| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Agencies and minimum charges Thread poster: Spencer Allman
|
|---|
Theo Bernards (X) 
France
Local time: 07:00
English to Dutch
+ ...
| Two big thumbs up ☺ | Aug 2, 2013 |
Sheila Wilson wrote:
...
With the convoluted job and invoicing interfaces some of these not-so-valued agencies use, you could well find yourself spending 10 minutes on translation (for 10 peanuts, or even a negative sum if there are charges to receive said peanuts) and 30 minutes on unpaid administration. ...
Hear hear. Another peeve I have developed over the years: the sudden mushrooming of online order management and electronic invoicing systems, often with a sub-optimal (at best) on-line CAT-tool that the agencies then gradually phase in as the CAT-tool of choice. Pah, another link in the food chain trying to nibble their chunk of the rates. We have accepted it, but we should have climbed the barricades...
Łukasz Gos-Furmankiewicz wrote:
...
Agencies sometimes claim discounts and waivers of fees that they don't transfer to their clients, even though it may be implied that they do. They also sometimes charge their clients additionally because of some circumstances applicable to the translator – but without forwarding a penny out of that to the translator.
The above is not business. The above poor business ethics. ...
Yep, always check the terms and conditions of agencies (I used to have a freemail address that didn't reveal my identity me for such purposes if the T&C weren't on the websites but they seem to catch on and not every agency accepts requests for quotes and service terms & conditions from a freemail address), so that you can throw the no minimum charge issue straight back at them by quoting from their own terms and conditions  .
| | | |
Saying "We're no longer going to pay minimum charges" is like walking into your local supermarket with a megaphone, standing at the checkout and shouting: "I'm not going to pay more than $2 for my champagne in future." They'd just laugh in your face and call for security to escort you out.
| | | | Jeff Whittaker
United States
Local time: 01:00
Member (2002)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Agencies and minimum charges | Aug 2, 2013 |
In my opinion, this is an area of opportunity for new translators.
Instead of charging lower rates (which we all know is a stupid idea and will never help them gain work at higher rates), they could charge their full rate, but waive the minimum fee (at least temporarily).
Agencies would get used to paying them the full rate and eventually, larger and larger projects will be assigned to this translator until they can finally institute a minimum fee.
This pra... See more In my opinion, this is an area of opportunity for new translators.
Instead of charging lower rates (which we all know is a stupid idea and will never help them gain work at higher rates), they could charge their full rate, but waive the minimum fee (at least temporarily).
Agencies would get used to paying them the full rate and eventually, larger and larger projects will be assigned to this translator until they can finally institute a minimum fee.
This practice would not anger experienced translators because most of us hate these small jobs anyway and we would rather see new translators working at .12 a word and no minimum fee than working on larger projects at .07 a word.
I think this is a great way for new translators to "get their foot in the door" and gain experience on small projects with an agency client while at the same time not taking away any substantial work from other translators or putting themselves in a position of not being able to raise their rate.
If as a result agencies become accustomed to not paying minimum fees, who cares? We would not be losing much financially speaking and there would be fewer new translators willing to work for lower rates.
[Edited at 2013-08-02 15:04 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 06:00
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| What a great idea! | Aug 2, 2013 |
Jeff Whittaker wrote:
In my opinion, this is an area of opportunity for new translators.
Instead of charging lower rates (which we all know is a stupid idea and will never help them gain work at higher rates), they could charge their full rate, but waive the minimum fee (at least temporarily).
Agencies would get used to paying them the full rate and eventually, larger and larger projects will be assigned to this translator until they can finally institute a minimum fee.
This practice would not anger experienced translators because most of us hate these small jobs anyway and we would rather see new translators working at .12 a word and no minimum fee than working on larger projects at .07 a word.
Like all the best ideas, it's so simple and logical!
| | |
|
|
|
Spencer Allman
United Kingdom
Local time: 06:00
Finnish to English
TOPIC STARTER | Been a good talk | Aug 2, 2013 |
Keep resisting
s
| | | | IrimiConsulting
Sweden
Local time: 07:00
Member (2010)
English to Swedish
+ ...
| Apply a minimum charge even if it's low | Aug 3, 2013 |
My advice is to charge a minimum fee, even if it's low (even 10 EUR). Very few PMs and agencies think twice about it. If they object or ask why, I explain that there are administrative time associated with every project (mainly registering the project, downloading/uploading files, versioning and invoicing time) inherent in each and every job, however small.
