SLV or MLV?

The difference between a Multi Language Vendor (MLV) and a Single Language Vendor (SLV) originates from software localization, where, over the years, a system was established in which an MLV takes on the project management and assigns the actual translation to many SLVs.

However, also as a result of better technical possibilities, the market is increasingly adopting the process of assigning the orders directly to the SLVs.

Suppliers are practically the only form of pure-bred SLVs that operate with only one language pairing and in one direction.

At our core, we are an SLV (for English-German), but we also provide our customers with translations from many other languages into German and from German and English into many languages.

Does this make us an MLV? Not in the classical sense. Our example shows that the difference is arbitrary.

For customers who want us to handle only one language pairing, we set up a suitable team. If the customer requires a multilingual solution, we choose a different approach with a different team. There is no single solution that works for all occasions.

You are here: Home Next FAQ Next MLV & SLV

Earth

Offshoring?

Theoretically, a translator can work from anywhere (see Near & far). However, for quality reasons, the translator should be located in the country of their target language.

What benefits are there to assigning the translation to a "cheap country"?

Lower administration costs for the price of considerably worse communication.

It is no accident that the offshoring wave is sloshing back again.

How big is big enough?

Frequently, we hear "We are a large company, so we need a large service provider!". However, when you consider that we provide servcies to one of the largest software manufacturers in the world to their complete satisfaction, you really have to examine this statement..

Why would you need a large provider? For very large, complex projects into many languages at once.

Do you have these?
Regularly?

We have "only" 15 permanent employees but through our pool of freelancers (see Structure), the perceived size and, much more importantly, the capacity for the largest proportion of the translation requests is more than sufficient.

Having said that, we do not have the large, inflexible machine of a company that must be set in use for each request at great cost of both money and time, and we can therefore react more quickly to customer needs and be more flexible.