Up until now, our Software Localization projects have a fixed rate of 0.07 USD / word. This includes mainly iPhone localization and Android localization.
We’re thinking about allowing translators to give their own translation rates, but first we want to hear your opinion.
Cons – Why Keep Fixed Pricing
The best thing about fixed pricing is that it’s known in advance. You can get a quote and know how much translation is going to cost. No questions asked and no room for doubt.
When you need to translate a 1000 words application into 5 languages, you can tell that it’s going to cost exactly $350.
Pros – Reasons to Move to Flexible Pricing
Translators in ICanLocalize come from different places, where cost of living is different.
While you can live pretty well from $2000 / month in Mexico, you need far more if you’re living in Norway. So, excellent Mexican translators can work for a lower rate than their Norwegian colleagues.
In fact, many times, Spanish translators tell us that they are prepared to do these projects for a lower rate. They also believe that ICanLocalize will be more competitive and get more Spanish translation jobs if we allow them to bid.
On the other hand, a Norwegian translator has to work very hard in order to earn a decent living while translating at 0.07 USD / word.
We believe that by allowing translators to bid for software localization projects, we’ll do three things:
- Improve the quality of translations
- Have more translators
- Decrease the overall cost of translation
What do You Think?
Shall we keep things as they are or give this a chance?
I think fixed pricing should be kept, otherwise the cutthroat competition will drive prices to peanuts level or this is what I am experiencing on the Polish market. If you feel Scandinavian translators should earn more, they could have a higher fixed price. I keep using ICanLocalize because of the fixed price. It allows working in good conditions.
We have used your services before and we are intending to use your service more extensively soon. I should say it is a very good system.
I feel the current arrangement does work very well for us. We know the cost and we can budget for the project. We also know that it is most likely that the job gets done very fast (based on earlier work) whereas I feel the new system will have two problems:
1- not knowing the cost for project.
2- waiting for right translator and right price could delay a project.
Here is what I am looking for as a customer:
High quality fast translation with a minimum of hassle for an affordable price.
I believe that having a bidding system would reduce the simplicity and predictability.
More importantly, it signals that the burden of choosing a capable translator is on me, the customer.
I would much prefer a system in which iCanLocalize reviews the quality of translators and ensures a high quality standard of translations.
I don’t quite see why a bidding system would lead to higher quality translations?
If there is a bidding system I think there would also have to be a feedback mechanism, allowing customer to rate translators and provide feedback on the translation job. Similar to reviews on eBay. (Or maybe you already have such a system in place? I have only used iCanLocalize for short text translations so far).
hello Hendrik,
yes, there is a feedback system on ICanLocalize.
you find the customer feedbacks if you follow the link to the translators’ profiles.
you can read and leave feedbacks even if you receive just a short instant translation.
I agree with flexible pricing. It will permit more projects to consider translation within a budget.
The Internet is all about freedom of choice. If ICanLocalize doesn’t provide this flexibility, then another platform may come in that does. Standards need to be maintained so perhaps a minimum/maximum range.
I really think that the fixed pricing should be kept. If it is decided to go with bidding, there should be some kind of ceiling placed to keep things from getting out of control.
I agree. I’ve seen the disaster the bidding system can foster. Halfway through a huge localization project the outsourced localizing team, chosen on the basis of the lowest bid (hired on the assumption that the existing TM and terminology pool were large enough to ensure consistency and quality even without appropriate competence), ended up asking the in-country reviewer, hired to do QC on their work by another company, in private communication, to help them out by translating the stuff they should have translated but didn’t have a clue about.
How about a fixed minimal rate and unlimited higher rate?
Bidding websites always bring in a lot of green hands who obtain jobs with lowest rate but mostly deliver bad translation quality. At last, clients will think this is not a good place to find a good translator.
ICANLOCALIZE is unique in a number of ways:
* payment is guaranteed
* payment is instantaneous
* price is fixed
* Translation infrastructure is in place
The above contribute to cutting out a lot of the hassle and enable focusing on the translation work.
