Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9] >
Is there a way to prevent the decline in translation rates?
Thread poster: Erwin S. Fernandez
Jeff Whittaker
Jeff Whittaker  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 18:22
Member (2002)
Spanish to English
+ ...
Rates have not increased very much at all in twenty years Jun 12, 2015

The cold and bitter truth that no one dares talk about is that if you are just getting by and barely making ends meet now at your current rate, keep in mind that in 10-20 years, you will probably still be earning the same amount of money, but all of your bills and other expenses will have increased or possibly doubled. That's when people will start offering to work for half of what you are charging now.

I was charging .10 a word back in 1993. So, if you think about it, with even a
... See more
The cold and bitter truth that no one dares talk about is that if you are just getting by and barely making ends meet now at your current rate, keep in mind that in 10-20 years, you will probably still be earning the same amount of money, but all of your bills and other expenses will have increased or possibly doubled. That's when people will start offering to work for half of what you are charging now.

I was charging .10 a word back in 1993. So, if you think about it, with even a half-cent raise per year, I should now be charging .22 a word.

Expenses go up, but rates have remained stagnant or decreased. It doesn't take a genius to see that translation is slowly becoming a side-line industry rather than a full-time profession . That's why you are seeing more and more translators with side-line businesses (seminars, ebooks, etc.).



[Edited at 2015-06-12 16:48 GMT]
Collapse


 
Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member for the following reason: Duplicated post
Enrique Cavalitto
Enrique Cavalitto  Identity Verified
Argentina
Local time: 19:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
Isn't productivity an factor to consider? Jun 12, 2015

Jeff Whittaker wrote:

I was charging .10 a word back in 1993. So, if you think about it, with even a half-cent raise per year, I should now be charging .22 a word.


Hi Jeff,

I imagine that technology has improved your productivity so, even with the same rate, throughput and therefore income have been probably growing since 1993.

Regards,
Enrique


 
Maria S. Loose, LL.M.
Maria S. Loose, LL.M.  Identity Verified
Belgium
Local time: 23:22
German to English
+ ...
ISO 17100:2015 Jun 12, 2015

This new standard has recently been released on a global level. In order to be certified under the standard LSPs need to work with translators who have documented evidence that they can meet at least one of the following criteria:

•a recognized graduate qualification in translation from an institution of higher learning;
•a recognized graduate qualification in any other field from an institution of higher learning plus two years’ full-time professional experience in tr
... See more
This new standard has recently been released on a global level. In order to be certified under the standard LSPs need to work with translators who have documented evidence that they can meet at least one of the following criteria:

•a recognized graduate qualification in translation from an institution of higher learning;
•a recognized graduate qualification in any other field from an institution of higher learning plus two years’ full-time professional experience in translating;
•five years’ full-time professional experience in translating;
•a certificate of competence in translation awarded by an appropriate government body.

Why would anyone fulfilling these criteria work for their national minimum wage. In many countries tuition fees for University studies are very high and it would not make any economic sense to study 5 years at University and then work for the national minimum wage. Let's hope that this new standard will contribute to separating the wheat from the chaff as far as translation services are concerned.
Collapse


 
Jean Lachaud
Jean Lachaud  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 18:22
English to French
+ ...
No productivity improvement Jun 12, 2015

Not in my case. I translate technical documents. Any productivity improvement (such as they are in real life) have not been sufficient to compensate for decrease in the quality of the source text (poor syntax, typos, non-consistent terminology, incomprehensible jargon, faulty reasoning, failure by copywriters to proofread after copying/pasting from documents referring to different equipment, blatant technical errors, etc.), the explosion of terminology requiring extensive research, abuse of word... See more
Not in my case. I translate technical documents. Any productivity improvement (such as they are in real life) have not been sufficient to compensate for decrease in the quality of the source text (poor syntax, typos, non-consistent terminology, incomprehensible jargon, faulty reasoning, failure by copywriters to proofread after copying/pasting from documents referring to different equipment, blatant technical errors, etc.), the explosion of terminology requiring extensive research, abuse of word-processing applications to do crash-inducing page-layout, etc.

