Username: Password:
Welcome! Please Sign In or Register

guru.com

reviewed by workinghard

Guru.com is an online marketplace for freelance talent that allows employers to post projects, and professionals to post their profiles.

workinghard
11/06/2008

guru.com 1

Putting one star here is being generous - but there are no lower options!

Guru.com used to be good. Now it is turning into a complete cash grab.

They've started using several new methods; one is how they calculate your ranking. I had a pretty good ranking due to the number of good projects that I was awarded and landed (based on professional rates). In January, they are going to change the ranking method so that providers that get the most jobs (and by extension, charge slave rates) will be ranked FIRST.

That is a complete ripoff.

Second, they have implemented 'Premium Proposals', which means that you can get your bid seen faster if you - guess what - pay more. And, surprise, surprise - the lower your ranking, the more you pay.

They are turning into a money-sucking machine - and ripping off the very people who keep their business going in the first place!

They are turning into an Elance-type operation, and I would NEVER work with Elance in a million years. Unless you want to give away your services for basically free, stay away.

Join to vote! 4 Helpful / 0 Funny / 3 Agree / 0 Disagree
Showing 3 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. login now.
ep2002 commented 391 days ago.
Sorry to hear of that workinghard. I'm curious, if you were running a site like that, how would you organize it, remembering that it does have to make money & it takes a lot of money to start up & run. I'm not sure if you can be objective b/c you are the IC, but if you could try, I would like to hear your thoughts. Thank you Michelle

Otanikitano commented 359 days ago.
You are absolutely right, workinghard. 100%. I joined up with them in 2002 when they were still "Moonlighter.com" and it was a great site. But every year they have added new ways to squeeze the service provider. They changed the ranking system a few years ago to reflect those with the highest dollar earnings, and that also created an unfair imbalance to anyone new, just like this new system of ranking service providers by jobs won. And reading their terms for the clients recently, they lean strongly towards the client company in arbitration and/or disputes. Guru.com is so completely client-oriented that I don't know why anybody uses their site anymore to get work. And the kicker is that the service is FREE for the client but Guru keeps bumping up the fees for the service provider along with continually kicking them to the curb like yesterday's trash.

undrmployd commented 299 days ago.
I agree that only charging those doing the work does put a larger burden on one side. That certainly doesn't make for a win/win - or even an equitable - business situation, where something thing of value changes hands for something equal value. (Then it almost becomes charity, not "business").

Perhaps splitting the charges between employers and ICs might lead to weeding out the abusive employers, i.e. only employers who were legit and serious, and who get/got quality results from an IC would return to use the site again. It might help keep the bogus employers out.

One idea I haven't entirely thought through is for the site to charge employers an up-front fee, then discount the charge for subsequent postings, or reimburse them something annually if they return to post subsequent jobs and use the services of a member.

However it's handled, I feel strongly that the site charges too high a percentage, particularly once they've been paid for a membership.
Showing 3 Comments
About This Reviewer
By the Numbers