Not a fan of bidding and the bidding table

[aarondesign]

Let me first just say that I love Upwork and I owe my freelancing career to this platform. But, after seeing a few bidding tables and how people are bidding upwards of 500 connects to get to the top of the list, I have to say I'm not a fan. I've been on Upwork for over 11 years, I work hard, my clients are very happy, and I bring a lot of money to Upwork - but now I have to compete with people who are spending money to be seen first. Why does my hard work, endless 5-star reviews from happy clients, 100% success rate, and "Top Rated" status not seem to matter anymore now that people can just bid their way to the top? I feel like people who are assets to Upwork, like myself, should get the perks of being placed near the top versus whoever spends the most money on this new bidding system. It looks and feels a little greedy on Upwork's part and I'd say it's not fair to those who work their butts off to make Upwork money with happy clients.

I will not be spending connects to be the first on a potential client's list of proposals. I just hope it doesn't affect my ability to be seen or get hired.

[tlsanders]

What type of job is this? What's the budget?

[roberty1y]

So top place cost $33 and no refund unless someone else spends even more and pushes the bid out of the top three. Upwork must love freelancers like that.

[tlsanders]

---

Robert Y wrote:

So top place cost $33 and no refund unless someone else spends even more and pushes the bid out of the top three. Upwork must love freelancers like that.

---

I'm sure they do, because those are the freelancers who are aiming for jobs worth many thousands of dollars and paying significant fees to Upwork on those jobs. 

[roberty1y]

But even if they don't get the job, they pay for boosting their proposal if they get into the top three bids. 

[tlsanders]

Sure, but so what? If I spend $20 on connects for each of five proposals and get hired on one that pays me $17,000 across a few months, that was a wonderful investment. In fact, it was a great investment even if I spent $20 on each of 20 jobs and only landed one.

[abixbg]

You are basically describing a Slot Machines in a casino. Do you realize why this is wrong!?

[ashrafkhan81]

Technically how is this even possible? An agency plus account can hold a maximum of 400 connects at any point, if the max is 400 connects how did someone bid for 500? 

Just the other day I saw a post about people boosting 399 connects, and that got me thinking about the limits Upwork has on connects are 200 (freelance account) and 400 (agency account). If those limits are still active freelancers are at a disadvantage as they can bid for a max of 200 connect while agencies can bid Upwork 400, now we see 500...

Can someone from Upwork clarify how did he manage to bid for 500 connects? or if the limit re still in place?

[davis-michael]

this must be the reason why my job offers on posts dropped to zero

[ericaandrews]

I have to agree with this comment.  If Upwork is all about increasing profits, then it seems to me, that they would take the freelancers that are already bringing in "Cinncinati bank rolls" of money for the platform and put them at the very TOP of the proposal lists (provided their skills match to the job) because those freelancers are more likely to get hired and produce even more money for the UW platform.  Why waste the client's time by 'promoting' junk proposals to the top of the list?

When clients get a list of proposals with the top 3 'boosted' proposals being junk  proposals, they are actually more likely to simply 'close' the job post or 'abandon' it and not hire anybody at all. Yeah, maybe Upwork makes a couple bucks off of desparate freelancers spending excessive amounts of 'connects', but Upwork potentially lost thousands of dollars UW could have made if that client had been shown quality freelancers first and made a hire, especially a long-term hourly hire or a large fixed price contract hire. As a business strategy, it's penny-wise and pound foolish: Sacrificing long-term recurring revenue for a one-time 'quick buck' right now.

When I see people bidding over 500 connects for a single proposal submission, that tells me a couple things.  Upwork needs to limit the maximum number of connects any freelancer can hold in their account at one time (maybe 200 max), and then limit how many connects a freelancer can buy in a single month. If a freelancer is spending hundreds and hundreds of connects per day simply 'spamming out' proposals everywhere and not getting hired anybody, that's a good indication that there is no market for whatever they are trying to 'sell'.  The connect system shouldn't be allowed to be abused in such a way that freelancers can buy an unlimited amount and simply endless 'spam out' proposals everywhere in desperation.  The 'connect' system should be about a freelancer having a chance to 'connect', not a 'right' to 'spam'.

[tlsanders]

I don't think I agree with this because those freelancers are already getting hired and generating fees for Upwork. If they promote them, then they're just shifting which projects they're working on, not actually increasing revenues. If they can get clients to hire freelancers who aren't going to be working and paying fees anyway, that's a new revenue stream.

[18d41e19]

Hi Aaron, 

Great post! I am new to Upwork and have noticed disdain from legacy Upworkers about the boost/bidding system. As a new freelancer, I don't know what it's like not to have to boost proposals. However,  I do not boost my Proposals because I don't come across the type(s) of opportunities that I am willing to pay to play.

Perhaps other freelancers see boosting their proposal as a business expense (i.e., marketing, branding, lead generation, etc.). If so, allocating resources for business development and marketing is a customary and usual business expense. 

