The new system-- Helping or not much difference?

[nick_scumaci]

I've been on the new connects system for 3 weeks now. I'm generally not against the charging for connects, but what I have noticed is that the areas where this new system was designed to help, it's just not doing that. One of the stated goals here was to cut the number of proposals on projects down. For the past 3 weeks, I've made it a point to note take note of proposals. What I can say, is that proposals have not gone down. In fact, I'm seeing more 20-50 proposal projects than in the past. The majority of jobs have 10-15 proposals. I'll give it some time, but at almost a month in, you would think you'd see some change by now. Maybe its just my field, which is Design and Creative.

Other things I've noticed in my time here...

1) Clients don't seem to know what they need, or how long something should take, etc. So the connects price is out of whack. I understand it's based on multiple factors, but there are jobs posted for 4-6 connects that just don't make sense. 

2) Devaluing jobs. I regularly see bids on jobs far lower than what they should be. Clients will state they want expert or even intermediate level freelancers. Set a budget for lets say $300, and get bids in the $30 range. More often than not, those freelancers get picked. I don't even know how to curtail this. I'm not sure how people even make money this way. Seems to me that clients just want the cheapest price, but in the end, freelancers get hurt by this. In fairness, I understand lowering your price if you're new here and want to build up clients. But I see this waaaaaaaay too much to think it's that everyone is just new. 

3) The issue of jobs posted without hire should be addressed by now. I've seen multiple freelancers bring this up, and there still isn't a solution. There have been some really good points and solutions made by fellow Freelancers, so it's odd this hasnt been fixed. The amount of active proposals that I have in my feed without hire is mindboggling. That's connects thrown away. It's gambling without a base factor. You can do your best to target the best client, but not everyeone has history. There really is no way to know if a client will simply follow through and hire. Freelancers shouldn't be punished if the client doesn't hold up their end of the bargain. If I lose out on a proposal to another freelancer, that's on me. If I lose out on a proposal because a client has decided to disappear and not follow through, how is that also on me?

Not knocking Upwork. Just some things I've noticed in my time here. And maybe with discussion some things will be looked at and tweaked further for the benefit of everyone.

[wlyonsatl]

If Upwork wanted transparency it would add the information Elance provided about all the proposal prices on each project and identifying which freelancer won and at what price.

This would be especially helpful on fixed price jobs, but it wouldn't be irrelevant on hourly projects.

Freelancers are completely working in the dark when it comes to understanding what role price plays in whether they are submitting proposals that are competitive with winning bids. Now that connects cost money, it's more important than ever that freelancers understand their total cost of doing business on Upwork.

But even without this information, low-priced freelancers will soon figure out that their low bids are not really making them much money. And that might be one of Upwork's goals.

[r_satta]

---

Nicholas S wrote:

Other things I've noticed in my time here...

3) The issue of jobs posted without hire should be addressed by now. I've seen multiple freelancers bring this up, and there still isn't a solution. There have been some really good points and solutions made by fellow Freelancers, so it's odd this hasnt been fixed. The amount of active proposals that I have in my feed without hire is mindboggling. That's connects thrown away. It's gambling without a base factor. You can do your best to target the best client, but not everyeone has history. There really is no way to know if a client will simply follow through and hire. Freelancers shouldn't be punished if the client doesn't hold up their end of the bargain. If I lose out on a proposal to another freelancer, that's on me. If I lose out on a proposal because a client has decided to disappear and not follow through, how is that also on me?

Not knocking Upwork. Just some things I've noticed in my time here. And maybe with discussion some things will be looked at and tweaked further for the benefit of everyone.