While the price is rather low for Hebrew work, it is worthwhile due to the above.
As Alvin said, enabling even lower prices will ultimately harm translation quality and harm business.
If anything make the fixed price different per language.
I agree that there should be a minimum rate on ICanLocalize.
As a matter of fact, I believe every professional translator has a minimum price set in his or her heart. I know I do. Once a bid is below that minimum, I’ll just go bake a bread if I have nothing better to do.
Maybe I’m being too idealistic here. Another thing we might want to try it to provide some education for our clients so they know how to choose a matching translator, instead of the translator who’s done the most work here, since most of them are not professional agencies. In the meantime, it’s always helpful if some kind of feedback can be provided to those who failed to get much work so they might get a better chance next time.
I agree with Tomasz at this point. Moving to bidding structure will not solve the low rates problem, which in fact reduces the availability of highly skilled e.g. western and northern European languages translators. Bidding will, at the opposite, give an edge to this problem. Adjusting (raising) the fixed rates for language pairs with ‘expensive’ target languages would be a better solution.
Hi Amir,
I agree with what people have said here: there should at least be a fixed minimum price. I was happy with the fixed price of 0.07 USD/word, for me it is a good price, and I don’t have to get involved in a bidding war, which I hate. If people are free to bid, they will start undercutting each other, and prices will drop instead of rise. So I think the suggestion of having a fixed minimum is an excellent one.
For the rest, thank you for all the recent changes and improvements! Working with Icanlocalize is getting better and better!
Iris
Hi Amir, fellow translators, customers,
I agree with many of the comments here, and think that the cons outweigh the pros. The fixed pricing is what makes icanlocalize unique, and provides user/translator security. Since all the translators here are very thoroughly screened before being allowed to join, customers are already assured of receiving a quality translation. I think this is one of the key added values of icl.
I think ‘a free market’ within icl would lead to the worst case scenario; messy bidding wars, stress, time wasted, etc. and it would be just like all the other freelancer websites.
I do have one idea that I haven’t seen mentioned yet, (sorry if it’s there and I missed it). One of my customers was *so* happy with the speed and the quality of my translation work that she offered to pay me %30 more than the USD $0.07/word rate. Wow! Perhaps you could keep the base rate the same (0.07/wrd), but allow the customer the option of paying a bonus for work done particularly well. By keeping it simple, and user friendly (one click on a ‘tip’ button) the customer could ‘reward’ work well done if the want, while the translator is always assured of the base rate. If the translator works hard on a translation, provides top quality work, but doesn’t get any tip… well, maybe the next time that customer will have to pick another translator?
I’d love to know what everyone things of this option!!!
Warm regards from Holland,
Carolyn
That’s an excellent suggestion. I think that we need to add an ‘instant bonus’ feature to the system.
Adding to our todo list right now.
Thanks Amir!
Yes, that would be a great idea!
This is obviously a controversial topic. Now I’m a translator, but for language pairs I don’t cover, I’m also a potential translation buyer, so I’d like to make a few suggestions.
As others have pointed out, a simple bidding mechanism will inevitably lead to cutthroat competition. There are more factors than price and location, and I think it should be _possible_ (but probably optional) to take them into consideration.
Here is what I would consider a (near) perfect solution. Every translator should have a profile with the following fields:
– Language pairs
– Fields of expertise
– Years of experience
– Location
– Minimum Rate
– Minimum amount or service charge for very small projects.
All of these – except for the rate – should probably be optional.
Translation buyers should be able to access either…
a) a “Quick Translation Service” (this would be the default) with the base price
or
b) an “Advanced Search” page where they can search and sort by the above criteria to find the best translator for their project.
The client should be able to decide what’s important to him. I think this would give everyone the best of both worlds. A simple bidding/auction mechanism would hurt both sides.
Whatever you do, may I suggest you look at how other “Service Marketplaces” are structured. E.g., Elance is very professional – you can see how much work a service provider has done, which tests he has passed etc.
