| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Who selects payment method/terms? Wrong paradigm on Proz job posting Thread poster: José Henrique Lamensdorf
|
|---|
| I did switch the roles once! | Oct 5, 2008 |
Kevin Lossner wrote:
Here's a fun, silly idea: a translator posts a certain quantity of capacity, perhaps an ideal job specifying format, subject area and turnaround time and invites outsourcers to bid on that capacity with a certain minimum.
It was fun, but not a silly idea.
Some years ago, when I moved from Mexico City —the world's navel to me at that time— and came to live in Veracruz, a beautiful seaport but with few work opportunities for an editor and translator, I had a silly idea: I faxed to three advertising agencies and two newspaper offices, posting my ad this way:
"Editor/translator in seek of professional publishers paying high salary and looking to work with someone that will provide you with growth and learning. Please don't apply if you don't meet all requirements".
I got two serious bids. One more asked for a large translation test (for free).
BUT WE ARE GETTING OFF THE POINT...
What I understand from José Henrique's post, is to extend and upgrade sections like where, how and when the translator expects to be paid for his/her work, and give us the opportunity to state our conditions, etc. The outsourcer will receive responses the same way they are now, but EXTENDED.
Is this too much to ask?
| | | | | As we are down to details... | Oct 5, 2008 |
(if Proz changes anything they're gonna need them)
Samuel Murray wrote:
I don't see how your reply relates to my comment. My statement was that if a potential client offers a payment method that you dislike, then it is up to you to decide (before accepting the job, obviously) if you are willing to accept it.
That goes to the whole automation of the system. Proz offers only PayPal and Moneybookers as options. There are many others, serving some countries one-way. For instance, Xoom sends money to 30+ countries, but the funds may come from any Visa, MasterCard, or PayPal.
It's not a matter of accepting, liking, or not. It's a matter of feasibility. Imagine I were a translation agent, to pay you some money from Brazil to South Africa, plus a dozen translators scattered all over the globe. It's much easier for each translator to tell me which ones work for them than for me - as a translation agency - to research and find that out. If I tell you I only pay by some system that doesn't work there, there is no use in trying. You'd have your payment stuck forever somewhere out of your reach.
The idea is to open up possibilities, not to close doors.
Samuel Murray wrote:
In the ProZ.com case, it is the buyer who is static -- translators approach him, not the other way round. The only reason for a translator to work as such is because someone has a translation job. This is the triggering event. ... So the buyer approaches the sellers.
Samuel Murray wrote:
Not true. Clients post a job and then they sit back and wait for translators to approach them. The buyers do not, as you say, approach the sellers -- in contrast, the sellers approach the buyer (after having been informed by ProZ.com that there is a buyer).
We've got our concepts mixed here. Clients posting a job is approaching the sellers. It's like climbing up a lamp post in a street market, and yelling Does anyone here have tomatoes to sell me? Then they step down, relax, and wait for the tomato merchants to approach. Bear in mind that they won't (or shouldn't) post a job if they don't have one... just like nobody would yell for tomatoes if they didn't want to make sauce, salad, whatever.
Samuel Murray wrote:
A system in which buyers approach the sellers might work like this: The client posts a job on ProZ.com, and then ProZ.com sends the buyer a list of profiles that best match his job posting. He then investigates (visits profiles etc) and approaches the translator of his choice. In fact, if you think this is a good idea, you might want to suggest it to Staff. It would certainly have advantages for both client and translator.
Like this? http://www.proz.com/translator-directory
Samuel Murray wrote: Payment terms are also to be considered. Take your car to the mechanic, and ask him if you can pay for the repair 60 days after the present month ends. You'll be riding buses for a long time! I'm not fond of comparing translation to plumbing or mechanicing or any other type of job, but since you started it...
That's to highlight the service providing nature of our trade. It's not a long chain of supply (unless several agencies reoutsource the job successively - which shouldn't be normal) where a processed product will land on the end-user's hands long after the raw material has been extracted from nature.