---

Opening jobs is too easy. To create a freelancer account I had to provide a lot of informations, such as my ID, matching profile picture, VAT ID (not mandatory but still), video chat to prove my identity, etc.
If you want to post a job offer you just have to create an account and... post a poorly made job offer. Obviously your payment method won't be verified (and you will look sketchy as hell), but still you are allowed to post a job offer and stay in the same market as other companies.
This is way too unbalanced, we freelancers have no means of knowing if the offer come from a scammer or from a legitimate company, we can only deduce it through our personal experiences and random 5 stars reviews we can't even check thoroughly.

How about a 0.15$ fee to pay to post a job offer too?

[nick_scumaci]

Roberto, 100% agree that there should be fee for posting jobs. The "free to post" thing just doesn't make sense to me. I look through my feed and half the jobs (maybe more) don't even have verified payment. I think if clients had to pay to post, that would really help curtail the scammers, duplicate posters and plain lazy clients. It would at least make them think twice. And you're right, there really isn't a foolproof way to deduce good clients from bad. Sure if a client has history thats one thing. But it's not a reasonable solution to ignore clients without history, which some people suggest. Some of my better clients came from being brand new to Upwork. This even touches on the clients who never even follow through and the whole returned connects issue. I think more thought needs to be put into the Client side of things. It seems its constantly the Freelancer side that gets tweaked for better or worse.

[florydev]

I am up for a job right now.   Client is unverified.  Apparently posted a job before and never hired.

There were only 7 people who proposed.  I am definitely not going back through all my proposals to verify this but I am pretty sure that is the least amount of proposals I have seen.

We talk on Monday.  At this point, the way I see it, this is MY job to lose.  If the client doesn't hire anyone it will be because he either didn't like what I said, didn't like what I cost, and didn't like any of the other seven.

Anything that would be a barrier to entry for that client getting to me is something I am deadset against.  I would much rather allow bad clients, poorly worded job ads, and scammers than prevent one good client from getting in.  

When I  get this job I will realize enough revenue to buy all the connects I need for life.  

[sebadraw]

I completely agree with you man. For me is a super let down because its not easy to be competitive in this site and this change of ruls onley makes the shareholder´s pocktes more fat. Its just another way of making more money for them. As if the commisions where not enough already. 

The 0.15 price is Per connect right? so we are paying 0.60 for the jobs of x4 connects?

[rolludesig]

i have nearly exhausted around 150 connects in this monthly cycle without any success..

[wlyonsatl]

Sebastian,

Your cost for connects is not just the number of connects for the projects you win.

If you spend 6 connects on every proposal and win 1 job for every 10 proposals you submit, then your connects cost per successful proposal is $9.00 (10 x 6 x $0.15).

[sebadraw]

Ok, this won´t brake my economy but is not helping either.  At leat in my area as an illustrator, there are not so may jobs out there and most of them are quite small. 

[tlsanders]

---

Sebastian C wrote:

I completely agree with you man. For me is a super let down because its not easy to be competitive in this site and this change of ruls onley makes the shareholder´s pocktes more fat. Its just another way of making more money for them. As if the commisions where not enough already. 

If that's the plan (which it should be, since Upwork is legally obligated to make its best effort to generate profits for shareholders), it's not working. The value of Upwork stock is down more than 17% over the past three months.

[sebadraw]

Oh thats incredibly bad! 

[rolludesig]

infact with the newsystem more proposals are being posted..instead the connect system could have been kept the same but they could have raised connects requirements for jobs based on the budget etc.. that way only relevant and serious bidders would have posted proposals & proposals would have been far lesser...

sorry to say but things are not going right 

[nick_scumaci]

I have to agree that it seems more proposals are being posted Rahul. I've never seen so many 20-50 proposal jobs prior to the change. I don't think the plan was thought out correctly. It seems that most people feel the price for connects is relatively small, so I guess that may be why more proposals are being seen. Had the price still been $1.00 per connect, I think less serious bidders would think twice about a 6 connect job.

[michelle-trevino]

Yep, I have to agree. I haven't seen any fewer proposals submitted in the social media and writing categories.

