I disagree. I had a startup in the recruting space. Companies only have about 3% to 7% of their jobs filled by head-hunter placement fees. This company is s

I disagree. I had a startup in the recruting space. Companies only have about 3% to 7% of their jobs filled by head-hunter placement fees. This company is smart. Most of existing head hunter placement fees were obtained because a head hunter getting a 20% to 33% placement fee was only able to be obtained by a lot of manual sales labor. This company automates that with a low 5% placement fee winning over competition and not requiring the high manual sales labor. Second, this company is trying to find companies that will hire most of their engineers through their system, instead of only 5% of their company hires. Also placement fees at 20% to 33% are only paid on: a) exec positions, or b) when a position takes a very long time to fill. That small category limits the percent of employees able to be hired with a contingency fee (from 3% to 7%). This company being cheaper means that companies can hire all levels of engineers and do it for quality reasons, since the 5% is no longer a blocker.