Curated Freelance Listings

Hey guys, finished up an MVP: contractden.com

Basically it's a filtered list of job listings (currently freelanceswitch, odesk and elance) to try and choose the higher paying listings, or at least the ones more worth pursuing.

I've set up a demo account (demo@contractden.com, demo) that you can login here with to look around.

At the moment it's pretty simple and I wanted to make sure I actually shipped instead of being stuck with feature creep.

Let me know your thoughts of the idea etc. Thanks

My first impression was "Why would I pay for this?" Unless I am mistaken you are scanning public sites and posting listings that might be good. Freelancers that scan those public sites do it daily anyways so there is no point in paying $12 a month for a hand picked listing.

Actually looking at the listings turns me away from this even more. The first one is someone looking for a fairly advanced voting site for no more than $400 (he estimates 10 hours and isn't willing to pay more than $40 an hour). $40 an hour is very low, I dont see how this one stands out.

The next one is a lot of work, at least a weeks worth, with an upper bound of $1000.

I don't think you've done anything wrong with the site, those are the better listings on those sites. The issue is that you are trying to sift gems out of a crap market; they just don't come often. The Indian coders have dragged the market to hell because clients don't realize how poor quality stuff they are getting for the really low price. In my experience good potential jobs get posted once or twice a week on all the sites combined. I don't really even scan listings anymore because of this and most of my work comes from my ads anyways.

Sorry if this sounds insulting; it is certainly not my intention.

No worries, thanks for taking the time to reply.

I understand the "Why would you pay for this" angle... the main reason for it is to save a lot of time and hassle with the poor results and just get the good ones. Searching for something broad, getting 500 results posted in the last 2 days, checking the first page and only finding one that was remotely interesting... not fun.

The listings themselves will probably be up for debate, but I've tried to begin with setting a bare minimum at least. The voting site, for example, (to me) isn't terribly complicated and more of a basic CRUD site. I'd say his estimate of time is pretty low, and while $40/hr may be low to many full time freelancers, I'm betting there's a large market of people out there who'd be happy with it (at least as a stopgap above the $10/hr jobs). Then again I may be wrong, but that's the beauty of testing it out.

I know that a lot of the jobs on the boards are awful, but I still know there's a few good ones. There's a few aspects I'd like to try and target, but as I said I'm just getting this released to see how it goes for now. I've added an option (unused yet) for sponsored listings that I can critique a bit better (such as only accepting the higher paying ones), but I'll have to wait until I bump up the user count a bit.

I can imagine how scanning public markets can get time consuming, if not annoying (unless they offer filters/alerts of their own).

I am more curious how you came up with the number of a monthly fee - did you approach a group of freelancers (focus group so to speak) and asked them how much they would be willing to pay?

Also, are these listings filtered automatically or manually? Who is doing the filtering?

I'm with VG on this one. I'm not sure I would spend $12 just to save me a 'little' time sifting through potential job opportunities. You've basically created another place for users to scan through job leads, but they'd have to pay to do it. I for one wouldn't do it. Here's why:

1. Most users have already been accustomed to scanning through job listings for projects that suit them. It's really not that time consuming.

2. Your filtering method isn't mentioned so how is a user to know whether you're method is stricter than, say, me. As VG mentioned, $400 for 10 hours of work might be great for someone, but not for me, or VG.

3. To be honest, there are only a handful of job listing sites even worth looking at. I for one don't even use Odesk or eLance for the reasons that I don't have experience 'points' on those sites. It makes it rather difficult for me to acquire work from those websites.

4. If the site is tailored for just programming, you should say that somewhere. I can't tell that from the landing page. As a designer, if I were to sign up, pay $12, and find no jobs for designers, I would be pretty unhappy.

I don't think the idea is bad, in fact, the opposite. I just think it needs to be modified in terms of application. If it's going to cost money, make it worth the fee. If not, than I'd recommend making it a free sign up with income coming from ad revenue. Oh, and a quick question. Why the word 'Curated' in the landing page? It's a word mostly used in the art world so it strikes me as odd.

Thanks for the feedback guys. At the moment I'm trying to whip up a few changes, should be done soon.

Originally Posted by Artashes I can imagine how scanning public markets can get time consuming, if not annoying (unless they offer filters/alerts of their own). I am more curious how you came up with the number of a monthly fee - did you approach a group of freelancers (focus group so to speak) and asked them how much they would be willing to pay? Also, are these listings filtered automatically or manually? Who is doing the filtering?

They're filtered manually, by me for now. I'm going to implement a simple automatic filter though, just for any obvious outliers (job closed, too long a time, lowest pay brackets). Should cut down a lot of work for now.

To be honest the monthly fee is initially a market test in itself, and me trying to estimate an appropriate fee for it. I probably should have done some sort of research beforehand, but no biggie. My main goal was to release the site and get some feedback. Doing so changed my thinking entirely, which made it a lot clearer that the business model might not be right.

Originally Posted by chaka42 I'm with VG on this one. I'm not sure I would spend $12 just to save me a 'little' time sifting through potential job opportunities. You've basically created another place for users to scan through job leads, but they'd have to pay to do it. I for one wouldn't do it. Here's why: 1. Most users have already been accustomed to scanning through job listings for projects that suit them. It's really not that time consuming. 2. Your filtering method isn't mentioned so how is a user to know whether you're method is stricter than, say, me. As VG mentioned, $400 for 10 hours of work might be great for someone, but not for me, or VG. 3. To be honest, there are only a handful of job listing sites even worth looking at. I for one don't even use Odesk or eLance for the reasons that I don't have experience 'points' on those sites. It makes it rather difficult for me to acquire work from those websites. 4. If the site is tailored for just programming, you should say that somewhere. I can't tell that from the landing page. As a designer, if I were to sign up, pay $12, and find no jobs for designers, I would be pretty unhappy. I don't think the idea is bad, in fact, the opposite. I just think it needs to be modified in terms of application. If it's going to cost money, make it worth the fee. If not, than I'd recommend making it a free sign up with income coming from ad revenue. Oh, and a quick question. Why the word 'Curated' in the landing page? It's a word mostly used in the art world so it strikes me as odd.

I agree, after a few days I actually asked myself how much it helps others, and it probably isn't worth that at the moment. No worries, time to iterate

1. I feel that regardless, it IS an issue and should be addressed.

2. Yeah I never got around to publishing some sort of criteria, but I should soon.

3. Agreed, but those two sites were really the biggest and easiest to integrate. If you know of any others I'd be happy to work them in. I also get pretty suck on not having enough pointless rep to land any work from them.

4. I'll try to make that clearer. Didn't occur to me it wasn't obvious, thanks.

It's funny how your view on things change as soon as you release it. I don't think what I was offering was worth it at the time. I'll be dropping the fee and aiming more towards sponsored listings for now (among other features). I used the term curated because it was what came first to me. I assumed the description would work and let you know just what it was about when you visited.

Again, thanks for the feedback.

Originally Posted by penguinburner To be honest the monthly fee is initially a market test in itself, and me trying to estimate an appropriate fee for it. I probably should have done some sort of research beforehand, but no biggie.

I would not recommend the approach for your future. A lot of times online you have only one shot to make an impression. Always test your market before releasing a tool publicly.

Ok, removed the payment requirement, and added a few more minor features.

Not bad. Very nice website. It looks really professional. What script did you use to make this site?
It's a good thing that you removed the payment requirement.
Most freelance websites don't charge anyway to view or bid on their listings.
Congrats on a very clean and good looking site!