moikchap

@imagination7413 Your club was the best club, it was the only place I consistently read the threads in full. I'm now in a similar "Why even come here?" position. I appreciate the time you took to clean up Club Canada, thank you.

It would change the complexity of a few orders as I throw in more additional/extras to reduce my overall order count needs and how much I need to track. A few "marquee" tasks would get extra bells and whistles. I go back to a few artists I haven't used in a while due to their price increases and offer the hardest tasks to them at their new price points.

Communication and iteration. There are sellers who show me bits and pieces of their work as they go, and those who don't. Those who do are far more likely to get the delivery correct because I have more chances to point out things they missed before we get to the revisions countdown. Their corrections tend to be bigger and more accurate than those who try to adapt a final product into the right shape, and they only get closer rather than dead on. As a result, the ones keeping me updated and showing me things are more likely to get more repeat business from me.

I feel like this type of situation works against the "Go Upmarket" goal mentioned all the time in the shareholder's letter. I have a skillset that's on par with a Head of QA when it comes to mobile gaming. I sell my services within my personal real-life network for a lot more than I need to live. I can gain and retain upmarket clients at upmarket prices. But, the only reason I don't make a fiverr gig to offer out those skills is due to situations like this. This invisible hand of a Success Score and other various gig rankings doesn't exist in real life. It's off-putting. I keep seeing long-time successful people saying their long-time work was randomly unraveled with no definable source. It makes me not want to "invest" in the seller side of the platform since it seems too unreliable. It strikes me like Fiverr is similarly blunting it's own potential when it lets this happen and messing with its own money. With the comments people are making about the Value For Money ratings, it also strikes me that possibly Fiverr is abandoning the "Go Upmarket" pillar to pivot to a sort of moneyball "bang for the buck" value proposition as their market position. That makes business sense to me, but it would be a bad omen for a lot of long time sellers who raised their prices to what the market can bear.

I think the thing to do is add the word "exceptional" in there somewhere to anchor/associate, and maybe even add the same emoji.

Google Slides, Google Sheets, and Google Docs. What's funny to me is that Google Slides is a better page layout tool than Google Docs. Google Sheets for Admin. Google Docs for rough work. Google Slides for final drafts.

That would be a buyer where things like budget, schedule, and style don't matter to them. Those buyers are probably exceedingly rare. The rest have some kind of constraint they're operating in that reduces the pool of sellers they're selecting from. The ideal thing to do is find a niche no one else says they support and then stuff your gig description full of those keywords. It will be a smaller pie but a bigger slice since you'll be competing against fewer sellers and more likely to be a first page result for that specific search.

The five sellers it showed me had between 42 and 139 reviews, and often had prices above the budget I specified. It's like it was trying to send me to people who were "demonstrably good" rather than "match your criteria". When I manually look for people, it's easy to find exact matches because I'm willing to try out people with zero reviews. At this point, I'm not sure Neo will show new sellers, so it's not a benefit to them. It would be then only pushing traffic upward, to the veteran sellers. So while they wouldn't benefit from using it, they would benefit from its use by others since the traffic may be one-sided in their favour.

It just showed up for me yesterday. I spent 10~15 minutes with it. I suspect it will be very helpful to new buyers and to veteran sellers. I like how you can continuously evolve and calibrate a search with natural language. But, it seemed to have difficulty following budget constraints. I suspect there are some "guard rails" in the system to prevent it from suggesting un-vetted gigs even if they match the request better.

I've interacted with about 200 sellers over three years. Probably about 5% I would flag as potentially legitimate scammers. There's a much larger section who fail to deliver because they simply over-estimate their skill and ability, or under-estimate the task. From what I understand, the seller pool is poorly or loosely regulated. It's very wild west-seeming. One trick I use, which I've seen others mention using, is throwing a small simple task out to a lot of different sellers and then continuing with whoever does the best from among that group. So you "waste" a bit of money checking people out, but you can likely find a worthwhile seller that you recoup some savings with so you can stay within your overall budget.

I'm in Fiverr Select as buyer-only. I can't find it. Where in the UI should I be seeing it? (I'm using Microsoft Edge version 120 on PC)

Probably there are good "Mixed Access Level" solutions that will work. If this was JIRA, I'd know how to set it up. The permissions schemes have a lot of granularity to give different groups stuff piecemeal, like browse but not write. Depending on the desired KPI, maybe the actual "buyer engagement" solution is to not use the forum. If the point is to increase knowledge sharing for the purpose of increasing buyer confidence and activity (ex, reducing waste, which increases profitability, which increases spend)... maybe curating a magazine-style "newsletter" might be a better option. Collect a few opinions, run it by a small committee, edit, publish.

For the purpose of increasing "buyer" engagement; yes. The effect that keeps me from posting more is that sellers have a dog in the fight on any buyer strategy and will be contrary even when it's not valid or appropriate. In my view, a seller/buyer is likely to argue against buyer strategies that negatively impact them, even if the strategy is proven viable by multiple buyers. You see it a lot in the "value vs premium" pricing debates where many sellers come in essentially treating high prices like they're a magic ward against poor service.

The proposed idea does exclude those who do both by auto-rejecting those with gigs. The existing Fiverr Select forums are basically the de facto exclusive club for mixed buyers and buyer-sellers, and it's dominated by seller topics and seller perspectives.

If I had an actual "just a buyer"-only zone to go to, my engagement would go way up. I have a feeling the other just-a-buyers who show up briefly and leave would be more sticky if they had a refuge. Maybe set up a Club which auto-rejects those that have gigs, and if they have a certain amount of completed orders, they go to a manual approval queue.