I will line up with with David here about possible “Quick Translation Service” and an “Advanced Search” features, though names may be different. Indeed, if you have two conflicting requirements to mate, i.e. one of the highest quality and the other of the lowest price, it is prudent to separate those instead of trying to (mis-)match them. Quality translation at standard fixed rates is assured by the original screening and acceptance procedure for translators listed here at IcL. On the other hand, having some kind of a bidding process as “Advanced” option will give customers and translators alike certain degree of flexibility outside of predetermined framework to account for possible variables.
IMHO it will also help to give translators a preview of proposed projects to have an idea of their complexity and nature before they bid. As often as not, customers’ comments of “No special skill required” type don’t help translators to make correct assessment of a job and bid accordingly.
From Russia with Love,
Gregory, Russian translator
From our experience, there isn’t such thing as ‘quick translation’. No one wants to get bad translation, regardless of how fast it is.
When clients push for very fast work, we often have problems with lesser quality. There are services that build their business on instant translation. We don’t want to be there.
Dear Amir,
My idea is to keep the fixed pricing the way it is, because it works, yet provide some kind of “superstructure” on top of existing system to give it more flexibility in “special” cases like higher living standards in some countries and individual rates for certain language pairs, rating of overall job complexity, etc.
Hi Amir,
I agree with the people that said they want to keep the fixed pricing in place.
Apart from the reasons already mentioned I think there is another unique aspect about translations: you need a translation, because you do not master the language.
Therefore if you end up with a bad translation, you wouldn’t even know it for the simple fact that you don’t speak that particular language.
Many websites that have bidding systems in place loose on the quality and definitely on the speed and that is not desirable for translation projects.
I think there are not only the translators that live in “poor” countries, but also the companies. The fixed pricing could be 0,07$ or 0,07-0,09$ (for big or small translations, or for technical or IT translations). That’s only an idea, I know that it’s not easy to find a solution.
Hello,
I also agree with setting a fixed minimum price. Bidding is good method but if there is no minimum price, then the price would just go down.
Here is another idea from me; Why don’t we set fixed prices along with countries’ decent prices? For example, one client wants to trasnlate one document into 4 languages. We usually get it with USD0.07, no matter what where we live in. In this case, for the UK translator USD***, Japanese trasnaltor USD***, Spanish trasnlator USD*** and Norwagain translator USD***.
For Japanese, there is a data on decent prices for each area in JTF website. (JTF: Japan Trasnlation Federation) So, there should be in other countries.
The more we could receive projects with decent prices, the more time we may have to focus on one project. I think this would result in high quality translations.
Ayako
Hi Amir, fellow translators, customers,
I agree with many of the comments here, and think that the cons outweigh the pros. The fixed pricing is what makes icanlocalize unique, and provides user/translator security. Since all the translators here are very thoroughly screened before being allowed to join, customers are already assured of receiving a quality translation. I think this is one of the key added values of icl.
I think ‘a free market’ within icl would lead to the worst case scenario; messy bidding wars, stress, time wasted, etc. and it would be just like all the other freelancer websites.
I do have one idea that I haven’t seen mentioned yet, (sorry if it’s there and I missed it). One of my customers was *so* happy with the speed and the quality of my translation work that she offered to pay me %30 more than the USD $0.07/word rate. Wow! Perhaps you could keep the base rate the same (0.07/wrd), but allow the customer the option of paying a bonus for work done particularly well. By keeping it simple, and user friendly (one click on a ‘tip’ button) the customer could ‘reward’ work well done if the want, while the translator is always assured of the base rate. If the translator works hard on a translation, provides top quality work, but doesn’t get any tip… well, maybe the next time that customer will have to pick another translator?
I’d love to know what everyone things of this option!!!
Warm regards from Holland,
Carolyn
I think fixed pricing should be kept. For the projects translators can currently bid on, translators often offer very low prices – too low in my opinion. I fear quality will suffer from too low prices.
While i’ve been happy to tranlate into Welsh for $0.07 per word, my minimum rate in the u.k. is £0.05 per word, which I think amounts to $0.10 per word.I certainly would’t be interested in becoming involved in a bidding process which would drop prices even lower than $0.07 per word.
