21–30 of 38 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does that have to do with language? Now, if you're an early stage startup you have your hands full already, you can wait until next year to spread across the EU in different languages. That does not impede anything For support, it's quite easy to hire people who speak different languages and the total cost will be the same.
Do you have actual experience building a product with cross-language support, or are you hypothesizing?
Among other things, europe's language diversity is listed as one of the reasons why europe isn't a good place for founding a tech company: the american market is much more homogenous. However, for translation startups, this diversity makes europe the best place to be in the world. They definitely won't run out of diversity, and it also has the european single market which makes it easy to conduct business across inne…
The American market is homogenous but crowded. World markets are increasingly open, but Americans aren't necessarily best positioned to take the lead.
Among other things, europe's language diversity is listed as one of the reasons why europe isn't a good place for founding a tech company: the american market is much more homogenous. However, for translation startups, this diversity makes europe the best place to be in the world. They definitely won't run out of diversity, and it also has the european single market which makes it easy to conduct business across inne…
Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. But, obviously, that does make Europe a very good market for translation companies.
This can't be serious. This is laughable by any stretch of the imagination.
Here's a list of how it impedes tech companies:
1. Localization effort for 20+ languages (for mainland EU). Every time a new feature that has some words included in it, it has to be translated. Screenshots in support have to be updated.
2. Training - if you have to train users, you need language specific training.
3. Account management - account/success managers need to be language specific.
4. Support - having support personnel that can speak different languages.
None of those are trivial and all cost significant money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. But, obviously, that does make Europe a very good market for translation companies.
> Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. This can't be serious. This is laughable by any stretch of the imagination. Here's a list of how it impedes tech companies: 1. Localization effort for 20+ languages (for mainland EU). Every time a new feature that has some words included in it, it has to be translated. Screenshots in support have to be updated. 2. Training…
The rest of the points, if needed, grow with the size of the customer base and do not impede tech companies' growth in the EU v the US.
Rudeness and bluster are not arguments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. This can't be serious. This is laughable by any stretch of the imagination. Here's a list of how it impedes tech companies: 1. Localization effort for 20+ languages (for mainland EU). Every time a new feature that has some words included in it, it has to be translated. Screenshots in support have to be updated. 2. Training…
It is indeed laughable to claim that absolutely all languages should be supported at all times and that a localisation is costly ("screenshot have to be updated", come on...) By the way, in the EU a population equal to the US's is reached by going for the 5 most populous countries (granted, as it happens that does mean 5 languages, including English, but that also means that these 5 languages cover a population large…
> should be supported at all times
Where did I say that? We're talking about impeding growth, which is along a continuum of time. Any additional "n" amount of effort required during a growth period is going to slow it progress. Additional effort is absolutely necessary to support a different local language by definition. It doesn't mean growth is impossible, it just means it requires extra effort and resources, which in turn means additional time and money.
> that a localisation is costly
Are you claiming it doesn't incur any cost? At what scale (let's use lines of translated text as a barometer) have you ever operated at?
> ("screenshot have to be updated", come on...)
Have you ever had to create support documentation in different languages? For the French specifically? Your reaction tells me this is not the case.
> bluster are not arguments.
Where specifically was I acting in a threatening way in my argument?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even large companies like Amazon or Facebook launch some of their new products only for the american audience and only expand to europe later. And early stage startups don't have the resources of translating their app into two dozen languages, offering customer service in those languages, having a sales infrastructure, etc. It's doable but more expensive if you operated in the american market.
What does that have to do with language? Now, if you're an early stage startup you have your hands full already, you can wait until next year to spread across the EU in different languages. That does not impede anything For support, it's quite easy to hire people who speak different languages and the total cost will be the same.
It literally is impeding you from operating in that other country right now. What do you not understand about that?
Take a like for like example:
I have 10 customers in Texas who use my software and they pay me $100k/year. I can sell my software to 5 more customers in California...tomorrow. So I make $150k this year.
I have 10 customers in the UK who use my software and they pay me £100k/year. My software isn't localized and therefore I can't sell my software to 5 French companies (because they require the French language for their employees). I have to wait a year to earn the additional £50k/year while I add support for them. I only make £100k this year.
I just lost out on an additional £50k. How is that not an impediment to my growth rate....it's literally 50% less...
Oh, I also have to hire French people to support them which increases my costs and therefore making me less profitable.
impede =/= prohibit
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. But, obviously, that does make Europe a very good market for translation companies.
> Europe's language diversity is a trivial cost of business and does not impede tech companies. This can't be serious. This is laughable by any stretch of the imagination. Here's a list of how it impedes tech companies: 1. Localization effort for 20+ languages (for mainland EU). Every time a new feature that has some words included in it, it has to be translated. Screenshots in support have to be updated. 2. Training…
While EU regulations harmonize a lot, it's still much, much messier than in the US.
* different tax regimes
* often quite different regulations
* contract requirements
* income levels which can affect pricing decisions / require regional pricing
* localized ad campaigns per country
* getting media attention in each country is hard
* ...
Among other things, europe's language diversity is listed as one of the reasons why europe isn't a good place for founding a tech company: the american market is much more homogenous. However, for translation startups, this diversity makes europe the best place to be in the world. They definitely won't run out of diversity, and it also has the european single market which makes it easy to conduct business across inne…
Another way of looking at Europe's language diversity is that having to deal with it early on will make you better prepared to go global. The American market is homogenous but crowded. World markets are increasingly open, but Americans aren't necessarily best positioned to take the lead.
Do we have evidence of this?
(European start-ups do tend to have a competitive advantage with administration, given the complexity and diversity of regulatory regimes on the continent. This explains e.g. Spotify (negotiating music rights) and Klarna (negotiating with banks).)
Not sure why you would bet against Google on this.
Google translate is tolerable for reading content in a language you don't know, but it would be terrible for translating messages to your customers! Human-human interaction requires a lot more understanding of nuance and idiom and even things like culture-specific expectations of politeness. Translation AIs are nowhere near good enough.
> We are now translating over 1,000,000 customer service messages a month > The company told us it now has more than 100k registered translators providing translation services for its platform. So... each human translator translates (on average) 10 messages per month. In fact, less than 10, because (presumably) some messages are also translated by AI. Odd numbers.
https://www.behind-the-enemy-lines.com/2018/01/how-many-mech...