Samuel Murray wrote:
As it happens, I used to make use of a freelancer mechanic who was very good and who charged no interest for payments that were up to 30 days late. I also sometimes take my car to another mechanic who will not hand me my keys until I paid him. I suspect that if I were a business client (not a private client), even the latter mechanic would be willing to accept delayed payment.
Now you got my point. The freelanceing mechanic was probably an amateur or a student who often had to borrow tools, equipment and facilities. The other mechanic, if you drove a lemon that had to go there every other day, he'd probably let you pay monthly, not to bother about making change all the time.
The point is that if you dropped in there once in a lifetime, or for the first time ever, neither would give you the keys without having got cash. And if the translator on Proz already worked for that client, and they were satisfied, there is no need for them to post a job here.
Samuel Murray wrote:
Some people here have also used laywers and doctors as comparison occupations. Well, I rarely pay for medical expenses on the same day that the medical treatment took place (I often pay much later, after I've been sent an invoice and a reminder). And we often read in the newspapers about how someone owes a lawyer legal fees -- so obviously there is often no payment upfront for legal services either.
Maybe that's customary in South Africa; certainly not the case in Brazil. And Proz is worldwide.
| | | | Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 23:10
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Yes, but not quite | Oct 5, 2008 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote: Samuel Murray wrote:
A system in which buyers approach the sellers might work like this: The client posts a job on ProZ.com, and then ProZ.com sends the buyer a list of profiles that best match his job posting. He then investigates (visits profiles etc) and approaches the translator of his choice. Like this? http://www.proz.com/translator-directory
Yes, but I'm missing a few features from it For example, if I'm a client and I know that the job would likely run from 22 October 2008 to 30 October 2008, I can't seach for freelancers based on that. I can search for freelancers who are available (green on their calendar) today, but not on any other specific date.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 23:10
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| I get the impression... | Oct 5, 2008 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
That goes to the whole automation of the system. Proz offers only PayPal and Moneybookers as options. There are many others, serving some countries one-way. For instance, Xoom sends money to 30+ countries, but the funds may come from any Visa, MasterCard, or PayPal.
It's not a matter of accepting, liking, or not. It's a matter of feasibility.
I get the impression that your gripe is not with the fact that buyers can indicate preferred payment terms, but with the fact that the number of options and the actual options they can indicate, are insufficient or not always appropriate. It seems to me that your thread is not about buyers and sellers after all, but about the limited options available to both.
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray wrote: José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
That goes to the whole automation of the system. Proz offers only PayPal and Moneybookers as options. There are many others, serving some countries one-way. For instance, Xoom sends money to 30+ countries, but the funds may come from any Visa, MasterCard, or PayPal.
It's not a matter of accepting, liking, or not. It's a matter of feasibility. I get the impression that your gripe is not with the fact that buyers can indicate preferred payment terms, but with the fact that the number of options and the actual options they can indicate, are insufficient or not always appropriate. It seems to me that your thread is not about buyers and sellers after all, but about the limited options available to both.
No, Samuel, it's not a gripe, but a suggestion to improve, actually to change to what I see as the usual practice everywhere in business: the seller says their price before bargaining - if any - begins.
The good translation agencies that contact me directly - and for which I work over and over again - describe their job at hand and ask me how much I'd charge to do it. After my reply, sometimes they say the budget for that job is tight, if I'd accept something lower. I do my best to accomodate within reason. So this is the standard practice.
By prompting the outsourcer to state/suggest/propose the price and payment term up front, Proz is nurturing worse conditions for their paying members. Some clients might have have been willing to pay COD, but when they saw that 60 days is the max, they envisioned new horizons for their cash flow.
The bottom line is that all this pulls a spiralling down effect. That's why you see threads about low rates here over and over again, but that's only the symptom. To solve the problem Proz must attack the root cause.
Of course, when an outsourcer gets prompted to propose a rate, they'll put it as low as they believe it's possible. Do you imagine that a translator who usually works for 12¢/word would bid at that level for a job posted as paying 20¢/word? Of course not!
So if outsourcers are spared from being prompted for how much, when, and how they are willing to pay, they'll get vendors bidding at their normal prices and terms, and both will make good business here. The bid will automatically show allthe viable payment methods for each translator. No need for outsourcers to put TBA there. If they don't work with any of them, and notice that most of the desirable vendors do, they'll get set for doing it.
