Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Poll: Do you usually charge per source or per target word? Thread poster: ProZ.com Staff
|
Oliver Lawrence wrote: If you charge by target word, then you effectively have an incentive to pad out the target text, thus impairing the quality of your own product. If you charge by source word, then you effectively have an incentive to write in note form, thus impairing the quality of your own product. I think if customer and supplier are even just vaguely professional it makes no difference how you charge (which admittedly also goes for charging by the word vs by the hour - it makes no difference in practice, it's more a matter of principle) | | | neilmac Spain Local time: 20:42 Spanish to English + ...
Chris S wrote: Never really grasped why we're not paid by the hour. Companies manage to pay bricklayers by the hour rather than by the brick, and to allow for some being quicker than others, so why not translators? I usually prefer to charge translations per word, unless I have a good reason not to, such as unwieldy formats. I charge my revisions (aka "proofing") either hourly, or per source word. A friend worked out a calculation for me and it turns out I'd be better off charging per word for my revsions too. But I don't - I just tell the clients they are getting a good deal and they accept it. And IMHO the speed at which we translate is not always "a good thing"(more haste, etc).
[Edited at 2015-01-22 12:53 GMT] PS: Notions of what is "professional" behaviour also vary. Personally, I'd rather get on with the job than pontificate or lecture others about what it is or isn't.
[Edited at 2015-01-22 12:56 GMT]
[Edited at 2015-01-22 12:56 GMT] | | |
For the simple reason that it is the only quantifiable factor known at the outset. It is a starting point. There may be a minimum fee, then a rounding up/down depending on a whole host of other factors (volume, complexity, client's pain-in-the-neck factor, format). Some folks niggle for anything, but the differences between versions of Word, over time and for a large volume, can make a difference. However, I consider that source word gives a sound basis on which to establish a clear... See more For the simple reason that it is the only quantifiable factor known at the outset. It is a starting point. There may be a minimum fee, then a rounding up/down depending on a whole host of other factors (volume, complexity, client's pain-in-the-neck factor, format). Some folks niggle for anything, but the differences between versions of Word, over time and for a large volume, can make a difference. However, I consider that source word gives a sound basis on which to establish a clear budget for the client and for the translation professional. ▲ Collapse | | | Not aware of that tradition | Jan 22, 2015 |
Muriel Vasconcellos wrote: One more point: It does depend on the language, as others have mentioned. By tradition, the wordier or the two languages is the one that's counted. For example, it would behoove a translator working from German to charge either by the source character or by the target word.
[Edited at 2015-01-22 11:02 GMT] I translate from French and from German into English. French has more words than English, while German has less. I have never heard of that tradition. The one I know, which was advised to me decades ago when I first started, was to adjust the rate to reflect that reality. My per-French rate is lower than my per-German rate but both would come out to about the same if you look at the resulting per-source (English) rate. The reason for basing your fee on source word is that clients want to know exactly how much they will be paying for a translation before you start. The actual charge is for the work being done, and word count X rate gives a rough indicator to start with. I don't quote my per word rate; I quote my fee. But I can tell a client what that fee is based on if asked. | |
|
|
How can you estimate your work per hour? | Jan 22, 2015 |
Tim Drayton wrote: Chris S wrote: Never really grasped why we're not paid by the hour. Companies manage to pay bricklayers by the hour rather than by the brick, and to allow for some being quicker than others, so why not translators? It's no wonder we're not taken seriously or treated like professionals when we charge piecemeal as though all words were equal and no skill was required. I fully agree with you there. I notice if I get builders in to do some work around the house, they charge me for materials used plus the hours they put in. Ask a plumber what his rate is per metre of pipe, and you will get a very funny look. Commoditisation is what is killing our business. OK, but I find it impossible to estimate accurately the amount of time I spend on a particular job. There are always distractions, such as answering these polls, browsing for something on the internet, perhaps prompted by something that I looked up for the job, but then got sidetracked, or a million things that happen around you that take time away from your WORK. I think it is impossible to estimate your work by the hour with any degree of accuracy that would be strictly fair. Besides, one of the advantages of being a freelancer is that you can set your own pace. You know you have a certain deadline to deliver a job, and the pace you set is entirely up to you. Charging by the hour would entail a standard of productivity that would take away your freedom as a freelancer. As for what Tim said about plumbers, etc. at least in Mexico, all independent craftsmen charge per unit of work, (appliance installed, square meters of bricklaying, plastering, painting, etc.) This is not to say that we shoud think of ourselves as craftsmen, as Chris has said.