Even when translating documents from a same company, lack of proofreading and of consistent style renders TMs useless.

In addition to that, malfunctioning, poorly-designed, needlessly-complex and/or buggy translation applications, together with the multiplication of incompatible formats conspire to shoot productivity down.

IOW, like Jeff, I work more (no less) than 20 years ago with the same income.


Enrique Cavalitto wrote:

I imagine that technology has improved your productivity so, even with the same rate, throughput and therefore income have been probably growing since 1993.
Collapse


 
GudrunPancake
GudrunPancake
United Kingdom
English to Finnish
Fasntastic news! Jun 12, 2015

Maria S. Loose, LL.M. wrote:

This new standard has recently been released on a global level. In order to be certified under the standard LSPs need to work with translators who have documented evidence that they can meet at least one of the following criteria:

•a recognized graduate qualification in translation from an institution of higher learning;
•a recognized graduate qualification in any other field from an institution of higher learning plus two years’ full-time professional experience in translating;
•five years’ full-time professional experience in translating;
•a certificate of competence in translation awarded by an appropriate government body.

Why would anyone fulfilling these criteria work for their national minimum wage. In many countries tuition fees for University studies are very high and it would not make any economic sense to study 5 years at University and then work for the national minimum wage. Let's hope that this new standard will contribute to separating the wheat from the chaff as far as translation services are concerned.


This is wonderful to hear and will hopefully make a big difference.

If clients are made aware of this standard and it is appropriately enforced, it should weed out all the "unprofessional" parties in no time.


 
Christine Andersen
Christine Andersen  Identity Verified
Denmark
Local time: 23:22
Member (2003)
Danish to English
+ ...
The profession is not regulated, so large sections are not affected by the ISO standard Jun 12, 2015

Maria S. Loose, LL.M. wrote:

Why would anyone fulfilling these criteria work for their national minimum wage. In many countries tuition fees for University studies are very high and it would not make any economic sense to study 5 years at University and then work for the national minimum wage. Let's hope that this new standard will contribute to separating the wheat from the chaff as far as translation services are concerned.


Indeed.
Let's hope the ISO standard helps, but there are still a lot of translators who are not qualified to that extent, and a lot of agencies and LSPs who are not ISO-certified.

Others think Google Translate does half our work, and simply do not understand how time consuming it really is.

@ Enrique
I find that while technology is very useful, and sometimes reduces the time it takes me to do a translation from the moment the order is placed to delivery, there is still quite a lot of 'down time' when I am not translating.
I update my glossaries and TMs, record terminology and data, client details etc. and prepare for the next round.

I think technology improves quality and consistency, but all in all I don't find it makes me a great deal more productive. I know colleagues find the same. Plus technology is not free - software licenses and updates have to be paid for from the modest increases there may be in productivity.

I get source texts now and then in 'dead' PDFs, which I have to translate without the CAT, and simply type up from scratch in a new file.
They do not take me much longer to translate per 1000 words than they would if I used the CAT.

What takes time is checking the terminology (these texts are usually medical) and proofreading, where again, the technology is useful, but not a substitute for careful human work..
I get similar texts in CAT-readable form, so they are quite a good comparison.

Besides, the technology has been on the market for many years now... So it is not a valid excuse for pressing rates down as other prices go up!


 
Dan Lucas
Dan Lucas  Identity Verified
United Kingdom
Local time: 22:22
Member (2014)
Japanese to English
You might be disappointed Jun 12, 2015

GudrunPancake wrote:
This is wonderful to hear and will hopefully make a big difference.
If clients are made aware of this standard and it is appropriately enforced, it should weed out all the "unprofessional" parties in no time.

ISO 17100 is very similar to EN 15038, an EU-driven standard that has existed for nearly a decade. Many of the larger agencies are EN 15038:2006 certified, agencies like Transperfect.

Transperfect's score over the past 12 months on the Blue Board is 3.9 - and I take even a score in the high 4s on the Blue Board with a pinch of salt until I can verify it using another source. Google "Transperfect low rates" and you'll get about 12,000 hits, most of which seem rather uncomplimentary. And yet they've been certified for seven years.