My worry with charging more is that it could push too many people (both clients and freelancers) off the platform. There's a point where additional fees make people antsy, and they will start looking for alternatives. 

[wlyonsatl]

Upwork has clearly said that losing freelancers is not a concern.

[r_satta]

---

Will L wrote:

Upwork has clearly said that losing freelancers is not a concern.

---

Where? I'm curious to read such statement and the context too.

[wlyonsatl]

Roberto,

On Page 47 of its 2018 annual report on file with the US Securities & Exchange Commission...

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1627475/000162747519000007/upwk-12312018x10k.htm

...you will find the following:

While continued use of our platform by freelancers is a factor that impacts our ability to attract and retain clients, our platform currently has a significant surplus of freelancers in relation to the number of clients actively engaging freelancers. As a result of this surplus of freelancers relative to clients, we primarily focus our efforts on retaining client spend and acquiring new clients as opposed to acquiring new freelancers and retaining existing freelancers.

[nick_scumaci]

Michelle, its a slippery slope with charging more, I agree there. But I think with enought effort, more balance can be achieved. The 20% fee Upwork takes is already super high. So yeah, more fees are going to make people think twice. But I think getting rid of the "free to post" aspect on the client side could help. It may even lead to better clients. As for proposals, I just saw my first 50+ proposals job posting. A job that has a budget of $2000 and a lowest bid of $100. I couldn't stop shaking my head.

[tlsanders]

---

Nicholas S wrote:

 But I think getting rid of the "free to post" aspect on the client side could help. It may even lead to better clients. 

---

This has been discussed at length here. Some clients who have spent huge amounts of money through Upwork have categorically said they would never have used the platform if they'd been asked to pay a fee, or even register a credit card, before posting a job. Others (like me) who are not big clients on Upwork but have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring freelancers across our careers have said the same. I can't recall ever having seen a long-term, high-paying Upwork client chime in to say they would have been fine with a fee, or even having to verify their payment method up front.

[r_satta]

---

Tiffany S wrote:

---

Nicholas S wrote:

 But I think getting rid of the "free to post" aspect on the client side could help. It may even lead to better clients. 

---

This has been discussed at length here. Some clients who have spent huge amounts of money through Upwork have categorically said they would never have used the platform if they'd been asked to pay a fee, or even register a credit card, before posting a job. Others (like me) who are not big clients on Upwork but have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring freelancers across our careers have said the same. I can't recall ever having seen a long-term, high-paying Upwork client chime in to say they would have been fine with a fee, or even having to verify their payment method up front.

---

So, 1$ (6 connects) for a freelancer is not that much, but for a Fortune 500 Company is something that should never happen. 
This says a lot about fees and priorities on Upwork.

[versailles]

---

Roberto S wrote:

---

---

So, 1$ (6 connects) for a freelancer is not that much, but for a Fortune 500 Company is something that should never happen. 

---

The situation is very easy to understand. Clients are rare, B2B platforms are many and freelancers are a dime a dozen. Any client, no matter their weight coming on a new B2B platform is in uncharted territory. They don't know what the platform has to offer before actually spending money on it. If you ask them to make a deposit of any kinds and other platforms don't (they don't), they will go someplace else.

Freelancers, on the other hand, are either making money on one specific platform, or they are not.

If they are making money, they know their rate of return and they have optimized their strategy. They won't mind paying a buck to send a proposal, because they know they will make money at the end of the day.

If they are not making money no matter what, or so little that few dollars is serious money, Upwork is politely showing them the door.

Upwork has priorities. Trying to stop bleeding money and maybe turn a profit one of these days is their priority. They failed so far and they have decided, it seems, to get rid of the low-earning freelancers that they see as a deadweight.

[r_satta]

---

Rene K wrote:

---

Roberto S wrote:

---

---

So, 1$ (6 connects) for a freelancer is not that much, but for a Fortune 500 Company is something that should never happen. 

