The Number of Connects seems out of line with many Assignments

[78c2ac9d]

Many of the assigments I am looking at are entry level for a low fee, yet are asking what seems to be a disproportionately high number of connects in order to submit a proposal.

For example, one posting requests completion of 30 tasks paid at $0.50 each, totalling $15.00.

The estimated time needed for each task is 15 minutes, so you could expect to complete 4 tasks per hour (grossing $2.00 per hour).

The number of connects is 8, which means it would cost you $1.20 to submit a proposal.  Even accepting that it's normal to invest money and time into searching for work, this seems like an exorbitant amount given the tiny amount that you end up with (just $13.50 once the 10% fee is deducted from the gross earnings).

Why is the number of connects so high?

[adrian29630]

Why is the number of connects so high?  So that UpWork can make more money of the back of Freelancers.  There is no other reason

[tlsanders]

Or, you could say, so that the many millions of freelancers who never land a job and so never pay a project fee pay Upwork something for their services. Why would you think the tiny fraction of Upwork freelancers who make money should subsidize the millions who, but for connects, would just be draining resources and chasing away clients for free?

[xrmsquared]

That's "The Long Tail". How all large internet companies were built. Lots of dross / niche content, but some of that on occasion interesting to almost everyone.

In the case of too many bids chasing clients away, I'd prefer an algorithmic matching system which perhaps charges freelancers if it thinks they are not a good enough match, but otherwise which would tuck their proposals well out of the way of other freelancers suitably experienced & qualified.

I also think clients should not be allowed to post a job without inviting at least 3 freelancers (with an AI / algorithm to suggest a dozen freelancers – rotated as in the talent search – to the client (but only where a good description is present, thereby also improving the quality of job postings and enabling the functionality described above) – otherwise the client paying a penalty fee for 'bidding war'-only jobs, and paying more or requiring a higher subscription level for addtional invites.

This would see a return to quality & regular invites on the platform, better and more complete job descriptions, and a 'connects tax' only for freelancers who are currently benched, and for whatever reason (new, not very active, patchy job history) way down in the search algorithm.

Clients would hire good contractors easily this way. Good contractors would receive good & appropriate invites. New, average or less active freelancers would have to bid more than not (and that's still a lot of freelancers, so some connects revenue would still be there).

[tlsanders]

I don't understand why you want so badly to make it inconvenient enough for clients that they go somewhere that doesn't make them jump through hoops. 

As a client, I almost always invite a few freelancers. It is a terrible, time consuming process that is very unlikely to yield the best options. Virtually always, I end up hiring someone who sent a proposal, who is a great choice and was not in the first many pages of my search results. 

[xrmsquared]

That's an interesting insight; I don't use the platform as a client.

My suggestion on the minimum 3 invites would be that the client would be presented with a page or two of search results from something similar to the talent search algo; and perhaps this list is changing dynamically as they type their job post out; better job description, better live search results.

With such an envisaged feature, there wouldn't be anything time-consuming about fulfilling an invites requirement.

If the system was known to produce good matches, it could even select 3 automatically in the event the client posts the job without doing so.

 A Job Composing / Search & Match co-pilot for an extra fee maybe...

[78c2ac9d]

What I am really looking for is more insight into the calculation used to determine how many connects are attached to each posting.

[crart]

But there is really no other reason. UW is losing people, money, credibility, trust. Desperately trying to stay on the surface they allow scam and fraud "jobs" to remain on the platform so their shareholders think there are actually people here and the business is running because naiive freelancers - or fake ones, bots - will bid on them, no one is awarded the "job" but the numbers go high. The platform is collapsing actually and freelancers are those who pay for UW's inability to find solution. No one calculates connects needed to bid on specific jobs and if there is such person then I am truly worried about their state of mind.

[spectralua]

That's right. This post can be taken as a solution to most topics over the past half year.

[mikelottridge]

My guess is that it simply reflects what freelancers are willing to pay in connects for a job posting ( and possibly bid additional connects for visibility). Jobs that will have a lot of freelancers competing for them probably have higher connect costs, even if they are low value contracts. Connects certainly are a source of revenue, so there's definitely an incentive for Upwork to maximize the opportunity. I just view it as an advertising cost, and it's up to us to decide if it's worth it or not. 