I mention Transperfect only because of its reputation. I'm sure there are many other large agencies out there - The Big Word, perhaps? - that also have a, er, "mixed" reputation among translators and are also EN 15038 certified.

Regards
Dan


Pepa Devesa
 
Jeff Whittaker
Jeff Whittaker  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 18:22
Member (2002)
Spanish to English
+ ...
ISO certification is meaningless for a service like translation Jun 12, 2015

http://maskedtranslator.blogspot.com/2009/01/iso-9001-certification-reality-check.html

an
... See more
http://maskedtranslator.blogspot.com/2009/01/iso-9001-certification-reality-check.html

and from https://patenttranslator.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/seven-completely-insane-translation-quality-assurance-notions/

"Totally Insane Idea No. 4: The quality of our translations is guaranteed because our translation agency is ISO-certified.

The abbreviation ISO means “International Standards Organization”.

We need to have internationally applicable and enforceable standards for example for exchange of files over the Internet, because otherwise we simply would not be able to exchange files, or for manufacturing of medications, or for standardized performance of robots on an assembly belt.

But only a recent escapee from a lunatic asylum, or a translation agency marketing specialist could claim with a straight face that such a standard can be used as method guaranteeing a high quality of translation.

Translation is a very complicated mental process, and the fact is that there is really not that much that we know about complicated mental processes. To believe that a method that works when applied to manufacturing of auto parts will also work when applied to translation is to me a sign of insanity.

There is only one method that will (sometime, but not always) guarantee a high quality of translation: using the best translator available, an experienced translator, who specializes in a given field and who is not exactly cheap."

[Edited at 2015-06-12 22:09 GMT]
Collapse


Barbara Niessen
 
Enrique Cavalitto
Enrique Cavalitto  Identity Verified
Argentina
Local time: 19:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
Technology is a lot more than CAT tools! Jun 12, 2015

Christine Andersen wrote:
I find that while technology is very useful, and sometimes reduces the time it takes me to do a translation from the moment the order is placed to delivery, there is still quite a lot of 'down time' when I am not translating.
I update my glossaries and TMs, record terminology and data, client details etc. and prepare for the next round.

I think technology improves quality and consistency, but all in all I don't find it makes me a great deal more productive. I know colleagues find the same. Plus technology is not free - software licenses and updates have to be paid for from the modest increases there may be in productivity.

I get source texts now and then in 'dead' PDFs, which I have to translate without the CAT, and simply type up from scratch in a new file.
They do not take me much longer to translate per 1000 words than they would if I used the CAT.

What takes time is checking the terminology (these texts are usually medical) and proofreading, where again, the technology is useful, but not a substitute for careful human work..
I get similar texts in CAT-readable form, so they are quite a good comparison.


Hi Christine,

I think you are taking a narrow definition of terminology. CAT tools have been a productivity booster, but this is just a part of the changes that took place since 1993. Remember the time it took to investigate terminology in the pre-Google years? Instant connection, FTP, OCR, strong work processors, laser printers at home. I remember translating with a typewritter!


Besides, the technology has been on the market for many years now... So it is not a valid excuse for pressing rates down as other prices go up!


I never suggested pressing rates down. Jeff wrote that he has been working for the same rate since 1993 and he equated that with constant income. I just suggested that he is probably translating more words per day than he did back in 1993.

Regards,
Enrique


 
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 18:22
English to German
+ ...
Simply don't work for unprofessional rates Jun 12, 2015

Enrique Cavalitto wrote:

I never suggested pressing rates down. Jeff wrote that he has been working for the same rate since 1993 and he equated that with constant income. I just suggested that he is probably translating more words per day than he did back in 1993.

Regards,
Enrique


Thanks for making th point for not pressing rates down.

But I believe we need to promote steady rate increases, no matter what CAT tools are used. And technology is never an excuse not to raise your rates eventually. When more technology is involved that can actually assist a professional translator to increase his/her output-volume or make it even more accurate (in terms of jargon and consistency for example), an all-around better language service/product can be provided - but never can the human brain, the human experience, the linguistic experience and talent be neglected. Neither can our (self-)education, (bi-cultural/multicultural) life and professional experience, expertise and talent.