I currently work only with agencies, which means that the files are almost always prepared and ready for translation and no pos... See more My advice is to charge a minimum fee, even if it's low (even 10 EUR). Very few PMs and agencies think twice about it. If they object or ask why, I explain that there are administrative time associated with every project (mainly registering the project, downloading/uploading files, versioning and invoicing time) inherent in each and every job, however small.
I currently work only with agencies, which means that the files are almost always prepared and ready for translation and no postprocessing is required. My minimum fees for these jobs are between 20 and 30 EUR depending on which tool I use. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I apply a minimum charge per month | Aug 3, 2013 |
My invoices to one of my frequent clients span from $4 to five digits. Their average with me is one job per week for the past 6 years and counting, and they require a (paperless, on PDF) invoice for each and every job. Though one of their PMs once suggested that I should adopt a minimum charge per job because they do, I didn't.
Now and then a new client pops out from the blue with a minuscule job. I tell them my minimum charge is USD 50 per month. I invoice them for that amount, and... See more My invoices to one of my frequent clients span from $4 to five digits. Their average with me is one job per week for the past 6 years and counting, and they require a (paperless, on PDF) invoice for each and every job. Though one of their PMs once suggested that I should adopt a minimum charge per job because they do, I didn't.
Now and then a new client pops out from the blue with a minuscule job. I tell them my minimum charge is USD 50 per month. I invoice them for that amount, and they are entitled to use the balance as (partial?) prepayment for any job they assign me within the next 30 days after that invoice. Only one so far has used any of the leftover.
I think it's fair. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Elina Sellgren
Finland
Local time: 08:00
Member (2013)
English to Finnish
+ ...
| From the agency's perspective... | Aug 4, 2013 |
it can be difficult to justify to clients that you charge a minimum of 2 x (to cover the employer costs etc. plus a small margin) what the translator charges as the minimum charge if the client only needs two words translated or proofread. Especially with long-term clients that regularly offer big jobs for the agency. So even if the agency doesn't accept a minimum charge from the translator but charges it from their client, it doesn't mean that they're 'evil' - they might still get a very small... See more it can be difficult to justify to clients that you charge a minimum of 2 x (to cover the employer costs etc. plus a small margin) what the translator charges as the minimum charge if the client only needs two words translated or proofread. Especially with long-term clients that regularly offer big jobs for the agency. So even if the agency doesn't accept a minimum charge from the translator but charges it from their client, it doesn't mean that they're 'evil' - they might still get a very small margin.
When I worked as a project coordinator for an agency, I was advised that we shouldn't explain everything to the client, regarding why the price is what it is, as it will look bad. But on the other hand, it's often obvious that clients simply don't know why the prices are what they are, if they have never had to set prices for anything in their own jobs, if they're just private clients or researchers etc. So you just get the response "that's quite expensive, I want a reduction or I'll go elsewhere!" If you give a reduction once, there's no justification for raising the price later, so if the client becomes a regular, they will be a regular client you get nothing out of. We had some clients who always sent small jobs, because they genuinely only had small texts, and the margin was regularly like 10 % or even below 0 %. Then the approach was that what the hell, our bigger projects will absorb the damage..
Has anyone come up with a solution to this dilemma? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 06:00
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| What do parents say to children? | Aug 4, 2013 |
ElinaSel wrote:
Has anyone come up with a solution to this dilemma?
Parents say "I'm sorry, I can't afford it, so you can't have it". They don't ask the shopkeeper for a half-price lolly; they just leave with a sniffling kid. But that kid is learning basic economics: everything has its price.
Frankly, I bleed for both agencies and end clients who can't come to terms with that.
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 07:00
French to English
ElinaSel wrote:
it can be difficult to justify to clients that you charge a minimum of 2 x (to cover the employer costs etc. plus a small margin) what the translator charges as the minimum charge if the client only needs two words translated or proofread. Especially with long-term clients that regularly offer big jobs for the agency. So even if the agency doesn't accept a minimum charge from the translator but charges it from their client, it doesn't mean that they're 'evil' - they might still get a very small margin.
As I said before, you have to factor in context.