[the-right-writer]

Because Upwork is trying to get freelancers to stop taking dirt cheap jobs. Those tiny jobs eat just as many resources, but with a tiny profit. I keep trying to get freelancers to stop taking those jobs, too, because the freelancers are being used and if we reject those jobs, clients will pay more.

[78c2ac9d]

Hi Jeanne, thanks for your reply.  Has UpWork talked about this somewhere and mentioned this as an issue they are trying to address?

[the-right-writer]

Yes, I will see if I can find the thread. Of course, they didn't express this the same as I did.

[the-right-writer]

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Product-Release-Notes/Marketplace-Updates-Changes-to-Upwork-Applicat...

https://community.upwork.com/t5/Feedback/Marketplace-Updates-Boosted-Proposals-and-Connects/m-p/1269...

I'm looking for more...

[78c2ac9d]

Thank you for the links.

The information in the first location does not correlate with what I am seeing, specifically where it states "a proposal at Upwork will range from 4 to 16 based on the project’s value. The number of Connects needed to submit for a project is determined by the size and scope of the project opportunity."

The above statement is what I would logically expect to be the case.  What I am observing in reality is the opposite of this, hence prompting me to start this thread.

[the-right-writer]

There is more, but it must not be in an "official" thread. I'll keep looking.

We haven't seen that statement in action. It seems as if the cheaper jobs have more connects per value. However, some seem to have been decided by throwing a dart at a board.

[tlsanders]

I think (though they didn't say it) that they mean its value to Upwork. I still see a decent number of high-paying jobs for 8 connects, while many $25 jobs are 16. 

[78c2ac9d]

I don't think this could ever be changed by trying to persuade an entire community to behave in a uniform manner.  There will always be someone who is desperate enough for some work even if it only pays pennies.  This could be any person who is trying to get their foot on the ladder by completing any kind of assigment just to gain credibility.  Or, it could be someone in part of the world where that kind of money is still worth having, relative to what they could earn doing something else in their country of residence.

This is the type of thing that needs to be built into the programming and enforced at the front-end, not left to the users to try and control via boycotting.

[tlsanders · Accepted solution]

The range is 4, 8, 12 or 16, so 8 is on the lower end compared with most jobs. 

It seems to me, though (just from the postings I've observed) that Upwork is making these tiny, undesirable jobs expensive. Many of them are 12 or 16 connects. Upwork makes little or no profit on these jobs--as you pointed out, their fee on this job would be $1.50. If a single customer service agent spends a few minutes interacting with the client or freelancer, Upwork has lost money on this job. (That's not even taking infrastructure into acount.)

If it's expensive to bid, one of two things happens: Freelancers get smart and stop bidding on them, or the cost of connects makes up for the low or negative value of the job. It's a win for Upwork either way.

[78c2ac9d]

Thanks for your reply.  When I initially posted I didn't know the range was from 4 to 16, so compared with other possible values 8 is indeed at the lower end.

I can see your logic regarding the different scenarios from Upwork's point of view.

However, this makes their statements regarding how connects are calculated blatently incorrect.  At the very least they should take a proper stance on very low value jobs that doesn't "work" by exploiting the freelancers.  They could easily do this by enforcing a minimum value on any postings, or requiring a fee from the job poster for postings under a certain value, to encourage more lucrative postings.

[tlsanders]

They could, but I'm not sure I think it's Upwork's responsibility to run a freelancer's business for them. Anyone attempting to run even the tiniest of businesses should know that it's not worth spending $2.40 to bid on a $5 job they have a very small chance of getting. 

I think there are a few reasons Upwork doesn't require a higher threshold. One is some large corporations that work with them insist on access to very low rates. One is that what's not a worthwhile job to me is a fair day's pay in some areas. The third, though, is that very small jobs can turn into a lot more. I have one client I did a $50 one-off web page for 7 years ago on Upwork. By the time our two years were up on Upwork, he'd paid me several thousand dollars. I still sporadically work with him today, and if I had to guess without doing the math I'd say the relationship has been worth about $30,000 at this point.

[tlsanders]

On a side note, you should probably stop looking at those jobs. Your profile indicates experience and expertise, and taking on cheap entry level work will only hurt your profile.