I hope we've got the payment method issue covered by now. We shouldn't expect Proz to find out which ones exist serving each country, as the locals can do that better and faster. The system just has to be geared to take and process their inputs automatically.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 23:10
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| This has been discussed time and again | Oct 5, 2008 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
By prompting the outsourcer to state/suggest/propose the price and payment term up front, Proz is nurturing worse conditions for their paying members. ... So if outsourcers are spared from being prompted for how much, when, and how they are willing to pay, they'll get vendors bidding at their normal prices and terms, and both will make good business here.
So the reason why you're against buyers indicating payment method is not that it is seemingly unnatural to do so but because you believe it promotes low rates. Well, this has been discussed here time and again.
You're assuming that clients usually have unlimited budgets and that they often have lots of time for to-ing and fro-ing.
Alternatively you're assuming that translators will only too be happy to receive hundreds of job offers, with no way of telling "sorry, you're too expensive" from "thanks, you are within our budget", and therefore no way of knowing on which jobs they should spend time crafting a careful bid, and which jobs should receive their standard response as being likely to be rejected.
| | | | | Payment methods | Oct 5, 2008 |
> Imagine I were a translation agent, to pay you some money
> from Brazil to South Africa, plus a dozen translators scattered
> all over the globe. It's much easier for each translator to tell
> me which ones work for them than for me - as a translation
> agency - to research and find that out.
Good point, of course. I've noticed that a number of translators state this explicitly on their profiles, but many do not. And from time to time there are posts f... See more > Imagine I were a translation agent, to pay you some money
> from Brazil to South Africa, plus a dozen translators scattered
> all over the globe. It's much easier for each translator to tell
> me which ones work for them than for me - as a translation
> agency - to research and find that out.
Good point, of course. I've noticed that a number of translators state this explicitly on their profiles, but many do not. And from time to time there are posts from forlorn translators who are upset because of difficulties in arranging payments by a desirable method.
It might be useful to add a free text field to profiles to encourage this information to be added more often. This might help PMs or potential clients figure out this important issue before accepting a bid or contacting a translator. An option to include it with quotations might be included.
For that matter, you could add a payment terms field to profiles and give an option to include that. I usually write that information in the body text of my quotation, and I may quote different terms depending on the situation, so I don't necessarily need the profile field for quotation purposes. Again, many people do include that information on their profiles already, but explicit encouragement to do so might be useful.
As I switch over to new software for issuing quotations and invoices, something I am considering adding explicitly is surcharges which reflect payment terms. José, I know you get worked up about customers who want to pay net 30, 45, 60 or whatever, and I too prefer the ones who pay immediately or net 10 (and give them first priority in my scheduling), but I just make it a point of charging the ones who want their 45 day terms (or who end up paying late consistently) a premium that amounts to a rather usurious rate of interest. Now I am thinking of coming out and saying quite explicitly that the job will cost € XX.XX for net 10 days payment and € XX.XX + 5% for up to net 30 or something like that. Or just mark up the job by 5 or 10% and put a note on the quotation that net 10 payment is entitled to a small discount. That is perhaps the better approach psychologically. It looks more like a reward than a penalty even if the math works out the same. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Samuel Murray wrote:
So the reason why you're against buyers indicating payment method is not that it is seemingly unnatural to do so but because you believe it promotes low rates. Well, this has been discussed here time and again.
Payment methods: PayPal, Ikobo, Moneybookers, wire transfer, check, gold nuggets, etc. These have to do with the feasibility of the deal.
If I - customer - could pay you only with a Brazilian bank securities, you'd give up on me regardless of rates.
Samuel Murray wrote:
You're assuming that clients usually have unlimited budgets and that they often have lots of time for to-ing and fro-ing.
No. There are local and worldwide market trends. There are even statistics available per language pair on Proz. So any translator has (and should have) some reference to their work's value here. If the outsourcer has the instructions leaflet for an alarm clock to translate, they know the rate may be lower than average. If it's a financial report to stockholders or the instruction manual for some complex equipment, it may be higher.
