They should have offered her 40% more, not less.
Anyone who has worked with clients knows they tend to approach any work you do for them as if you always have to prove why you are worth the money they pay you. Even though they willingly hired you to do the job, they still act as if they believe it’s not worth the money, and they could have done it themselves for a lot less.
Most clients, once you actually provide the work, will come to the understanding that what you do is actually important to their business, while some will back out after a few months with the claim that they want to try to do it alone. Or, in the case below, with the help of none other than AI.
You know it is only a matter of time before they eat their hats and come crawling back to you.
This content freelancer, u/NegotiationStrict473, posted a story about how brands tried to replace them with AI and miserably failed. Like any business that just discovered the wonders of AI, they thought they could do their marketing alone with these tools and were shocked to see their numbers plummeting after posting these AI-generated videos everyone hates.
So, after this experience tanked, the brand had no choice but to come back to the freelancer and offer to take them back. However, after they stupidly cut ties with this freelancer and after they suffered from their experiment, you would think that they would offer to pay the freelancer much more than before. But no, the offer they put on the table was actually 40% less than what they paid the freelancer before they went the AI route.
So they broke the previous agreement, failed with their experiment, learned nothing, and then came back expecting a discount.
Even though the freelancer could use the money, they don’t think it’s right to accept this insulting offer. But what should they do instead?
Author: Kayitsi.com