Best Wishes from Wales,
Martyn.
Hi, I just recently registered at ICL, and one of the reasons I chose ICL is because of the organised structure and the lack of bidding prosedures.
Bidding will only lead to lower prices. Maybe that’s what Amir wants to get more customers, but I think you will loose quality down that path.
The rate is far (!) to low for me as a scandinavian translator, it’s almost half the price of a decent rate here. But I’m willing to test it because it seems like a quick way to work. The translator assistant, the project overwiev, the fast feedback from people behind ICL. To me it seems like a place that guarantees quality, and that factor is actually unique for freelance sites like this.
Keep at least a fixed minimum price, but I would be happy if you would consider a way to earn more for complicated task, or for different countries with different costs of living.
Quality should be the competition factor, not price!
Our interests are the same. When clients are happy, there are more jobs for everyone and we all make a better living.
What we want is to get better translation which clients can trust.
I’m glad that so many translators and clients responded to this post. The general consensus is that we should keep the current model as it is, allow exceptions for ‘expensive’ languages and make review and QA default for all translation jobs.
Hi again,
I agree with what seems to be the general consensus that lower rates = lower quality, and I also agree that keeping things as simple as possible is one of icl’s strengths. Perhaps you could continue to offer fixed rates, but as has already been suggested, a minimum fixed price per language set. This seems to me to be a satisfactory compromise between simplicity, quality assurance, customer satisfaction, and happy translators, and reflects the fact that some languages are simply more expensive than others to translate.
Caro
Hi Amir
I appreciate that you have opened this question for debate. And I’m happy to see that you understand and agree with our arguments.
I hope you will continue to keep at last a minimum fixed price.
Thanks
KJ
I don’t think it’s fair to encourage translators from “poorer” countries to try and undercut those from “richer” countries purely on the basis that their supposed cost of living is lower. This is unfair to the former, as it means they have to accept a low rate to get the job (a kind of “you’re in India/China/Brazil therefore you don’t deserve to be paid as much as us in the USA” mentality), and it’s also unfair on the latter because they have to bid against others offering much lower rates. The amount the translator is paid should depend, rather, on factors like skill and quality of the service provided. Also, bear in mind that the “lower cost of living” usually comes at a price, and many people in these countries cannot afford – in many cases do not even have access to – the ‘luxuries’ that translators in the Western countries take for granted. To give an example, a holiday abroad can be quite prohibitive for somebody earning “poor country” rates. Bear in mind too, that many translators are expats, so while they may have a lower cost of living in their adopted country, they often have to set aside large sums for trips home.
Our current problem is with 0.07 USD / word being too low for several language combinations.
But, as others have mentioned here, opening everything to a bidding war is not the solution. We’ll have to allow for different costs per language pairs.
I agree this is not the ideal way to change things. I’m from Spain and I’m still thinking the fixed rate (which is in fact 0.056$) it is low for professionals like me -maybe not for amateurs.
Due to the variety of the texts, there should be some consideration on their difficulty and technical level, and not only the language pair. And it could be even lower for very easy and simple texts.
Hi Mizar, I agree that 0.056 is very low for prof translators. I keep working for icl for several reasons: it requires no acquisition on my part (the work just shows up), I don’t have to negotiate the price, direct, guaranteed payment, useful tool, feedback/recommendation system… I think this (at least partly) makes up for the low rate. Do others agree?
yes, I agree that working enviroent at ICL is almost perfect to me! In additon your comment, I think the support system is good too. They quickly reply whenever I face problems. I feel secure always. Although frankly the price is nearly half of here, it does make up for.
Hello all,
I think we should be educating customers (explain why translation costs what it costs), not reducing the rates to attract them. Cutting into our income is a road to nowhere. Low rates put professionals off for that’s what we do for living (as opposed to moonlighters).