Translators should be sensible enough to offer prices that correspond to what they will be delivering. On the other hand, if a "scroogey" client sets the bar too low, they might wind up having the alarm-clock-leaflet translator working on their report to stockholders.
Samuel Murray wrote:
Alternatively you're assuming that translators will only too be happy to receive hundreds of job offers, with no way of telling "sorry, you're too expensive" from "thanks, you are within our budget", and therefore no way of knowing on which jobs they should spend time crafting a careful bid, and which jobs should receive their standard response as being likely to be rejected.
That's part of the translator's turf. To offer competitive but wortwhile prices; to consider all the extras required (e.g. original in scanned PDF, removing tape hiss while subtitling into a DVD; editing charts; etc.); and to provide what the client actually needs. Some people call this marketing.
It's a waste of time - on both sides - to send bids "likely to be rejected".
| | |
|
|
|
Stuart Dowell
Poland
Local time: 23:10
Member (2007)
Polish to English
+ ...
| Normal or not? | Oct 6, 2008 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Every business selling anything in the world states up front the payment methods they accept.
This is very often true, especially in retail situations.
In business-to-business transactions, however, I think it is common for a buyer to set out its conditions, them approach the market to solicit offers.
I don't have any problem with this.
Stuart
| | | | | Why do I see it otherwise, then? | Oct 7, 2008 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
The buyer merely indicates his preferred method of payment. It is still entirely up to the bidder to decide if he accepts or rejects it.
My understanding so far was that if I wasn't happy with the "offer", I should refrain from quoting (thanks for the brief explanation, Enrique). However, I am sure that those who know me here also know that I am not a beginner and I am far from considering the bulk of job posts on this site as standard. Why is it then that I was mistaken?
Also, we should not forget that even though it is just a proposal as per job board rules, the payment method, among other job post elements, is carved into stone in most cases. I doubt that those outsourcers who actually do consider it to be merely a proposal - and not a condition - are part of the majority...
My problem more specifically is that the current state of the jobs system doesn't allow for negotiation, and in my opinion, negotiation is key. It's not as much about who gets to set the terms - in my mind, the buyer and the seller are equal in the negotiation process. The flaw of it all is that there is no negotiation in most cases, since rates, payment terms and deadlines are announced in advance in the job post. It would be a waste of time to even consider quoting on such jobs, because in my experience, those who do add such details to their job posts are doing so precisely to avoid negotiation, and thus impose their own terms.
It really is as José says - such information simply should not be allowed in job posts. There is absolutely no other solution I can see, no matter how hard and objectively I think of it.
| | | | | The result of translating English > Spanish > English | Oct 7, 2008 |
Uldis Liepkalns wrote: the situation will become even worse- just today I got to know about http://translate.google.com/translate_t# It translates directly from almost any to any language (without first translating it to English as a mediatory), I tested it with general texts in many languages- the results were better than I would have believed possible just yesterday- say, in a 100 word text Swedish, Finnish, Estonian, Lithuanian, German into Latvian- in average one word was not recognized, the rest was fully understandable, just grammar needed to be somewhat corrected.
This is the result of translating your paragraph to Spanish and then to English again with translate.google.com:
"Translates almost directly from any to any language (not translated into English as a mediation), I have tested with the general texts in several languages, the results were better than we had thought possible yesterday, for example, in a 100 word text Swedish , Finnish, Estonian, Lithuanian, Latvian-German in the middle of a word has not been recognized, the rest was fully understandable, only the grammar needed something to be corrected."
Indeed it is quite an achievement. Impossible just months ago. But I am not really worried about it. Any company requiring a professionally written text in the target language will need a translator. Google will actually help us feed the desire and need of a professional translator among companies.
