Two editing jobs last week showed me which one actually pays

I took a $50 'quick edit' gig from a referral and it took me 8 hours because they wanted complete rewrites on every paragraph. Then I did a $40 project through a legit freelance site where the scope was clear from step one and I finished in under 2 hours. The lower paying job actually earned me more per hour by a mile. Has anyone else found that bigger budget offers sometimes hide more work?

3 comments

3 Comments

thomasb4113d ago

Man that $50 gig sounds brutal. I had a similar thing with a "light copy edit" that turned into restructuring the whole damn thing. Client kept saying "just one more pass" - ended up 12 hours for $60. Meanwhile I've done $35 quick turnarounds that were literally just fixing typos and missing commas. It's wild how some people think a small price means they can demand everything. The clear scope sellers always win in the end though.

jackson.max13d ago

@wadejenkins is right, spelling it all out beforehand saves so much headache. I started doing that after a nightmare with a "quick proofread" on a blog post that turned into me rewriting half the paragraphs. Now I always put a cap on revisions in my quote, like "includes up to two rounds of changes" or something similar. It's not about being difficult, it's about keeping the job fair for both sides. Those clear scope sellers really do come out ahead, I've found.

wadejenkins13d ago

@thomasb41 nailed it with "clear scope sellers always win." Always make them spell out exact deliverables in writing before you quote a price, even for small jobs.