As mentioned by others, $0.07 per word is already fairly low. Different rates depending on the language pair do not quite make sense, because everyone’s situation is different. Also, generally, because of inflation and other reasons, everybody tends to increase prices this way or another (unless it’s a promo). I read somewhere that in our industry the prices have not been universally or consistently increased for at least several years, which means we’ve effectively reduced the rates by the amount equivalent to inflation. Given that, I do not think asking us to cut down the rates even more is fair, quite frankly.
In short, my vote is for the lowest price cap, QA and a distinct strategy of attracting more customers by high quality work rather than dumping prices.
Thanks!
Consider this post on Alex Eames’s translatortips.com (from his latest article ‘Resisting Translation Rates Erosion’):
‘Editorial
*********
Giving away our translation work?
——————————–
The Times newspaper has decided that enough is enough and is ending
free access to its content on the web.
According to this BBC news story…
“Times Editor James Harding said it was time to stop “giving away”
journalism in the two newspapers.”
I see parallels here with the translation world, with…
* pressure on translation rates
* abusive translation memory practices
* the “valueless” perception the world has of translation
These are results of globalisation – a process in which translators
usually stay in the background like ghost-writers. Let’s remember
there would be no globalisation without translation.
James Harding went on further to say…
“Our feeling is that it is time to stop giving away our journalism.
That’s because we feel that we are undermining the value of our
journalism, undermining the value of the Times and undermining the
perception that journalism and news has a value.”
Does this overtone of undermining sound familiar? Isn’t that what we
do when we agree to a low rate or disastrous terms for a translation
job?
“Localizing” that quote for “the translators’ market”, I came up with
this…
My feeling is that it is time to stop giving away our translation
work. That’s because we feel that we are undermining the value of our
translation, undermining the value of the profession and undermining
the perception that translation and documentation has a value.
Well, it’s food for thought anyway. Be careful how much you are giving
away in terms of discounts, lowered rates and ever quicker turnaround.
It looks to me as if the Times are moving towards a web-only
publication, as printed circulation dwindles and people spend more
time online. It will take a few years for people to get used to the
idea. This makes me ponder the question “How can we take steps to
ensure that our work is valued?” This fits in very well with the
article I had planned for this edition, which is all about resisting
rates erosion.’
A very relevant post, I think.
USD .07/word is already pretty low and bringing in the flexible pricing will further reduce quality of translations and qualified translators. Also as Sergei mentioned, we are absorbing inflation effects by keeping the same price. Lowering our rate from USD .07/word will put more burdens on the translators (which will eventually happen with bidding process.) If you absolutely need to change something, ICL can introduce “expert” or “quality” translation options which offer translations more than USD .07/word to get attention from clients who are looking for high quality translations? At the same token, you can also offer “speed” or “budget “translation options which may not offer higher quality but speedy translations? Each clients and translators can choose options according to their own needs. This is just a thought.
Yes – the current fixed rate is pretty low (esp. if you live in the UK like I do).
I think there are brilliant suggestions above.
Bonus option sounds good, even better, different quality services with fixed rates – client can choose which they need and budget accordingly.
I have to say, I hate the idea of bidding…!
We got tons of great ideas here and I’m very happy we asked before making any change. It’s pretty clear that a bidding system is not the right thing to do.
I’ll wait for some more feedback and the see what we can do to keep things running right AND allow for exceptions to work.
Hi Myriam,
I think that’s a good idea! Most of us provide not only translation services, but also copywriting, proofreading, and editing…. maybe these should be options with fixed rates too!
So far I’ve read only Sergei’s voice doubting in the sense of rates depending on the (target) language. To be honest, I don’t really understand why. It’s quite common practise, making sense and used for a long time in this market because of fitting best to the facts: im most cases the target language translator is based/located in the target language country. (That’s actually also something what most translation clients prefer… someone who is in daily active and vivid contact with the target language, in addition to the education background.)
A professional translator translates for his/her living – paying target country´s rents, taxes, prices for bread, specialized dictionaries…
For e.g. German as target language: if you take 7 US-Cents as the base price and reduce the 20% fee (to ICL), you realise you’re paid 5,6 US-Cents per source word (as Mizar hinted at above). “Translate” this to Euro-Cents and you’ll soon end up with 45 Euro-Cents per word (if you’re lucky and the currency exchange rate is all sunshine that day).