| | | | | Time is important here! | Oct 7, 2008 |
A couple of points from the outsourcer's point of view:
- Time, indeed... If my budget will only allow me to pay 10 cts/source word, why not state that in my job posting? If your rate is 17 cts, you know you don't need to waste your time quoting for the job, and I'm not swamped with quotes I can't afford. Simple as that. The idea of negotiation is fine, but while we're negotiating, I'm not getting new clients in and the translator isn't translating - and the deadline still stands. T... See more A couple of points from the outsourcer's point of view:
- Time, indeed... If my budget will only allow me to pay 10 cts/source word, why not state that in my job posting? If your rate is 17 cts, you know you don't need to waste your time quoting for the job, and I'm not swamped with quotes I can't afford. Simple as that. The idea of negotiation is fine, but while we're negotiating, I'm not getting new clients in and the translator isn't translating - and the deadline still stands. The indications I give in the job posting ensure that both parties only invest their time in negotiations if there's enough chance of coming to an agreement. Which in turn ensures that whomever is going to get the job, will actually still have a reasonable deadline. If I spend 2 days negotiating with different translators, that's a turnaround time shortened by two days.
- Negotiation: in their job offer, outsourcers can state whether the 10 cts (let's stick to that example) is an indication or a fixed offer. And I've happily paid the 14 cts someone quoted on a job I offered for 10 cts, because his profile and CV matched the job so much better than his 8 cts competitors.
- RE: the idea of posting a job, after which Proz finds suitable candidates: that's actually what I do * before * posting a job. I enter certain criteria into Connect!, and post my job only to those translators whom I believe might be interested. If I have some time, I prefer to contact someone individually if their profile indicates a good match between job and translator.
Yes, rates, payment terms and deadlines (and in a decent job posting, some other things as well!!!) are "announced" in the job posting. Like Victoria said, a job posting is a proposal, which I consider an invitation to translators to start negotiations. But for translators as well as outsourcers, I think it's a good thing to have some basic idea of where these negotiations could start, before you invest your energy in it. That's why I add so many details to my job postings...
So, in summary: as an outsourcer, I'm actually pretty happy with the current system. I understand your objections, but I rather regret the "them against us" tone in this debate. How about working *with* people, rather than *for* them, or even *against* them?? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| We are getting somewhere! | Oct 7, 2008 |
Susan van den Ende wrote:
A couple of points from the outsourcer's point of view:
- Time, indeed... If my budget will only allow me to pay 10 cts/source word, why not state that in my job posting? If your rate is 17 cts, you know you don't need to waste your time quoting for the job, and I'm not swamped with quotes I can't afford. Simple as that.
This makes sense, Susan!
From this standpoint, what is missing for both sides is some field for the job poster to state whether the pay being offered is a suggestion or a limit.
So if you say your 10¢ is a suggestion, and it's some delicate, complex, or otherwise special job, a world-class specialist in that stuff will take some time to write you that s/he can do it for 15¢, and you'll be interested in reading that offer. But if you say those 10¢ are the limit, neither party will waste time.
Hello, Proz team! The above is a true suggestion!
Susan van den Ende wrote:
The idea of negotiation is fine, but while we're negotiating, I'm not getting new clients in and the translator isn't translating - and the deadline still stands. The indications I give in the job posting ensure that both parties only invest their time in negotiations if there's enough chance of coming to an agreement. Which in turn ensures that whomever is going to get the job, will actually still have a reasonable deadline. If I spend 2 days negotiating with different translators, that's a turnaround time shortened by two days.
The purpose of the system here is to circumvent these time-wasting negotiations. If you found me through my profile here, or even my web site, okay, we'll have to negotiate until we get to a mutually acceptable agreement. However if you post a job for 10¢, I send you my bid for 12¢, we haggle over it for two days, and I finally agree to do it for 11¢, IMHO it's dishonest. If I could do it for 11¢, why did I attempt to rip you off with 12¢ at the outset? (figures are merely for illustration purposes)
Susan van den Ende wrote:
- Negotiation: in their job offer, outsourcers can state whether the 10 cts (let's stick to that example) is an indication or a fixed offer. And I've happily paid the 14 cts someone quoted on a job I offered for 10 cts, because his profile and CV matched the job so much better than his 8 cts competitors.
This reinforces my proposal to Proz. You'd say that 10¢ is a suggestion. The 8¢ bidders would be offering to stretch their abilities to do it. The 14¢ one would be a perfect match. And there might be a 20¢ bidder which you would rule out on cost/benefit grounds. On the other hand, if you stipulated 10¢ as a max limit, it would mean that you couldn't afford anything higher, so it would spare both the 14¢ bidder from wasting time and you from some regret that your end-client isn't wealthier.