The trouble when there are only two words is that very often you need to be given the context. Just recently I translated a cookery book and a couple of days later I was asked to translate just two additional words which translated as "potato peeler". I had in fact used this very term in a soup recipe, so I assumed it was in this context.
Then the client sent back the book for me to do a final check post-formatting. Turns out the "potato peeler" was the caption for a photo show a lemon being peeled, for another recipe entirely in which the name of the implement was not given. So I had to remove the word "potato". I shudder thinking how silly the agency would have looked if I hadn't insisted on doing that final proofread (they had deemed it unnecessary). So those two words actually ended up taking a considerable amount of time, far more than if I had been given them at the same time as the rest of the text, right next to the recipe where a lemon was peeled.
| | | | | I think I have a solution... doing exactly the opposite | Aug 4, 2013 |
ElinaSel wrote:
When I worked as a project coordinator for an agency, I was advised that we shouldn't explain everything to the client, regarding why the price is what it is, as it will look bad. But on the other hand, it's often obvious that clients simply don't know why the prices are what they are, if they have never had to set prices for anything in their own jobs, if they're just private clients or researchers etc. So you just get the response "that's quite expensive, I want a reduction or I'll go elsewhere!" If you give a reduction once, there's no justification for raising the price later, so if the client becomes a regular, they will be a regular client you get nothing out of. We had some clients who always sent small jobs, because they genuinely only had small texts, and the margin was regularly like 10 % or even below 0 %. Then the approach was that what the hell, our bigger projects will absorb the damage..
Has anyone come up with a solution to this dilemma?
I play it wide open with my clients: I have my prices for everything, and I tell them that if they want to take up any part of my work on their own, I'll obviously won't charge them for it. Of course, if I'll be resuming the project at a later stage, after they've done something on it, they must deliver it to my standards.
This is not visible on a plain text translation job, however it becomes evident on DTP and video projects.
If they want me to translate and do the DTP, it's one price. If they want me to translate only, they'll do the DTP, and want me to proofread afterwards, I'll deduct the DTP and add the proofreading costs.
Video clients are quite varied, since I cover all the steps except the dubbing itself (which I can outsource or let them outsource on their own). Some corporate end-clients will send me a video, and want it translated, dubbed or subtitled, edited with PPT slides, and authored into a DVD. Other clients are video producers; they just want the translation, their internal staff will take care of the rest. Between one extreme and the other, there are countless possibilities, and I am open to any of them.
For instance, depending on a video producer's demand, my subtitles time-spotting may be cheaper (no overtime required from their staff), faster or otherwise more convenient, so they'll ask me to do it as well.
Bottom line is that I charge for everything I do, however I don't do anything that is unnecessary, or that the customer can get done more economically with their own resources. By itemizing my costs, they can decide on this.
Regarding lower prices, I had an interesting exchange with a client a couple of months ago. I gave my estimate, and a few days later the client called to tell me that she had found someone 25% cheaper. I thanked her for being so considerate, letting me delete all the files she had sent me; remarked that very few clients bother. She said, "No! I want YOU to do it! ... but at a 25% lower price." I explained that if I gave a 25% discount just because she had found someone cheaper, my initial estimate - according to my book - would have been blatantly dishonest, an attempted rip-off. I said that my price was what I considered a fair market value for what I'd be delivering, which I knew, and hoped that the cheaper vendor would know the value what they'd be delivering too.
Epilogue: I was assigned the job at the full price I had estimated. What I'll never know is whether there actually was a 25% cheaper translator or not!
| | | | Shai Navé
Israel
Local time: 08:00
English to Hebrew
+ ...
| Minimum charge (in one form or another) has a reason | Aug 4, 2013 |
ElinaSel wrote:
We had some clients who always sent small jobs, because they genuinely only had small texts, and the margin was regularly like 10 % or even below 0 %. Then the approach was that what the hell, our bigger projects will absorb the damage..
Which is quite a misleading and unhealthy stand from a business sustainability perspective. I'm not implying that everything in our work and service should be judged only through the prism of money, but losing money is never the right direction or choice.
Those clients who threat to go elsewhere if they will not get a discount should be let go and good riddance. Without even raising the issue of translation not being an interchangeable commodity, they should be let go and ruin the businesses of those (foolish enough) accepting to subsidize their clients while not covering their own costs and time.