In other words, translation and any other language service isn't becoming an automated process whereby the person becomes increasingly superfluous. On the contrary, the language expert must be the one deciding what to accept and what not to accept, as far as technical assistance is concerned. He/she must have the experience and the skill to make the right decisions, and decide about a lot more factors then ever before because there are simply more tools. He/she must have an excellent command of at least two languages to become/be a good translator (not someone who had a second language in school and now thinks he/she can become a translator).

What I want to say is that translating, proofreading, revision, editing, and copy-writing are highly sophisticated tasks comparable to tasks in other highly sophisticated professions. It takes time, effort, skill, dedication, and lots of knowledge to be in a position to work as a professional translator.

But too many times, translators are made to believe that the delivery of more words within a shorter period of time or the delivery of CAT-tool assisted output must be discounted. It's simply hilarious.
What counts is the finished product which guarantees that the end client can achieve his/her objectives because the translator applied best practices in his/her work.
Why should a more quickly delivered and more accurate product cost less at all? The point can be made for asking for more. Certainly not for less.

As you said, Enrique, other prices go up; hardly ever is there anything that becomes cheaper - like gasoline in America over the last year - but we're not driving that much in our cars - we work at home.

So, the way to prevent declining rates is - not to work for those rates. We all usually have a rate range within which we operate. But there must be a barrier below which we will never go (which can vary, depending on many factors). But if anyone suggests to work for even less than is posted on ProZ.com's translation rate page (and the minimums posted there are already so low that I would rather consider the standard rates posted there as minimums), then there had to be a very good reason for it, but there isn't a good reason for the average volume in any field of expertise to ignore those minimum rates. Because it would simply mean that the translator lets him/herself be exploited, working for money that is simply inadequate for the brain work he/she exerts and the product he/she delivers.

I can understand exceptions; maybe you're translating a book that you get paid royalties for; and yes, it takes experience to get the best book translation deals; or you decide to do a good deed for a student because you're interested in the material. Even then, would you really work for USD 0.05 or 0.06/word?

I do hope that professionals will increasingly separate themselves from amateurs who work for unprofessional clients (mostly agencies). Well, amateurs actually separate themselves more and more from professionals by working for rock bottom prices.

Professionals must simply not stoop to these low rates/prices. Then we need not fear declining rates.

[Edited at 2015-06-13 01:18 GMT]


Elisabeth Moser
Beatriz Ramírez de Haro
Christine Andersen
Panopticon
 
Bernhard Sulzer
Bernhard Sulzer  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 18:22
English to German
+ ...
ISO-certified can backfire Jun 12, 2015

Jeff Whittaker wrote:

http://maskedtranslator.blogspot.com/2009/01/iso-9001-certification-reality-check.html

and from https://patenttranslator.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/seven-completely-insane-translation-quality-assurance-notions/

"Totally Insane Idea No. 4: The quality of our translations is guaranteed because our translation agency is ISO-certified.

The abbreviation ISO means “International Standards Organization”.
... But only a recent escapee from a lunatic asylum, or a translation agency marketing specialist could claim with a straight face that such a standard can be used as method guaranteeing a high quality of translation.

... There is only one method that will (sometime, but not always) guarantee a high quality of translation: using the best translator available, an experienced translator, who specializes in a given field and who is not exactly cheap."

[Edited at 2015-06-12 22:09 GMT]


I can only fully agree with that. And when we talk about ISO, we should really look at it from the viewpoint of the professional translator, not that of an agency that's looking for a marketing tool or the organization who wants to certify pretty much everyone for lots of money.

Here's a link to the new standard 2015 (a preview only because if you really want to see all of it, you must buy it).

https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:17100:ed-1:v1:en

In my opinion, even this new standard will have quite a few drawbacks, and why in the world would I want to pay for it and buy into all that as a professional translator?


From Marked Translator's conclusions of previous ISO versions, we should certainly not blindly support the new standard as a great thing for the industry. We better make sure all the below concerns have been solved before we sanction and buy it all.


"ISO certification is sort of fashionable and trendy in the management world, but it’s not clearly proved to be effective, and there are instances of companies abandoning an ISO quality certification because it was ineffective or an obstacle (e.g. Toyota).