---

The situation is very easy to understand. Clients are rare, B2B platforms are many and freelancers are a dime a dozen. Any client, no matter their weight coming on a new B2B platform is in uncharted territory. They don't know what the platform has to offer before actually spending money on it. If you ask them to make a deposit of any kinds and other platforms don't (they don't), they will go someplace else.

Freelancers, on the other hand, are either making money on one specific platform, or they are not.

If they are making money, they know their rate of return and they have optimized their strategy. They won't mind paying a buck to send a proposal, because they know they will make money at the end of the day.

If they are not making money no matter what, or so little that few dollars is serious money, Upwork is politely showing them the door.

Upwork has priorities. Trying to stop bleeding money and maybe turn a profit one of these days is their priority. They failed so far and they have decided, it seems, to get rid of the low-earning freelancers that they see as a deadweight.

---

Mind that I'm not saying that their position is hard to understand, they obviously have to make money, but from their latest decisions it seems they are only going to squeeze freelancers and do nothing about clients.
You claim that They don't know what the platform has to offer before actually spending money on it. but this is the same for freelancers. Upwork is now trying to get rid of too many freelancers with drastically and poorly-thought ideas (e.g. paid connects only for a part of their freelancers), and this is something they dragged for too long and tried to patch it up at the last minute,

Btw, they did something about freelancers, and OK, what's done is done. But now they need to do something about unresponsive clients too. 
Mind that our role is not to give Upwork solutions (if that was our role we should pretend to be paid and/or work for them), our role is to bring up problems and let them take care of it. But they don't seem too communicative and responsive, and this is leading to tens of the same posts made everyday by worried freelancers (successful ones too) who literally don't know what will happen.

[tlbp]

---

Michelle T wrote:

Yep, I have to agree. I haven't seen any fewer proposals submitted in the social media and writing categories.

My worry with charging more is that it could push too many people (both clients and freelancers) off the platform. There's a point where additional fees make people antsy, and they will start looking for alternatives. 

---

My perception is the opposite. I checked gigs for writing and social media last night and noticed many have 5 or fewer bids and very few had over 20. I think the number of proposals per gigs has dropped. But, I'm not tracking it daily so any of my observations are purely anecdotal. 

[florydev]

My experience has been different in that I saw a lot of jobs that were 20-50 before, usually quite quickly.  I was actively looking before the snappening and have been after.  I still see 20-50 but it seems like it takes a while to climb there.

I also posted a research job and only got 7 applicants in, I think, two days.  Two of whom I really liked.  It was a US only job so maybe that explains it but I thought the research category was quite competitive (and I am a verified client).

[alphazomgy]

I think there are less proposals being submitted to jobs, especially the higher paying ones. (These often cost 6 connects.) 

Personally, I'm a bit more hestitant to submit proposals now, but I actually think this new connect system makes it even easier to submit proposals because connects are waaaay cheap, especially for US freelancers.

This new change to connects was obviously designed to limit **Edited for Community Guidelines** and what not from spamming jobs with proposals. As someone pointed out earlier, jobs that pay $3/hr, $5/hr, are losing Upwork money due to AWS fees. 

[r_satta]

---

Mark F wrote:

I also posted a research job and only got 7 applicants in, I think, two days.  Two of whom I really liked.  It was a US only job so maybe that explains it but I thought the research category was quite competitive (and I am a verified client).

---

I too posted a job offer and then I closed it since I found what I was searching for. It was my first job offer as a client but I was verified, I easily linked my Paypal client to my profile. Still I obviously had no reviews, so receiving 20 proposals in 2 days for a ~50$ job was kinda sad.
The worst part was reading all the poorly made proposals (e.g. I'm a student and I believe I can be of help) and trying to figure out why someone with 0 experience on Upwork (0$ made, 0 hours billed) was a Best match for what I was searching for. And out of 15 proposals I received in a day, 10 freelancer were under Best match (5 of them with no experience). It's not really a best match if all the proposals are under that category 

Oh, and they were sorted automatically under the best match category, it was kinda annoying to click "new proposals" every time.
This is how easy is to post a job offer on Upwork. Too easy. If I was a CV thief I could have taken like 10 curricula in a few days with all the info they provided to me.

