands-on knowledge in the industry, ya gotta come up in budget. 😄

 

I don't bother with the entry level posts. If someone is looking for entry level, it tells me that they want cheap. I only bid on mid-level and expert jobs unless I have some connects to blow, which I usually do every month.

 

If the budget is something like $5 and I want $65 for 1 article, I know that I'm probably too high. But if it's something like $150 and I want $250-$300, I might give it a shot.

 

You also have to understand that the client's aim is the cheapest at the highest quality. We're looking to maximize income, so we're immediately put into a situation where we have to justify a higher price. Why am I better than the guy bidding $3/hour? I can think of several reasons.

 

Also, for some people, money isn't too much of a factor. This is usually businesses. Individuals usually have a tighter budget, so I tend to avoid them as well. Your standard blaaahger making adsense pennies can't spend $100 for an article. A business guy that needs some content for his blog because he's too busy usually prefers quality and experience over price.

and979
Community Guru
Andrea B Member Since: Feb 20, 2015
3 of 24

A few hours ago I made my bid for a job with a budget of $100. It's a proofreading job for 16K words, but the client wasn't giving enough details to determine if the budget was worth it. So I decided to place my bid at $160, while at the same time offering a discount to be agreed once I have the text to be proofreaded. $160 would really be my best price for an average proofreading.

 

So... some clients are unaware of the real prices on the market, some of them try and set the lowest budget possible, some other are reasonable and understand that there must be an ethic also in paying freelancers what they deserve.

 

My personal statistics say that I have never got a job in which I have placed a bid higher than the client's budget. But that's not a reason to stop trying.

prestonhunter
Community Guru
Preston H Member Since: Nov 24, 2014
4 of 24

I don't believe that most clients are looking to spend a specific amount of money. I believe they are looking for value.

 

Value is not the same thing as price.

 

And it is not the same thing as "cheap."

 

If your job proposal and your profile page indicates that you are offering the client a good value... meaning they'll get the most "bang for their buck," then you will get the client's attention.

 

Maybe I can hire "Contractor A" to do this job for me, at only $50.00.

 

But "Contractor B" applied, and clearly has more experience, more expertise in this type of project. "Contractor B" is going to charge me $100.00 for the same job, but that's clearly a better value for me.

petra_r
Community Guru
Petra R Member Since: Aug 3, 2011
5 of 24

@Andrea B wrote:

A few hours ago I made my bid for a job with a budget of $100. It's a proofreading job for 16K words, but the client wasn't giving enough details to determine if the budget was worth it. So I decided to place my bid at $160, while at the same time offering a discount to be agreed once I have the text to be proofreaded. $160 would really be my best price for an average proofreading.


 160 for 16k words? That is WAY too cheap!

and979
Community Guru
Andrea B Member Since: Feb 20, 2015
6 of 24

 160 for 16k words? That is WAY too cheap!

Petra,

it's a proofreading on an existing translation. It's basically a matter of three (maybe four) hours, or even less if the translator of the source text wasn't Google Translate. Last week a client set a $20 milestone for a 10-minutes proofreading, and when I submitted my job I only asked him $10.

But if you say so maybe I should really reconsider my rates - not only as a proofreader but as a translator too. I guess it also depends on where you live (i.e. costs of living are different in Italy and in India), and you probably already know that there are people on here willing to work on the same job for 1/2 my rates.

petra_r
Community Guru
Petra R Member Since: Aug 3, 2011
7 of 24

@Andrea B wrote:

 160 for 16k words? That is WAY too cheap!

Petra,

it's a proofreading on an existing translation. It's basically a matter of three (maybe four) hours, or even less if the translator of the source text wasn't Google Translate.


 Done properly (checking every sentence against the source text for correct use of language and fixing errors, mistranslations, flow, context) proofreading of a 16 000 word translation can NOT be done properly in 3 to 4 hours.

 

That is an absolutely crazy idea. You essentially have to read 32 000 words - the source text and the translation. How the hell can that take only 3 or 4 hours, let alone less?


All you can do in 3-4 hours is reasonably carefully read a text in one language and say "Yes or No"

 

As for the cost of living being different in Italy and India - why the hell would that even matter? How many native Italian translators live in India?

 

I live in Italy and I take $ 0.02 per word for translation proofreading / light copy-editing.

jmeyn
Community Guru
Joachim M Member Since: Mar 23, 2015
8 of 24

@Petra R wrote:

@Andrea B wrote:

 160 for 16k words? That is WAY too cheap!

Petra,

it's a proofreading on an existing translation. It's basically a matter of three (maybe four) hours, or even less if the translator of the source text wasn't Google Translate.


 Done properly (checking every sentence against the source text for correct use of language and fixing errors, mistranslations, flow, context) proofreading of a 16 000 word translation can NOT be done properly in 3 to 4 hours.

 

That is an absolutely crazy idea. You essentially have to read 32 000 words - the source text and the translation. How the hell can that take only 3 or 4 hours, let alone less?


All you can do in 3-4 hours is reasonably carefully read a text in one language and say "Yes or No"

 

As for the cost of living being different in Italy and India - why the hell would that even matter? How many native Italian translators live in India?

 

I live in Italy and I take $ 0.02 per word for translation proofreading / light copy-editing.


The average reading speed is 250 WpM. So to just take the text in the average reader would require 2 hours. Naturally this speed can be increased by using speed reading techniques but these don't include correcting and commenting. So to correctly proofread 16k words 4 hours are ambitious.

 

Like you Petra, I charge $0.02 for proofreading human translations. I gave up on proofreading Google Translate translations, won't do them. 

petra_r
Community Guru
Petra R Member Since: Aug 3, 2011
9 of 24

Joachim M wrote

 

Like you Petra, I charge $0.02 for proofreading human translations. I gave up on proofreading Google Translate translations, won't do them. 


 They (Google Translations) don't need proof-reading, they need re-translating.

 

Bad human translations need editing or heavy editing.

 

Editing costs extra. When I am given a bad translation to proofread I go straight back to the client and tell them that the text needs to go back to the translator to be fixed, or needs editing. At a higher rate, obviously.

 

I find it is sometimes quicker to re-translate than to edit a cr*p translation. But as I don't translate at the moment if I see a text like that I decline to do it.

and979
Community Guru
Andrea B Member Since: Feb 20, 2015
10 of 24

 


Done properly (checking every sentence against the source text for correct use of language and fixing errors, mistranslations, flow, context) proofreading of a 16 000 word translation can NOT be done properly in 3 to 4 hours.

 

That is an absolutely crazy idea. You essentially have to read 32 000 words - the source text and the translation. How the hell can that take only 3 or 4 hours, let alone less?


All you can do in 3-4 hours is reasonably carefully read a text in one language and say "Yes or No"


 

Petra,

the client didn't even want to give me the original English text. I asked him for it. He just want me to check if the translation is flowing enough. So I just have to read 16000 words, and make some minor changes here and there if needed. I guess 3-4 hours are enough, given the fact is not a specialized text. But maybe I'm wrong and I'm going to make the worst mistake of my entire life...

TOP SOLUTION AUTHORS
TOP KUDOED MEMBERS