Oftentimes, the purpose of ISO 9001 certification in a translation agency is nothing more than a marketing tool (e.g. for contractual reasons for certain clients) and not a sincere initiative to increase quality control.

ISO 9001 is very vague and contains almost no specific or detailed requirements, so the way in which the standard is implemented will look completely different company to company, with completely different results as well.

The price tag that ISO charges for its certification is mind-boggling. You want to know where price pressure comes from in the translation industry, look at the office space rent that large agencies pay in large cities (e.g. New York), add on the ISO certification costs, and you see why these agencies have a 100% or larger markup over your freelance fee for their end clients.

Price pressure forces ISO-certified agencies to prefer using translators who charge lower rates. The result, ironically, is that established, experienced freelance translators who charge higher rates are less likely to be providing translation services to ISO 9001-certified agencies.

The price pressure also makes it appealing for ISO 9001-certified agencies to hire quality managers and project managers with lower skill levels at lower salaries, compensating for the lacking skills and experience with enforced routines, procedures, and paperwork to meet the ISO requirements. This tends to depersonalize vendor relations as well. (Unquote)

I prefer client feedback to any ISO-certification.

[Edited at 2015-06-13 02:03 GMT]


 
Łukasz Gos-Furmankiewicz
Łukasz Gos-Furmankiewicz  Identity Verified
Poland
Local time: 23:22
English to Polish
+ ...
... Jun 13, 2015

Thanks, Christine, there's always a way out. I was about to just say I agreed with Kevin in full and that was it, but I think there's always something that could be done — even if it likely won't be done.

I think visibility really is key to improving our status, even though it's not really invisibility that's holding us where we are and suking us further in.

Unfortunately, agencies often work like factory lines, including in mentality and savoir-vivre, as there's more
... See more
Thanks, Christine, there's always a way out. I was about to just say I agreed with Kevin in full and that was it, but I think there's always something that could be done — even if it likely won't be done.

I think visibility really is key to improving our status, even though it's not really invisibility that's holding us where we are and suking us further in.

Unfortunately, agencies often work like factory lines, including in mentality and savoir-vivre, as there's more to the race to the bottom than just the rates. More, cheaper, faster, little respect for the translator.

Many agencies do seem to be run by accidental people. Kevin certainly is right that the world just doesn't need so many LSPs. In fact, I suspect they're having it worse than translators. I wish the bulk of the small ones would just go back to either translating (if that's whey they'd done) or the commodity market.

Why?

Let's go back to how outsourcing starts for people. At some point you have more jobs than you can handle. What do you do? Some people up their rates, and demand diminishes accordingly until they have their calendars as full as they want and rates as high as still allow that.

Others, however, farm out the excess load without increasing their rates. And that's probably where many of those countless LSPs come from.

As a translator that's wrong to do, as it harms the profession. If you're good enough, you should up your rates, go up, get better clients etc. That means your junior colleagues can step up into your old place. If you refuse to move up, you're keeping others down. And that's not altruistic or humble or noble or anything else like that. The only thing it is is easy. (And not even for real.)

Next, agencies are actually competing against freelance translators all the time. Often on the price. This does lead — like ISO — to cheaper and less skilled QA'ers, and worse rates for translators in the budget. They compete against us and win using their costly competitive advantages that they effectively expect us to help them finance later, when they farm the very same jobs out to us, at a reduced fee.

It also leads to no QA and little added value in general, which means there's only the claiming and farming out of jobs. And that not as a classic mediator who's open about being a conduit only.

So the industry right now is sick and unsustainable, but, of course, there would be ways of healing it.

For the record, I'm pretty sure agencies would gain from most of the things that would benefit translators. I'm pretty sure a lot of agencies would be happy to see the pressure on their prices gone, some breathing room and some wiggling room to play with, hire better translators, better QA'ers, innovate, offer better services, find ways to connect with clients — not just to standardize and make things cheaper.

But for that agencies are too set in their ways. At this point in the history of the industry, this is taking on carricatural forms:* they even expect us to say multi-page contracts unchanged, in PDF, only to be printed and scanned and sent back.

