3 ms·

I think this is a great idea, but am I the only one who thinks the minimum rate should be more like $70? This would widen the perceived quality gap between this

I think this is a great idea, but am I the only one who thinks the minimum rate should be more like $70? This would widen the perceived quality gap between this and Elance IMO, but I'm guessing you've probably done a lot of research before settling on $35.

jamesbritt 16y ago
I do not expect to get anyone skilled for $35.00. Perhaps that's an ignorant assumption, but I don't think I'm alone in this. Charge more.
- ovidiu 16y ago
  It really is an ignorant assumption. I am skilled and work for less as an employee (before tax) in Romania.
- edanm 16y ago
  If the plan is to include more countries e.g. Israel, 35$ makes sense - average salaries for programmers are different in different countries.
- zephyrfalcon 16y ago
  Hmm. That would imply that either I'm not skilled, or I'm not charging enough. :-/
- jeswin 16y ago
  Our idea was to tie the minimum rate to an acceptable monthly income in the US/West for decent living standards. $35 * 160 hours per month = $5600 a month Of course, there is nothing stopping consultants charging more. The idea was simply to do away with ridiculously low rates.
  - mxavier 16y ago
    This approach isn't perfect, as people have pointed out, but I think its better than the alternative. A lot of freelance coding sites are practically unusable from the employer's side because every yokel can give a low rate and not even read the project description. I think forcing those people to try to prove their worth and getting rid of some riff-raff employers that underpay is a net gain.
  - crpatino 16y ago
    This is a ridiculous claim!!! Wold class talent should not settle down for "acceptable monthly income" and "decent living standards", that's what we reasonably competent talent do. And even the reasonably competent freelancers should be charging twice as much, just to compensate for the lack of benefits, the depreciation of their infrastructure, and the fact that they will not likely be able to book 4 x 40hr-solid weeks month after month. The whole point of your little startup is to cut off the people who leaves in countries with lower cost of living. You should rename it as WeCantCompete.us
- happybuy 16y ago
  Yes, I think that is an ignorant assumption. I've hired extremely responsive, very good freelance developers on elance for less than $35p/h. Although I do agree with the positioning of the site as a 'premium' experience. If anything, for PR purposes, I'd focus a lot on how difficult it is to get accepted into the site as a developer. May be good to push the rate higher and only accept developers who have a personal recommendation from an already accepted developer. For example, make it similar to how http://www.dribbble.com/ http://www.dribbble.com/ handled their initial invitation process. This keeps the perceived quality high and will ensure the site has a key marketing differentiator from other outsourcing sites.

jamesbritt 16y ago

I do not expect to get anyone skilled for $35.00. Perhaps that's an ignorant assumption, but I don't think I'm alone in this. Charge more.

ovidiu 16y ago
It really is an ignorant assumption. I am skilled and work for less as an employee (before tax) in Romania.
edanm 16y ago
If the plan is to include more countries e.g. Israel, 35$ makes sense - average salaries for programmers are different in different countries.
zephyrfalcon 16y ago
Hmm. That would imply that either I'm not skilled, or I'm not charging enough. :-/
jeswin 16y ago
Our idea was to tie the minimum rate to an acceptable monthly income in the US/West for decent living standards. $35 * 160 hours per month = $5600 a month Of course, there is nothing stopping consultants charging more. The idea was simply to do away with ridiculously low rates.
- mxavier 16y ago
  This approach isn't perfect, as people have pointed out, but I think its better than the alternative. A lot of freelance coding sites are practically unusable from the employer's side because every yokel can give a low rate and not even read the project description. I think forcing those people to try to prove their worth and getting rid of some riff-raff employers that underpay is a net gain.
- crpatino 16y ago
  This is a ridiculous claim!!! Wold class talent should not settle down for "acceptable monthly income" and "decent living standards", that's what we reasonably competent talent do. And even the reasonably competent freelancers should be charging twice as much, just to compensate for the lack of benefits, the depreciation of their infrastructure, and the fact that they will not likely be able to book 4 x 40hr-solid weeks month after month. The whole point of your little startup is to cut off the people who leaves in countries with lower cost of living. You should rename it as WeCantCompete.us
happybuy 16y ago
Yes, I think that is an ignorant assumption. I've hired extremely responsive, very good freelance developers on elance for less than $35p/h. Although I do agree with the positioning of the site as a 'premium' experience. If anything, for PR purposes, I'd focus a lot on how difficult it is to get accepted into the site as a developer. May be good to push the rate higher and only accept developers who have a personal recommendation from an already accepted developer. For example, make it similar to how http://www.dribbble.com/ http://www.dribbble.com/ handled their initial invitation process. This keeps the perceived quality high and will ensure the site has a key marketing differentiator from other outsourcing sites.