[Edited at 2015-01-22 17:04 GMT] | | | Rebecca Garber Local time: 14:42 Member (2005) German to English + ...
on the client. I prefer to be paid by target word, since that is economically advantageous. Payment by line (55 characters inclusive) is also quite lovely. However, I really prefer to get paid, so I tend to roll with the agency's/client's preferences. My pricing is pretty targeted, so I find that it all works out in the end. | | | Giles Watson Italy Local time: 20:42 Italian to English In memoriam Maximum estimate | Jan 22, 2015 |
When asked to quote on a job, I like to offer a maximum estimate of the cost based on the source word count (plus the usual other factors, such as urgency, repetitions etc), which I ask the customer to approve or reject by replying to my email. My standard rate is quite ambitious so if the job turns out to be easier than it looked, I might trim a little off my bill. Either way, the customer knows in advance how much the job will cost and any discount comes as a nice surprise. | | | Mario Chavez (X) Local time: 14:42 English to Spanish + ... Many ways to skin a cat | Jan 22, 2015 |
Chris S wrote: Never really grasped why we're not paid by the hour. Companies manage to pay bricklayers by the hour rather than by the brick, and to allow for some being quicker than others, so why not translators? It's no wonder we're not taken seriously or treated like professionals when we charge piecemeal as though all words were equal and no skill was required. For some projects, I request payment by the hour, such as when I have to work on layout for a brochure or a PowerPoint presentation. The longstanding advantage of billing by source wordcount is simply that the customer knows how much the service will cost him in advance. However, the flip side of such approach for us is that we focus too much on the words on paper and tend to ignore everything else, such as negative space, font size, document layout, graphics that may or may not serve the purposes of the document, etc. Others have expressed this better, but we are getting paid for our accumulated expertise, which includes our thinking time to write translations at our best. We are not getting paid per word, character or line or page. As feedback to my colleague Chris: why should we aim to be quicker than others, as your comparison seem to imply? Did I misinterpret it? Regardless of how we choose to charge for our services, we do a disservice to ourselves if our main thrust is to translate faster than the competition.
[Edited at 2015-01-22 23:30 GMT] | |
|
|
Nikki Scott-Despaigne wrote: For the simple reason that it is the only quantifiable factor known at the outset. It is a starting point. There may be a minimum fee, then a rounding up/down depending on a whole host of other factors (volume, complexity, client's pain-in-the-neck factor, format). Some folks niggle for anything, but the differences between versions of Word, over time and for a large volume, can make a difference. However, I consider that source word gives a sound basis on which to establish a clear budget for the client and for the translation professional. Many clients request a quotation. If I am not able to give it to them, they may feel at the end that the cost is too much if this is the first time they request a translation. | | | Julian Holmes Japan Local time: 03:42 Member (2011) Japanese to English Rule that applies in Japan | Jan 23, 2015 |
Nikki Scott-Despaigne wrote: For the simple reason that it is the only quantifiable factor known at the outset. Quite right! Japanese customers/clients are obligated by law to issue a PO if they are capitalized at a certain amount (10,000,001 yen) or higher in accordance with the ”Act against Delay in Payment of Subcontract Proceeds, Etc. to Subcontractors." In J>E translation, the number of translated words can fluctuate a lot +/-10% or more and fall below or exceed estimates depending on the kind of source text owing to the nature of Japanese, which can either be too 'wordy' or insufficiently written or oblique and require padding out in the translated English. So, the only way a company can issue a PO is to set a charge on source characters which is the 'only quantifiable factor known at the outset.' I recommend being aware of the above when dealing with Japanese customers. | | | Taner Göde Türkiye Local time: 21:42 English to Turkish + ... Per 1000 characters without spaces in the target language | Jan 23, 2015 |
Because Turkish is an agglutinative language, one Word in Turkish may expand to as many as 9 words (example: "bilmeyebilirdin" = "You might not have been able to know it"). Therefore, charging per 1000 characters without spaces in the target language is custom usage in Turkey. | | |
Chris S wrote: If you charge by source word, then you effectively have an incentive to write in note form, thus impairing the quality of your own product. . But not really, of course, because the serious point is that words as they first come out of our brains tend to be slightly waffly and imperfectly constructed (who naturally writes in note form, anyway?). To make a text clear, effective and elegant, the editing process usually makes it tighter and pithier. As that famous quote goes, "I'm sorry this letter is so long; I didn't have time to make it shorter". And, in response to Muriel, of course you sometimes need to add a gloss to bring out an implicit meaning for the benefit of the target audience. But in my language combination, at any rate, a well-edited translation is almost always noticeably shorter than the original. Of course this may not be the case for other combinations, e.g. out of German. | |
|
|
Mario Freitas Brazil Local time: 15:42 Member (2014) English to Portuguese + ...
Oliver Lawrence wrote: If you charge by target word, then you effectively have an incentive to pad out the target text, thus impairing the quality of your own product. People may have different points of view, of course, but think of yourself as the client, not the translator. Would you agree to pay per target word? I wouldn't. | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Poll: Do you usually charge per source or per target word? CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |