Forum: MemoQ support
Topic: Make sure agencies leave "Homogeneity" switched OFF when running statistics in memoQ!
Poster: Rossana Triaca
Post title: Financial sense...
So many points, so little time!
First of all, y'all making me feel really old, because good ol' Déjà vu had it first over a decade ago, and even before that you could always get this self-matching analysis in some roundabout way with some tinkering.
I understand its popularity rose (and pearls were clutched) when the market leader (Trados) included it too as a separate option, but again, even then it was possible to get this internal analysis in Trados differently, and big outfits were already using it for pricing (don't hate me @Paul, but this option was as revolutionary as the magical Autosave included in some 2009 service pack or the other by the time it you guys included it :D).
[quote]
It is not standard industry practice as far as I am concerned (...)
[/quote]
I don't think that's quite how it works... :)
Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just relaying what is actually now the standard for agencies that demand a specific CAT as part of their workflow (keyword: demand). Then again, there's a whole other market outside of these, and I obviously support you 100% to send them packing if it doesn't make financial sense to you to accept their terms. However, I think we can agree that an agency that uses this option nowadays is not trying to embezzle you and doesn't deserve public shaming for it.*
I didn't quite understand why you would call them "imaginary" or "virtual" fuzzies - they are pattern searches of the TM you'll populate while doing the project, so there's nothing unsubstantial about them. Also, I agree with @Samuel that in my mind internal fuzzies always made much more sense than fuzzies against an unbeknownst TM which could have been filled by our dear friend, the almighty Alphabet Translates.
Internal fuzzies/homgeneity/intra-project analysis or the what-have-you method of estimating work have their pros and cons. The cons are obvious if you were banking on them as your gain for using/paying for the CAT, the pros are that all the statistical information you can gather (and I really do mean all) allows you to make a much more informed estimate of the work ahead.
Blanket rates? Bad idea... Whenever this comes up, I think that if the discount is the issue, then your rate was too low to begin with. Mind you, I use internal fuzzies for my direct clients too; for technical texts they *know* how much copypasta they had to do for producing the text, and they appreciate the honesty and transparency of my estimates. It's a win-win scenario too, because they become repeat clients and are happy to pay me my rates without question rather than go with a cheaper translator who will ignore the exact makeup of their texts. No doubt it's psychological, but a nice breakdown of where their money goes to goes a long way to loosen the purse strings.
All this being said, I've never worked (nor I expect I will) with an agency that doesn't pay at least a token 10% for repetitions, just for the sake of them *being there* as context and needing to be processed along the rest. Also, such a piecemeal work is bad news for the end-client, and when the things go south (and they will) your name will be on the line... I'd definitely decline their generous offer, explaining why.
---
*Let's save our righteous wrath for non-paying agencies such as LinguTek (not their real name, it's clearly a different name like Gnarnia, lest the Godz be angered), that years later still owe me 500 bucks. I'm sure the check is in the mail!
Topic: Make sure agencies leave "Homogeneity" switched OFF when running statistics in memoQ!
Poster: Rossana Triaca
Post title: Financial sense...
So many points, so little time!
First of all, y'all making me feel really old, because good ol' Déjà vu had it first over a decade ago, and even before that you could always get this self-matching analysis in some roundabout way with some tinkering.
I understand its popularity rose (and pearls were clutched) when the market leader (Trados) included it too as a separate option, but again, even then it was possible to get this internal analysis in Trados differently, and big outfits were already using it for pricing (don't hate me @Paul, but this option was as revolutionary as the magical Autosave included in some 2009 service pack or the other by the time it you guys included it :D).
[quote]
It is not standard industry practice as far as I am concerned (...)
[/quote]
I don't think that's quite how it works... :)
Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just relaying what is actually now the standard for agencies that demand a specific CAT as part of their workflow (keyword: demand). Then again, there's a whole other market outside of these, and I obviously support you 100% to send them packing if it doesn't make financial sense to you to accept their terms. However, I think we can agree that an agency that uses this option nowadays is not trying to embezzle you and doesn't deserve public shaming for it.*
I didn't quite understand why you would call them "imaginary" or "virtual" fuzzies - they are pattern searches of the TM you'll populate while doing the project, so there's nothing unsubstantial about them. Also, I agree with @Samuel that in my mind internal fuzzies always made much more sense than fuzzies against an unbeknownst TM which could have been filled by our dear friend, the almighty Alphabet Translates.
Internal fuzzies/homgeneity/intra-project analysis or the what-have-you method of estimating work have their pros and cons. The cons are obvious if you were banking on them as your gain for using/paying for the CAT, the pros are that all the statistical information you can gather (and I really do mean all) allows you to make a much more informed estimate of the work ahead.
Blanket rates? Bad idea... Whenever this comes up, I think that if the discount is the issue, then your rate was too low to begin with. Mind you, I use internal fuzzies for my direct clients too; for technical texts they *know* how much copypasta they had to do for producing the text, and they appreciate the honesty and transparency of my estimates. It's a win-win scenario too, because they become repeat clients and are happy to pay me my rates without question rather than go with a cheaper translator who will ignore the exact makeup of their texts. No doubt it's psychological, but a nice breakdown of where their money goes to goes a long way to loosen the purse strings.
All this being said, I've never worked (nor I expect I will) with an agency that doesn't pay at least a token 10% for repetitions, just for the sake of them *being there* as context and needing to be processed along the rest. Also, such a piecemeal work is bad news for the end-client, and when the things go south (and they will) your name will be on the line... I'd definitely decline their generous offer, explaining why.
---
*Let's save our righteous wrath for non-paying agencies such as LinguTek (not their real name, it's clearly a different name like Gnarnia, lest the Godz be angered), that years later still owe me 500 bucks. I'm sure the check is in the mail!