I also was happy with ICL for some time – for short gap times between other, (financially) more serious orders. For the same reasons: responsiveness from site staff, clear structure, quick and reliable payment… But I simply couldn’t afford still to offer my services regularly through ICL [beyond just a few last exceptional cases]. I simply couldn’t afford really to ‘work’ regularly via ICL – it’s less than 50% than the basic rates I am paid by really low paying translation agencies – and 1/3 of the normal rates I am paid for tranlsations into German.
Neither the landlord will understand my asking for a “more globalized rent” nor will my baker sell me globalized bread.
I still believe it wouldn’t be that bad to start seriously thinking about a price/rates grades depending on the ‘expensiveness’ of the target language.
Concerning different rates for different countries, what will be the objective criteria applied to determine which countries should be allowed the higher rates, and which ones should receive the lower ones? Do we intend to regulate the market, or will we let the market guide us? In my language pair, the average rate is $0.06-0.10. So, what is the suggestion? Reduce the rate, because Russia, Ukraine or any other country where Russian is in wide use are not considered ‘developed’ countries? How about equal opportunity? Is there anyone who’s going to compare the CPIs (consumer price indices) in, say, the UK and Ukraine? Is there anyone who will make adjustments for inflation rate and family situations?..
As I noted before, let us just give time to the ICL sales department to do their work of attracting more clients and let’s just keep our rates competitive but within reasonable range that would allow us, translators, to make a living. We, too, are a part of the market that calls the shots. We have to set challenging goals to reach impressive results.
Thanks!
As Sergei says. And the snip from Eames’ newsletter is very relevant indeed. Good salesmen sell quality, not cheapness. I am surprised at rates mentioned. Although many do work for even less where I live, I don’t have a problem with 0.14 p.w. via an agency.
Sergei. We are talking about translation as a profession not a hobby, so please do not compare to rock-bottom-prices – 0.06 is NOT average for a professional translation if expertise and experience is expected, not even for translation to an Eastern European language. As long as ICL does aim to stick to delivering professional service, as long there might be quite few reasons to fear a lowering of Eastern European languages rates.
As for your question “How about equal opportunity?” – Yes, this, Sergei, is exactly what I am talking about. Please so compare the everage expenses for pure living, add average professional expenses and please do ask me again what about “equal opportunity”. You were – until now – defending the pricing strategy “all the same rates for all target languages” with such a point? What about equal opportunity for surviving and working on for two individuals, if both earn the same amount of dollars, but one of them simply has to pay, let’s say, half the fixed expenses per month in total than the other? “Equal”?
You ask: “Is there anyone who’s going to compare the CPIs (consumer price indices) in, say, the UK and Ukraine?” – yes people do, statistics do exist and yes, freelancers usually do set their pricing depending on the expenses they have, that’s a quite common practise, too.
http://wiki.proz.com/wiki/index.php/Determining_your_rates_and_fees_as_a_translator#How_much_money_the_translator_wants_to_earn
the title should be “how much the translator has to earn” (in order to work on, i.e. to provide exactly the professional service his/her client is searching for) instead of just “how much the translator wants to earn”, but still maybe helpful for this part of the discussion.
Dear APK,
Thank you for your comments. I think essentially we mean the same thing, but are only using different wording.
As a clarification, my point was not about equalising rates across the board. Not at all. I was only saying, let’s see what the clients would be willing to pay, rather than enforce LOWER rates ourselves. If that was not your point and I misunderstood you, I apologise.
You’re welcome to continue this discussion if you feel inclined to do so via email: sergei.translator @gmail.com (pls remove space.)
Thank you,
Sergei
Hi everybody!
I think that bidding is not a good alternative as there will always be translators who will offer too low prices and clients who will prefer the lowest cost. This is a disadvantage for everybody, I guess.
