Ann: Freelancer delivers strong growth in key metrics in Q1 2017, page-9

ex-holder here;

I think will be more a regression to the mean between freelancer and competitors, there just isn't enough to make freelancer 'the best' option, imo. (yet?)

Relatively low $ and time cost for a competitor to start up with new ('better'?) features and start up giving better $ value percentages for their employer users and worker users as they try to get market share while Freelancer company needs to risk disrupting their established user base to add features and risk margin to add value user value

From user experience point of view the platform is clean and functional but the user-base and user-culture seems a bit junk.
I encourage shareholders to make a profile and click around and try to do some stuff, my impression is that employer-users are very often flaky and spammy and worker users are very saturated in lots of areas. (good for employer bad for worker user platform loyalty).

My experience getting an completing a job was technologically fine,
Limited bids (ie: job applications) before paying a subscription fee after trial will hurt worker user platform loyalty as i had to place many bids to get 1 job (Maybe its that my skills are rubbish!) Anecdotally the culture is to create and spam out a saved application response which is fine but not a driver of quality imo.

Monetisation of everything, including the skills certifications, has been done reasonably nicely and probably fine for shareholder value, but a bit of a barrier for new users perhaps.
As an employer I'd probably still just go with an established worker user or someone who can link me a portfolio.

So then there is macro scale stuff where the market hates risk and is hungry for dividends.
$359 mill is a just bit much when you look at other functioning growth stocks.

Freelancer is not bad it's just not quite good (and safe) enough and could plausibly be beaten by or have the user base corrode.