[feed_my_eyes]

---

Roberto S wrote:

The worst part was reading all the poorly made proposals (e.g. I'm a student and I believe I can be of help) and trying to figure out why someone with 0 experience on Upwork (0$ made, 0 hours billed) was a Best match for what I was searching for. And out of 15 proposals I received in a day, 10 freelancer were under Best match (5 of them with no experience). It's not really a best match if all the proposals are under that category 

---

Perhaps the reason that you received so many poor proposals from unskilled workers was that your budget was less than $50? Just a thought.

[r_satta]

---

Christine A wrote:

Perhaps the reason that you received so many poor proposals from unskilled workers was that your budget was less than $50? Just a thought.

---

It was a quick job for a skilled translator, 1000 words in X pair language with some requirements needed, and being a translator myself, I offered to pay from 20 up to infinite dollars. The range of bids I received was from 20 up to 100. Not that low, not that high, just a normal job for a translator and the opportunity to make 100$ in 1-2 hours.
One of them literally wrote "Hey, I'm here if you need help, count me in", end of the proposal. AND YOU SPENT 0.15$ TO SEND THIS?? I really laughed reading it.

By the way, the point of my message was "Why there are so many best matches and why somebody with 0 experience is a best match"

[0101]

---

Nicholas S wrote:

It's gambling without a base factor.

---

My thought is quite similiar.

[michelle-trevino]

What's funny is that I probably wouldn't have submitted proposals to my top clients ($10K+) if I had to pay for connects. They had little to no experience on Upwork and, naturally, I'm being more picky with my connects now.

[florydev]

I would draw a completely different conclusion from what you experienced. 

[chefperryp]

What I'd like to see is a minimum bid requiement based on the flat fee, experience level or hourly rate that the client is offering.

Clients that want (and get) "penny-per-word" offers aren't making any of us money, and should be encouraged to move on to sites that cater in that type of quantity-over-quality work. I have no problem with a free-market, lol, but it's frustrating when I spend 10% of my monthly allotment of connects to bid for a $200 job, and then lose it to a $15 low-baller. 

I can't spend a day researching and writing for $15, and continually having to buy more connect points simply because I make reasonable bids based on what the client has STATED that they're willing to pay is, frankly, getting old. 

With due respect, this system seems to be skewed unfairly in "the house's" favor, who's making money at both ends of the deal.

Maybe a system of reimbursement for a percentage of the connects we bid, if we don't get a job?

[sebadraw]

100% agree with you... but well, what can we do?

[chefperryp]

Squeaky wheels, and all that, lol.

I honestly believe that Upwork strives to be the best freelance provider out there, and is willing to make needed (and reasonable) changes to do so. That's why I work here.

Feedback from ONE freelancer isn't going to raise an eyebrow (and it shouldn't, you can't run a buisness that way, lol) but if they recieve the same feedback from enough contractors, they'll listen. 

[petra_r]

---

Perry P wrote:

I honestly believe that Upwork strives to be the best freelance provider out there, and is willing to make needed (and reasonable) changes to do so.

Feedback from ONE freelancer isn't going to raise an eyebrow (and it shouldn't, you can't run a buisness that way, lol) but if they recieve the same feedback from enough contractors, they'll listen. 

---

If it benefits clients or Upwork or the bottom-line or is legally necessary, yes.

Not if enough freelancers complain, no.

Considering that the site has way too many freelancers, with another 10.000 a day desperate to get in, appeasing and retaining freelancers is not a priority, and I assume the purpose of the changes is, in part, to encourage freelancers from certain sectors of the freelancing pool to go elsewhere.