As a translator, I think the fixed price should be kept. Even if currently the price is low, ICanLocalize is the best option on the web nowadays, in my opinion. There are sites which you can join where you’ll be asked to pay a yearly subscription with no guarantees that you’ll get projects at all. There are others which will let you apply for jobs or contact clients for free with no guarantees of any kind, nobody in those websites is responsible for payment. So it’s you and your good luck!
ICanLocalize protects and takes care of translators.
We do not have to search for projects, we just sit down, log in and apply for existing projects in our language pair. If a client selects our application we’re ready to start with the assurance that the client already deposited the money and ICanLocalize holds it in escrow for us. We only have to worry about our translation outcome, being sure that the money will be deposited in our account as soon as the translation is finished. Besides, we get all the necessary tools! Which translation website offers that nowadays? In many places, translators have to wait for 30 days or even more after delivery to get paid. Without mentioning the fact that many times we may come across a not so honest client. Here we work and we get paid…our effort is in good hands!
In all, I think the fixed pricing should be maintained but perhaps it can be raised to 0.09USD or 0.10USD, which would be 0.072 or 0.08 USD for us (considering the 20% commission). Also, this pricing can be fixed according to the language pairs in question. This is just my humble opinion.
I also think the ‘bonus’ button mentioned above would be great (although I don’t know how many clients will use it actually).
Undoubtedly, this is something really difficult to decide on!
Best regards,
Laura
“but perhaps it can be raised to 0.09USD or 0.10USD”
in my opinion, definitely. main web-based translation service competitors managed to raise their rates for expert service long ago. ICLS’s fixed rates right now are still on the level of absolute basic translation services (native but just general knowledge of own language, quite few or no translation experience), not on the level of professional service delivery.
if coming with pricing levels for language ‘expensiveness’, 3 levels would be ok
9
10
11
Hello everybody,
I agree that the fixed prices should be raised, particularly for software localization projects because it usually takes longer to translate them and lots of issues have to be clarified to ensure that the translation is in the right context.
Expert translations should have a higher bidding treshold too, maybe bidding should start at 0.08. While I can manage to make a living with the current rates, many translators with a different work speed or higher cost of living can’t.
The rates for reviewing should be raised, too. At the moment, I’ve spent more than 3 hours reviewing a project and have only earned around 20 USD. But at any rate, it’s not possible to deliver a high-quality review – which involves lots of tasks and often discussions to find the best translations – and earn a decent amount of money at the same time. This applies to reviewing individual strings in software localization projects. Instant translations and other projects can be reviewed faster.
I also noticed that when a different translator is selected during a project and some of the strings have already been translated, the new translator doesn’t earn anything if he/she makes changes to the old strings. I think that whenever someone else than the original translator edits a strings, they should get paid.
Best regards,
Anne
As many of you have said: any project should show USD 0.07 as minimum price. Then translators would be able to offer their services at a rate they consider fair, according to the difficulty level, responsability involved and expertise required (I mean translating important medical instructions for a big manual is not like translating strings for a fun game).
I am in Italy and 4 eurocents per source word would be considered almost unacceptable nowadays for a professional working full-time, plus taking into account the floating exchange rate (PayPal deducts commissions). On that sum, we must pay 20% up to usually 27% tax (according to one’s overall income) and 26,72% for social security.
I hope I made my point.
Best,
Silvia Prendin
Hi everybody,
Like many colleagues have expressed it already, I think that a flexible bidding system develops an unfair competition between countries with a high standard of living and countries with a lower standard of living. A fixed rate/word should be maintained but $0.07 is very low. In luxemburg where I live the minimum rate/word for my language combinations is between €0.1 and €0.14. So $0.07 minus 20% commission minus Pay Pal commission converted in € is just pocket money ! Maybe the commission could be decreased too…
Also different fixed rates/word should be established based on the difficutly of the project. Translating strings for a teenager iPhone app requires less time than translating a user guide for a company software for example.
And depending on how urgent the translation is, some different rates could also be fixed.
Thanks for letting us give our opinions.
Best regards,
Flora