(* Grammarians who claim that this should be a semicolon are wrong.)

... In which they aren't actually all that different from end clients. Outsourcing is a broken model, simply put. These days, everybody wants 'tailored' or 'bespoke' services, except nobody wants the costs and hassle of actually employing people and actually bonding with them. Or actually partnering up and bonding with them.

Don't believe me? Can't see where I'm driving at? So how many times have you been given business documents to translate, full of internal terminology and with no context provided, where the agency's client (or the end client, howsoever remote in the chain) apparently wants you to read his mind, fulfil his deepest unspoken desires and generally make him feel cosy and fuzzy and all? Well?

This is because people want inhouse translators. They just can't actually think about having them. Or at least their 'personal' translators just like their GP or their lawyer (if they aren't large enough to employ one).

All in all, I'd probably blame the broken concept of outsourcing for the ills of the industry.

Back to the topic, though, with some work (this relates to what Bernhard wrote), you can escape some of the worst. But it's not like you can come out unscathed. Kevin is still largely right. Anyway, unless you're willing to become a part-time manager/marketer, you can usually forget it.

Which is a pity because having one million managers in charge of one-man* companies is a monumental waste of human resources.

(* Despite most translators being female, this is still correct.)

Edit: Bernhard, my other problem with ISO is how it makes the client the ultimate QA'er just for holding the purse strings. Unfortunately, many (dear) linguists think that way, too, for which I blame lazy-ass universities from certain parts of the world that fail to help people get some intellectual mojo. In fact, that ISO 442357474754 (or what was the number again) rule seems to be geared towards localization mills.

I tend to view ISO as pretty much a denial of what being a professional translator should be about.



Edit: What Jeff said has also inspired some thoughts: One could say translators are too many, hence we need to diversify our sources of income in order to make any decent money. Nope. We need diversification in order to increase our power to say no, but there's a difference. There are probably many more translator jobs than translators to fill them.

The problem is that every last freaking job on the planet seems to go through some sort of an auction. Even with 50 jobs and 20 translators, the market would still be forcing the tranlastors to compete and bid low. This is basically how agencies and clients handle it. They're largeer, more powerful, they can get away with it. Even consumers are developing similar habits, though.

JL01 wrote:

It looks as if a primer on free market may be necessary around here.


There's no such thing as free market. It only exists in economy coursebooks. We live in a gaming age (kudos to Eric Zimmerman), and we can't live without gaming the system.

Why else do you think everybody wants the new client discount or the old client discount or key client discount or always some form of discount anyway in any case, the same that everybody else also is asking for but also everybody acts like he*'s the only one? (Freeriding is a linked concept.)

(* Everybody's a he.)

[Edited at 2015-06-13 03:13 GMT]
Collapse


 
DLyons
DLyons  Identity Verified
Ireland
Local time: 22:22
Spanish to English
+ ...
EN ISO 17100:2015 Jun 13, 2015

"The use of raw output from machine translation plus post-editing is outside the scope of this International Standard."

Says it all really!

P(standard will have any measurable effect) ≈ 0.

[Edited at 2015-06-13 08:44 GMT]


 
Suzan Hamer
Suzan Hamer  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 23:22
English
+ ...
Hear Hear Jun 13, 2015

Triston Goodwin wrote:

Even for populated pairs like mine (English - Spanish) there is a lot of high paying work available. Those agencies aren't charging less than $0.20 per word, and some charge a lot more. The idea is that they contribute somehow to the process and add value, but they're not doing anything that individual translators cannot do on their own.

If you want [to] earn more, learn how to market yourself and find your own clients.


I don't see the point of agencies, have never worked with one. From the beginning I have worked with end clients, people looking for the services I provide. One client leads to another in many cases. My ProZ profile has also been useful; some of my best clients have found me through ProZ.



Edited to correct quoted text.

[Edited at 2015-06-13 10:25 GMT]

[Edited at 2015-06-13 11:48 GMT]


 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Is there a way to prevent the decline in translation rates?







Anycount & Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000

Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.

More info »
Trados Studio 2022 Freelance
The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.

Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

More info »