[Anonymous-User]

Boosts is not a business expense.
You are gambling, does gambling cone under business expenses?
Need to check.

This seems to be a drivel story that the Upwork Defence Volunteers use.
I'm extremely suspicious of those folk that think gambling on the
possibility of getting an interview is seen as a legitimate business
expense.

Do you pay for the recruiter to put your resume forward? It's unethical.

[18d41e19]

Hi Pete, 

I am not defending UW nor am I accusing them. I just offered my opinion about how some freelancers may view the bidding system. For the record, I have only been on the platform a few weeks. I landed a few contracts (without boosting) but can empathize with what others are saying. 

Edited to add: I don't plan to purchase boosts because, for me, it's a terrible business expense on top of the other fees already associated with being a freelancer. 

[tlsanders]

How is boosting more of a gamble than spending connects to bid in the first place? 

[Anonymous-User]

Because you cannot see what happens behind you, You don't know anything, you are just trying to trump the current bid, and then it becomes a never-ending story of who has the most connects or who is desperate enough to get at the top.

Gamble away, I will watch from the sidelines.

[tlsanders]

So you mean that you're gambling as to whether you make it into the top three slots? 

If you don't, it costs you nothing. What type of gambling gives you 100% of your bet back if you lose? 

[Anonymous-User]

Why have a top-three slot then?

Why show it?

Upwork is creating a system that encourages people to throw money at something that has no discernable outcome.

"If you don't, it costs you nothing. What type of gambling gives you 100% of your bet back if you lose? "

If you lose at gambling you lose 100% if you don't get the contract you lose 100%,, what is it you can't see from that? Gambling by throwing boosts at a proposal when you do not know what is going to come in behind you, someone with 100 connects, 500 connects, where does your proposal sit?

Now you said earlier if im not mistaken that the client gets a mixed bag of proposals previsouly, or at least alluded to, so now the client gets those willing to gamble to appear high enough up the list. to get noticed.

Are those people suitable? Does the client get frustrated? I have seen client posts where that is the case.

[tlsanders]

What I can't see is how you're distinguishing it from using connects at all. 

If you use 6 connects and you don't get the job, you've lost 100% of your investment.

If you use 50 connects and make it into the top three slots and don't get the job, you've lost 100% of your investment--identical in all ways except the size of what you're characterizing as the "bet."

If you use 50 connects on a 6 connect job and don't make it into the top slot, you get 44 of your connects back. If you know of a gambling setting where I get 88% of my bet back when I lose, please tell me where I can take advantage of that system.

[hedy_w]

It isn't just about what you spend on connects.  If everyone is paying the same amount for connects, then it is a more level playing field and you know a client isn't just hiring someone because they spent the most on connects.  They aren't hiring based on who they think is the most qualified for the job.  They hire based on amount of connects.  Part of the point is less people are getting responses to their proposals even though they may be just as qualified or more than someone who is paying for more connects.  And aren't those extra connects you spend temporarily unavailable until they hire someone, so you have less connects to use on other proposals? 

[tlsanders]

Don't you think that in the regular business world, businesses that invest more in marketing themselves have a better chance of drawing customers? Is there ever really a level playing field? For example, if you and I both set up websites offering the same service, and the sites are of relatively the same quality, but I spend $500/month on Google ads to draw customers to my site and you rely on them finding you organically, who do you think will draw more customers? 

[hedy_w]

That's a completely different example you're giving with Google.  You know in advance what you will have to spend.  Upwork keeps changing the rules and they already take 20% off your first $500 or $1000, then 10%.  They are already making money off freelancers and don't they also making money off certain memberships?  They could just give flat rate memberships people could join and be done with it instead of this competition with boosting by connects. 

[dcapdevielle]

Lets not talk about biding 50 connects to a job that never gets awarded.

[tlsanders]

That's silly. 

When you place an advertisement, you don't know whether or not customers will respond. Does that make it not a business expense?

When you take a prospective customer to lunch to talk about what you can do for them, you don't know whether they'll hire you. Does that make it not a business expense? 

[fdynasty]

What is happening now is the agencies who use to pay for google ads which were too expensive, now they are boosting here on upwork to get jobs, so the word freelancer is out of existence as they cannot compete with these agencies.

The reason your proposal does not get viewed because you are just seeing the 70 or 200 connects, and forgetting the freelancer before them bit below so their proposal will be after the top 3.

It's been 3 months now, only 1 interview and out of the 200 proposals I send, I am a top-rated here on upwork but now being top-rated or top-rated plus is just pointless, go make a new account and start boosting no difference.

[6bfcdaf8]

Stop putting mystery on boosting. These people are just paying to be listed on top, nothing else. Upwork won't do anything else to sell your service over the others. It will just list your proposal at the top and customer will never stop reading especially because its clear that its paid advertisement. They are looking for the best fit.

Yet some people still wont believe it and will keep paying (and not getting jobs). Boosting wont get you to a better position. Its just a feature like any other.