Sometimes these clients are a 'lost cause' and they will keep jumping from one bottom feeder to another, but at other times they will learn it the hard way. Sometimes one just have to let all those pretend language service providers and resellers to educate one's future clients. But offering a good and professional service while losing money is the worst possible solution from the service provider's side. Not only that it puts one commercial sustainability at risk, it also sends the wrong messages about the service and profession (miseducation of clients) and make it that much more difficult for all the other professionals out there.
It is like going to a doctor, lawyer, etc. They all charge a "minimum" fee even if it just a basic and "simple" procedure. Why? Because they need to cover their time and resources allocated.
@Jeff
I don't mean to criticize, and you made a valid point. However, I see two related issues with it. First, when one is doing something as a beginner one should understand that one is doing so for the sake of gaining experience and remain in full control over it. Taking constant flow of small (usually urgent) projects that don't cover one's time and efforts could be potentially harmful if getting out of hand. Secondly, abusive practices and standards almost never stems from the top. It is harder to change things when working with 'established' experienced professionals. The disruptions are usually introduced at the lower segments, which are usually easier to manipulate, and gradually grow and with them over time as the new de facto standard and way to do things.
[Edited at 2013-08-04 18:23 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Gina W
United States
Local time: 01:00
Member (2003)
French to English
| I have never heard of this, either | Aug 4, 2013 |
Spencer Allman wrote:
Of course, they can say what they like, but they then proclaim that this is a growing trend in the industry. First I heard about it.
Spencer
Same here. In fact, years ago I worked as an administrator at a couple different language centers, and no this was never the practice then, so I don't see why it should be all of a sudden now.
| | | |
Theo Bernards wrote: Yep, always check the terms and conditions of agencies (I used to have a freemail address that didn't reveal my identity me for such purposes if the T&C weren't on the websites but they seem to catch on and not every agency accepts requests for quotes and service terms & conditions from a freemail address), so that you can throw the no minimum charge issue straight back at them by quoting from their own terms and conditions .
And, of course, refuse to work with people who sink so low, which is one of the reasons why I have avoided so many problems.
ElinaSel wrote:
it can be difficult to justify to clients that you charge a minimum of 2 x (to cover the employer costs etc. plus a small margin) what the translator charges as the minimum charge if the client only needs two words translated or proofread. Especially with long-term clients that regularly offer big jobs for the agency. So even if the agency doesn't accept a minimum charge from the translator but charges it from their client, it doesn't mean that they're 'evil' - they might still get a very small margin.
When I worked as a project coordinator for an agency, I was advised that we shouldn't explain everything to the client, regarding why the price is what it is, as it will look bad. But on the other hand, it's often obvious that clients simply don't know why the prices are what they are, if they have never had to set prices for anything in their own jobs, if they're just private clients or researchers etc. So you just get the response "that's quite expensive, I want a reduction or I'll go elsewhere!" If you give a reduction once, there's no justification for raising the price later, so if the client becomes a regular, they will be a regular client you get nothing out of. We had some clients who always sent small jobs, because they genuinely only had small texts, and the margin was regularly like 10 % or even below 0 %. Then the approach was that what the hell, our bigger projects will absorb the damage..
Has anyone come up with a solution to this dilemma?
Yes, I have. Explain the rates to the clients. It has been proven in your example that not explaining the rates leads to worse results than it aims to prevent, by simply making the clients ask for discounts from a high amount they don't understand (no matter that it might actually be a good price to pay for what they get).
From a negotiation POV, justification is a powerful tool. It enhances trust, and it puts the ball in the other guys' court if they wish to continue arguing. If a justification is difficult to find, it may be a hint that the rate might actually be unjustifiable, in which case the pricing scheme which has led to it should be readdressed.
What agencies need to understand (apologies for a little stern tone) is that they shouldn't play a poor game with the clients and then expect the translators to shoulder the costs. Agencies need to become more resilient and do a better job negotiating, which includes charging more realistic prices and being prepared to justify them and even allow a prospective client to walk out, giving up on using discounts as both an incentive to gain and keep clients and a universal solution to problems. Traders (middlemen), who sell volumes of goods, can afford discounts more easily than craftsmen (or providers of professional services), who work with their hands and essentially sell their time.
