guru.com
1
SHORT n' SWEET (or SOUR):
KNOW THAT THE SUBJECT SITE IS A GAMBLE.
It can easily be a money pit. Mob rules prevail. As a freelancer, you never know who you're dealing with; as an employer, you never know who you're dealing with. Both sides are gambling: the freelancer gambles that they will get paid at all, the employer gambles that they will get the quality of work they need/expect/are paying for.
(There are a lot of "big heads" in this world who might think they're wonderful at what they do, while others' perceptions may be entirely different. The subject site is one place where those differences in perception intersect).
FWIW, I tend to discount advertising of any kind, fully expecting individuals to inflate their own value and accomplishments. Heck, even some job counselors encourage that, so, knowing that, how can anyone expect to be believed when trying to "sell themself"? And selling yourself is exactly what the subject site requires for anything resembling success there.
BOTTOM LINE:
You get what you pay for...JUST REMEMBER WHAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR...opportunity, and not a shred more beyond that.
IMO, if you pay to join this site, the ONLY thing you can be sure to happen is that you will no longer have the money you paid for your membership. Once they have that, then all you get is "opportunities" to bid against others who are scrambling and scraping for the same generally-low-paying jobs that you are.
Between membership charges, high - and highly erratic - fees collected for their "service", I'm convinced they take entirely too high a percentage for what they provide. (It's about as risky as playing the lottery, but more expensive and with similar chances of winning).
It can be useful to acquire new clients, but that takes perseverance, low bids - and low expectations - on the part of the freelancer. It seems, perhaps, that the most benefit comes AFTER you've acquired a client AND you're able to somehow cajole that client into giving you work directly and outside the scope of the web site. (I'm strongly suspect the site owner is not foolish enough to think that isn't happening).
Read on if you want a detailed description.
My Experience There:
I've had (free) "Basic" listings on the subject site for a few years. (I think 2 before I landed any jobs from there). I finally landed my first job, and that customer was very satisfied, and I've since had repeat business from them. (In fact, I've met their job requirements so well, they call me directly rather than listing jobs "for bid", and we've developed somewhat of a rapport). Unfortunately, that employer doesn't like dealing outside of the subject site's processes because they like the fact that it handles some tax info for them. So, if I stick with that employer, I'm bound to continue to pay high fees to the subject site for the mere "opportunity" to bid on other jobs, (I'd guess roughly 95% of which are low-paying).
I hope to continue to get work from that employer, and took a chance that getting a paid membership would increase my "opportunities for work." (I earned enough from that employer last year, and paid enough in guru fees, that the fees I paid would have covered the cost of membership, but with little left over).
While I can now bid on more jobs, I am still somewhat limited because the work I do often cannot be done by someone in another location, yet alone in another country. (My job categories include shooting photos and video, along with editing, audio work, and DVD creation, something someone from Asia or Europe cannot do easily, i.e. shoot photos or video "within 25 miles of [the nearest large, U.S. city]". Conversely, I cannot easily shoot something in Australia, New Zealand, or any other country or continent. But none of that is the fault of the subject site; it's a condition of working in the field I chose).
Since I've "upgraded" my membership, I've noticed some odd, and certainly unexpected, things. Here are what I consider the oddities, (and perhaps they should serve as warnings to others considering a similar upgrade):
1) I've invoiced a repeat client for work done since the upgrade, yet the subject site deducted the same "service fee" percentage as they did before the upgrade took effect. In simple terms, paid membership is described as working like this:
a) an employer posts a job and it gets listed for all to be aware of,
but details are restricted in certain cases. Example: Basic
members can see that a job has been posted in their category of "expertise", but are prevented from seeing all the details of the project description, AND prevented from bidding on it unless the employer posted it as "Open" to all, rather than only non-Basic members. If you upgrade from a Basic membership to a paid one, you can now see all the details, but if/when you get paid, the fee charged by the subject site is based on when you first viewed the job listing, i.e. at the considerably higher rate of a Basic membership. In this case, not only has the site collected the price of membership, but they also have earned the highest fee available.
b) depending on how the job is listed by the "employer", bidding
may be restricted this way:
- Open jobs: anyone can bid on, even free "Basic" memberships. These also incur the highest fee the site automatically deducts for your payment.
- non-Open jobs: can only be bid on by those with a
paid membership, and the fee collected by the site is supposed to be a smaller percentage, but that , too, is not always the case. (See item "1) a)" above).
c) as freelancers submit bids/proposals, the employer is notified.
d) the employer can decide to use whoever they want, or no one at
all.
e) if a bid is accepted by an employer, the freelancer and "employer" work out the details of the project between themselves. The site owner apparently couldn't care less if either party doesn't know how to effectively communicate project details and expectations.
f) at times/events/stages agreed-upon by the 2 parties, the
agreed-upon price can be put into an escrow account, (which
the site claims to be the safest method of payment, but charges
the highest fee), or invoiced directly through the site, (which
the site claims offers less protection that the payment is, in
fact, legitimate).
g) upon completion of the project, full payment is expected, and
dollars and the completed project change hands between the
"employer" and the freelancer.
It seems I've been lucky finding this one repeat employer, as I've never had a problem with payment or delivery of a project completed for them. HOWEVER, I've never had a bid accepted by any other employer, either. I submit what I think are very comprehensive and detailed proposals, often listing exactly what I will provide - and what I expect from the employer - for the dollar amount of my bid. I raise many questions in my proposals to be certain I can, in fact, deliver the project up to expectations. (Perhaps my proposals are too detailed, but I continue to ask in an effort to acquaint an employer with all the things I must consider to deliver what they want).
2) If you have a Basic membership, and view the description of a job, then upgrade to a paid membership, THEN make your bid, and your bid is accepted, you will have lost:
a) the cost of upgrading your membership,
b) a higher fee for the site's processing, if and when you finally do get paid.
3) You apparently can "buy your way to (or near) the top".
With only Basic membership, I was awarded a few jobs, with excellent feedback for all of them from the employer. Despite that excellent feedback, I was rated between 100 and 200 in one specific category.
I then upgraded my membership to a paid one, and, without doing ANYTHING else...not even bidding on another job...my rating skyrocketed to within the top 10 in that category. At least one of those numeric ratings certainly was NOT a reflection of how satisfied my clients were with the results of my work. Yet, having given $$$ to the site for a paid membership, I suddenly gained a higher ranking. (Seems like "pay-to-play", as in politics, doesn't it)?
I could go on, but I think you get my points: the subject site has been beneficial for some, and torture for others:
1) the subject site has not worked out methods, processes, or a system that can be fair to all, and
2) they seem to act similarly to most long-running businesses, i.e. they give you as little as possible for what you pay them, and keep as much as possible for themselves. (Enough to make you wonder if they once worked for Bernie Madoff, or on Wall Street).
My description is not meant to claim the site is totally useless, but to help people understand what - and how little - to expect if they choose to sign-on there. Caveat emptor.
Epilogue: you may have noticed that I've avoided naming the site. I realize that may be useless, given the venue and topic I'm posting this to. However, I still retain some level of paid membership - and a satisfactory ranking - there, and didn't want to risk having that tainted or ruined by someone at the subject site.