It costs a mere $95 to post a single job on LinkedIn. Considering LinkedIn's population of 100m+ that has to be one of the best values I know of. Especially if you are on a national or global hunt for your mark.
It seems to me the odds of posting a job on LinkedIn resulting in just a handful of candidates are near nill - assuming of course it is a real job that pays real money and not a get rich quick scheme. I would bet a wad of money on that and I don't generally bet my green. In fact, in 2011 - when the US average number ofresumes received per opening is 200, I'm trying to figure out what would prompt LinkedIn to 'guarantee' only10 applicants?
I don't expect LinkedIn will have a queue of refund requests, considering its wimpy and almost comical wager. I do think they made a brand management error in not showing some confidence in their services and should have upped the ante to be at the very least closer to the national average.
What guarantee do you think LinkedIn should have made?
Leave a Reply