So, it comes down to setting up justifiable fees, knowing the justifications and citing them confidently. It's easier to be confident when one believes in the justification, which is easier when the rate really is fair. Minimum rates are fair when they reflect certain steps that always need to be taken in respect of every translation, no matter how small – whether by the agency's admin staff or the translator. When the problem comes down to the bother of having to drop everything and translate 100 words ASAP, well, that's a super rush fee kind of situation rather, perhaps.
Regarding the risk of losing the client, well, the risk is sometimes worth taking, and sometimes even letting the client go is the better solution. It may look like you're losing whatever markup that client is bringing in, but:
– you're actually tying up your resources in a low-yield operation while you could be investing them in a higher-yield venture instead,
– especially in high-volume-based-discount scenarios, several smaller clients without volume-based discounts could possibly add up to a higher value for you, even in spite of some additional trouble arising from the fact that those are e.g. 4-5 clients instead of one (which isn't always that much trouble).
Thus, you may be losing potential profits in being overeager to gain or keep that client. Consider especially the bother created by that client (including the detrimental effect on morale, and the production of fatigue in your human resources), and the rate at which clients come to your door.
Another observation regarding the threat of going elsewhere is that it has a chance of being an empty one, a just-in-case-it-actually-works kind of attempt. And if the client actually does walk, he can be chased e.g. by a different PM from the agency if the agency really is so inclined and prefers not to use the same PM. But – while I have no data to base a serious opinion on – I'm under the impression that agencies yield too easily. Then, like I said, amidst sometimes pleading and entreaties, the cost of those concessions is passed on to the translator who gets to perform the job.
[Edited at 2013-08-04 22:15 GMT]
| | | | Elina Sellgren
Finland
Local time: 08:00
Member (2013)
English to Finnish
+ ...
| Educate agencies to educate clients | Aug 5, 2013 |
Łukasz Gos-Furmankiewicz wrote:
From a negotiation POV, justification is a powerful tool. It enhances trust, and it puts the ball in the other guys' court if they wish to continue arguing. If a justification is difficult to find, it may be a hint that the rate might actually be unjustifiable, in which case the pricing scheme which has led to it should be readdressed.
What agencies need to understand (apologies for a little stern tone) is that they shouldn't play a poor game with the clients and then expect the translators to shoulder the costs. Agencies need to become more resilient and do a better job negotiating, which includes charging more realistic prices and being prepared to justify them and even allow a prospective client to walk out, giving up on using discounts as both an incentive to gain and keep clients and a universal solution to problems. Traders (middlemen), who sell volumes of goods, can afford discounts more easily than craftsmen (or providers of professional services), who work with their hands and essentially sell their time.
Another observation regarding the threat of going elsewhere is that it has a chance of being an empty one, a just-in-case-it-actually-works kind of attempt. And if the client actually does walk, he can be chased e.g. by a different PM from the agency if the agency really is so inclined and prefers not to use the same PM. But – while I have no data to base a serious opinion on – I'm under the impression that agencies yield too easily. Then, like I said, amidst sometimes pleading and entreaties, the cost of those concessions is passed on to the translator who gets to perform the job.
[Edited at 2013-08-04 22:15 GMT]
I have been wondering about this for a long time - why this particular agency is unwilling to go on and justify/explain why they charge a minimum fee, whenever a client questions it. I asked about it once, and the response was that it will 'look bad' to the client if you explain and explain about everything. (Imagine telling an old client that you raised your prices by 50 % because you made calculations and noticed that it wasn't profitable .) Of course, if the end client is a private person with a limited budget, they may have to choose the lowest offer even if they want to choose a pricier one. And for private persons, it may be difficult to imagine why ordering from a translator directly and through an agency may lead to different prices. So many clients know so little about the principles of business. Some business basics should perhaps be included in school curricula?
I have gotten the feeling that in Finland people as service buyers often seem to assume that whatever the rate, it's hardly ever justifiable. They say that the price has 'air' if it has a margin! So many people simply do not understand where all the money comes from that pays for their holidays, sick leave, etc... And if you explain to such people that the price covers costs such as time spent on invoicing, they see it as unreasonable - in some people's view, the price should only cover time spent on the 'actual' work. It is incredible how much big business in this country is based on these kinds of ideas and they don't have longevity for that reason. And small businesses, on the other hand, may have to take what they can get if they want to stay in a business where some players don't charge minimum fees.
But then, if every business educated their clients, perhaps these notions would slowly go away..
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Agencies and minimum charges | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
