
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
papaklass says it right - put the cost of algorithms formulated on the ball into the cost of your work.
Or, in the most complicated cases, stipulate the cost of formalising the task. Although, they rarely agree to this.
And then, with experience, any set of characters you estimate at once, and accurately enough. By handwriting, by nickname, by vocabulary.....
papaklass says it right - put the cost of algorithms formulated on the ball into the cost of your work.
Or, in the most complicated cases, stipulate the cost of formalising the task. Though, they rarely agree to it.
And then, with experience, any set of characters you estimate at once, and accurately enough. By handwriting, by nickname, by vocabulary ....
komposter, let me disagree with you ... Although everyone has his own truth. In the sense that how to consider a potential client - conscientious or not?
If you put into the cost of your work the cost of algorithms formulated on the ball, then by definition the client is not considered bona fide, because he pays for the "risk of not ordering". This is what retailers do, for example, in terms of theft. All of us overpay for goods exactly as much as the shop has stolen from us....
Having a mechanism for building a relationship between the customer and the contractor through the MQ site, it is possible to construct it more or less fairly...or try to do so....
Absolutely agree with abolk:
For example, imagine that you are a performer. You discuss and form correct TOR for the customer for about 3-4 days... and now let's, as papaklasssuggests , look at the manager.... will he communicate with a potential buyer for at least more than an hour?
Expert-writers, sometime sit down, calculate how much time it takes to do the work on normal assignments and on balloons, compare with the ratio of income from normal assignments and balloons. It will turn out something like 30/70 and 70/30. Why should normal customers pay for balloonists? The cost of the job should include the cost of discussing the job, but in a reasonable amount (reading and 2-3 circles with questions and answers), normal customers should not pay for balloonists.
... Now let's, as papaklass suggests , look at the salesman.... will he communicate with a potential buyer at least more than an hour?
Expert-writers, sometime sit down, calculate how much time it takes to do the work on normal assignments and on balloons, compare with the ratio of income from normal assignments and balloons. You'll get something like 30/70 and 70/30.
That's the way it is. The less the customer is willing to pay, the more often the task is incomprehensible, the more arrogance and pretentiousness.
It should be understood that market prices already include the price of the programmer's work on the customer's requirements.
If a programmer does not understand this, he is doomed to reduce his competitiveness.
Trying to figure out how to separate and charge the customer the price for the requirements specification and the price for the work on the code itself is utopian.
Trying to figure out how to separate and charge the customer the price for the TOR and the price for the work on the code itself is utopia.
It is possible to set a fixed fee for TOR analysis and approval. And whether the order will be fulfilled or not is another matter. :)
it's about the same as at a watchmaker - inspection and fault detection 500r. The cost of repair - depending on the complexity of the repair and the cost of spare parts.
It should be understood that market prices already include the price of the programmer's work on the customer's requirements.
If a programmer does not understand this, he is doomed to reduce his competitiveness.
Attempts to figure out how to separate and charge the customer the price for the requirements specification and the price for the work on the code itself are utopia
It's not about rationing of a programmer's labour, not about pricing policy, not about what kind of balloonists customers are and what kind of programmers are constantly pampered, but about the fact that the Work service has serious and fundamental flaws in the order placement procedure, namely:
1) the executor should be able to refuse the work
2) the executor should be able to reduce the cost of the work
3) the customer should be able to increase the cost of the work.
It is possible to set a fixed fee for the analysis and approval of the TOR. And whether the order will be fulfilled or not is another matter. :)
it's about the same as a watchmaker - inspection and fault detection 500r. The cost of repair - depending on the complexity of repair and the cost of spare parts.
As for the development of TOR and problems with payment for this - so in the service "Work" everything is normally thought out there. The customer attaches the ToR, presses the 2nd button - and the programmer sees his money. That is, before the programmer starts working on the TOR, he makes sure that the client is solvent. And then the task can be edited and replaced many times.
I dealt with a foreigner who haggled, asked for a discount, and the assumption of his solvency seemed so plausible that I undertook to help him with the TOR, but as soon as it came to the second button, he became deaf-mute.
The conclusion from all this is that a programmer, following the rules, does not start working with the TOR until the customer presses the 2nd button. The only thing that can be used to judge the solvency of the client is the fact that he confirms the 2nd step (TOR). There is nothing else (many Internet users - both Russian-speaking and English-speaking - have achieved perfection in the skill of suggestion and pretence).
As for correcting the cost of work when the TOR is changed - here I honestly don't know how it should be implemented. But it is somehow illogical for a programmer to reduce the cost of work - as well as for a customer to increase it. Who will use such a strange possibility?