Forum: CAT Tools Technical Help
Topic: Translation Workspace -> are we forced to pay the $14/month to GeoWorkz as LB vendors?
Poster: Christine Andersen
Post title: I go for more cooperative clients
[quote]Dylan Jan Hartmann wrote:
[quote]IanDhu wrote:
Broaden your client base, and move away from this one. It doesn't make sense to have to pay a client in order to work for it. [/quote]
Please kindly respond to the question in the post, or leave it be. Thanks.
"Move away from" LB? Look at the top performing global LSPs and you may reconsider this advice when you realise who LB is.
Thanks again, looking forward to hearing from anyone with experience with Translation Workspace.
[/quote]
I was expected to pay for the privilege of using GeoWorks - after spending time installing it, and more time trying to get it to work, all unpaid. I lost patience with LB before I ever earned a penny from them.
That was some years ago, but my approach to the big clients has always been the same. I look at who they are, and if they are big and inflexible, they are not for me.
I have practically always been offered more work than I could take on by clients who let me choose my CAT tool - so I strongly prefer my own CAT, having fine-tuned it and collected all my databases and TMs on it, quite a part from the simple, subconscious routines. OK, I pay for that, but then the online support is excellent when I need it. (I rarely do!)
My preferred clients are small to medium-sized agencies - ´Big enough to cope, small enough to care´ - as one of them said in its tagline.
They often pay better rates, or else they are more helpful and save me time. I hope the big companies never crowd that type of agency out. I have simply stopped working with several big names.
Two started as small, sensible agencies, and ended up as big bullies, one in the UK and one in Denmark, whom colleagues are boycotting. Others expect me to spend too much (unpaid) time on portals and ticking boxes, or they are inflexible one way or another - often with tight deadlines and work outside my scope.
I regretfully dropped one originally very nice agency that started collaborating with LB - and I could no longer just use my own CAT. They did not pay particularly well when the pound was low, so the extra hassle was the deal-breaker.
I know a lot of people work more or less happily for LB, but I hope they never succeed in crowding out the smaller agencies who really have a lot to offer both clients and translators.
Topic: Translation Workspace -> are we forced to pay the $14/month to GeoWorkz as LB vendors?
Poster: Christine Andersen
Post title: I go for more cooperative clients
[quote]Dylan Jan Hartmann wrote:
[quote]IanDhu wrote:
Broaden your client base, and move away from this one. It doesn't make sense to have to pay a client in order to work for it. [/quote]
Please kindly respond to the question in the post, or leave it be. Thanks.
"Move away from" LB? Look at the top performing global LSPs and you may reconsider this advice when you realise who LB is.
Thanks again, looking forward to hearing from anyone with experience with Translation Workspace.
[/quote]
I was expected to pay for the privilege of using GeoWorks - after spending time installing it, and more time trying to get it to work, all unpaid. I lost patience with LB before I ever earned a penny from them.
That was some years ago, but my approach to the big clients has always been the same. I look at who they are, and if they are big and inflexible, they are not for me.
I have practically always been offered more work than I could take on by clients who let me choose my CAT tool - so I strongly prefer my own CAT, having fine-tuned it and collected all my databases and TMs on it, quite a part from the simple, subconscious routines. OK, I pay for that, but then the online support is excellent when I need it. (I rarely do!)
My preferred clients are small to medium-sized agencies - ´Big enough to cope, small enough to care´ - as one of them said in its tagline.
They often pay better rates, or else they are more helpful and save me time. I hope the big companies never crowd that type of agency out. I have simply stopped working with several big names.
Two started as small, sensible agencies, and ended up as big bullies, one in the UK and one in Denmark, whom colleagues are boycotting. Others expect me to spend too much (unpaid) time on portals and ticking boxes, or they are inflexible one way or another - often with tight deadlines and work outside my scope.
I regretfully dropped one originally very nice agency that started collaborating with LB - and I could no longer just use my own CAT. They did not pay particularly well when the pound was low, so the extra hassle was the deal-breaker.
I know a lot of people work more or less happily for LB, but I hope they never succeed in crowding out the smaller agencies who really have a lot to offer both clients and translators.