Susan van den Ende wrote:
So, in summary: as an outsourcer, I'm actually pretty happy with the current system. I understand your objections, but I rather regret the "them against us" tone in this debate. How about working *with* people, rather than *for* them, or even *against* them??
You tend to emphasize negotiation, and it's one situation where one must be against the other. The ideal is win-win (two wins), not just "win". So even within a loving couple, there is the "I cooked dinner, now you do the dishes." situation now and then.
The preposition in "working --- people" varies a lot. I certainly enjoy working with my clients, help them get the results they need in the most cost-effective manner feasible. My profile on Proz is all about this issue. But sometimes I have to work for people who just want it done ASAP, and make it very clear that they regret having to pay anything for it. Now and then there is a case where I get maneuvered into a position where the "opponent" wants to tweeze as many pennies from me as they can, e.g. by including more work (e.g. extensive DTP, video editing embedded in subtitling work) into what was initially agreed. Every outsourcer is different.
While we are at negotiation, I looked back at my original posting, and the basic issue - something non-negotiable - has been dorlorn: the payment method. If the vendor is in a country where some payment method is impossible due to government restrictions, or outrageously expensive, there is no way to negotiate that. Attention, Proz team, the second suggestion: So it makes sense to include each and every possible/acceptable payment method, both on the paying and receiving sides beforehand.
Finally, there is the payment term. Proz should not suggest 60 days. This tends to make less-experienced outsourcers cash-flow-happy. Even if they are receiving COD, and would be able to pay in a couple of days, upon seeing this as an option, they often go for it. The bottom line is that it downgrades the translator's position in the whole process - the one that may be paid last.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 23:10
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Let's blame culture | Oct 7, 2008 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
So if you say your 10¢ is a suggestion... But if you say those 10¢ are the limit...
What do you regard the current system to be? Suggestion or limit? To my mind, the current system is "suggestion". Basically, the client says "I start the bidding at 10¢" and it is up to the translator to bid higher or lower. No doubt some clients will regard their opening bid as non-negotiable, but that is something to be negotiated between the translator and the client.
Hello, Proz team! The above is a true suggestion!
So your suggestion is that an additional tickbox be added to the pricing info on the job submission, saying "These terms are absolutely non-negotiable" (by default not ticked). It sounds like a good suggestion. Submit it in the suggestion forum, and I'll +1 it.
However if you post a job for 10¢, I send you my bid for 12¢, we haggle over it for two days, and I finally agree to do it for 11¢, IMHO it's dishonest. If I could do it for 11¢, why did I attempt to rip you off with 12¢ at the outset?
This is called "negotiation" and is morally acceptable in many cultures.
In fact, in some cultures the other party will always assume that your first bid is a dummy bid and that you are always willing to go lower. In other cultures, the first bid is regarded as practically non-negotiable.
Attention, Proz team, the second suggestion: So it makes sense to include each and every possible/acceptable payment method, both on the paying and receiving sides beforehand.
I understand why you want this -- it is because your country doesn't accept most payment methods, and you prefer not to receive job notifications that offer other payment methods than the one your country accepts. But I think that if you know that the payment method is often the dealbreaker, you can easily scroll down in every job posting to the payment method and decide within seconds whether to delete or to reply.
I'd like to take a leaf out of that and do a slightly different suggestion, namely that payment method not be selected using a dropdown list but using tickboxes, so that multiple options can be selected.
The question is... should this be labelled "Preferred payment method" or "Accepted payment method"? Because a payment method that is accepted is not necessarily preferred. What would you consider more important to say/ask (if you were to imagine yourself a client) -- preferred or accepted payment method.
Finally, there is the payment term. Proz should not suggest 60 days.
ProZ.com doesn't suggest 60 days. The client can fill in the number of days himself, and ProZ.com doesn't allow him to set it to more than 60 days.
| | | | | Getting close | Oct 7, 2008 |
Samuel Murray wrote: José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
So if you say your 10¢ is a suggestion... But if you say those 10¢ are the limit... What do you regard the current system to be? Suggestion or limit? To my mind, the current system is "suggestion". Basically, the client says "I start the bidding at 10¢" and it is up to the translator to bid higher or lower. No doubt some clients will regard their opening bid as non-negotiable, but that is something to be negotiated between the translator and the client.
As it is, we translators never know. Maybe they are just probing with that offer, haven't got a clue on rates for that pair and/or speciatly. Maybe they are already on a tight budget because of DTP, paper, printing, whatever other costs that cannot be changed. Maybe an agency is having the job re-done from scratch after a rejection by the end client, and now they must keep their original offer and still make ends meet, even if at no profit at all.
Samuel Murray wrote:
So your suggestion is that an additional tickbox be added to the pricing info on the job submission, saying "These terms are absolutely non-negotiable" (by default not ticked). It sounds like a good suggestion. Submit it in the suggestion forum, and I'll +1 it.
AFAIK this is the suggestion forum.
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote: However if you post a job for 10¢, I send you my bid for 12¢, we haggle over it for two days, and I finally agree to do it for 11¢, IMHO it's dishonest. If I could do it for 11¢, why did I attempt to rip you off with 12¢ at the outset? Samuel Murray wrote:
This is called "negotiation" and is morally acceptable in many cultures.
Maybe I was too curt. It would be negotiation if I lowered my price in exchange for e.g. a longer deadline, they providing me DOC files instead of scanned PDF, etc. If I lowered my price just for their asking, it would an admission of my attempted ripoff.
Samuel Murray wrote:
In fact, in some cultures the other party will always assume that your first bid is a dummy bid and that you are always willing to go lower. In other cultures, the first bid is regarded as practically non-negotiable.
Definitely, I negotiate often with some regular clients, mostly local, learn about the specific job constraints and requirements, discuss alternatives, and so on; but not in an electronic bidding process with someone across the globe who has to make a quick yes/no decision.
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote: Attention, Proz team, the second suggestion: So it makes sense to include each and every possible/acceptable payment method, both on the paying and receiving sides beforehand. Samuel Murray wrote:
I understand why you want this -- it is because your country doesn't accept most payment methods, and you prefer not to receive job notifications that offer other payment methods than the one your country accepts. But I think that if you know that the payment method is often the dealbreaker, you can easily scroll down in every job posting to the payment method and decide within seconds whether to delete or to reply.
Brazil is not alone in this. Search the fora here, and you'll see such problems in too many countries around the world. Many outsourcers leave the payment method to be agreed. If they can't use any of those the translator can accept, it will be a waste of time for both. The best is to match both parties' possible options first.
Samuel Murray wrote:
I'd like to take a leaf out of that and do a slightly different suggestion, namely that payment method not be selected using a dropdown list but using tickboxes, so that multiple options can be selected.
The problem is that new electronic payment methods come up every other week. It's easier for Proz to add new items to a drop-down list, where one may check many with Ctrl+click, and also add new ones
Samuel Murray wrote:
The question is... should this be labelled "Preferred payment method" or "Accepted payment method"? Because a payment method that is accepted is not necessarily preferred. What would you consider more important to say/ask (if you were to imagine yourself a client) -- preferred or accepted payment method.
One must start from the accepted, and later settled on the preferred. If one method is not accepted for unmitigating reasons, noting will make it preferred.
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote: Finally, there is the payment term. Proz should not suggest 60 days. Samuel Murray wrote:
ProZ.com doesn't suggest 60 days. The client can fill in the number of days himself, and ProZ.com doesn't allow him to set it to more than 60 days.
Involuntarily it does. I don't know how much it costs these companies, but here in Brazil (where monthly interest rates for consumer credit are around 10%/month, and pays around 1%/mo. to investors), several drugstore chains, when you pay with a credit card, they offer you to break the total in three installments at no interest surcharge. Of course anyone will take that offer.
So if Proz had a field where the job poster had to type in the number of days after delivery/invoice they would pay, it would probably be different.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Who selects payment method/terms? Wrong paradigm on Proz job posting | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
