Sorry folks. took a break so couldnt update. I got a rejecton. one of the OC was accepted. Have filed for appeal.
But i have observed one thing. There hasn’t been more than 1-2 accpetance for talent posted in the threads since dec. Something has chnaged drastically at Tech nation. Pre nov. even last year- success was more than 50%, with review robably 70% of those who posted (not saying applied).
I am sorry to say this. But I dont think there is any expert here who can help. They applied at a time which was way more easier than this. Welcome any insight on this. Otherwise everyone is just flying blind. But since we cant expect any data about approval rates, it is conjecture but that’s what i have observed.
@kontrol Sorry to hear about your rejection and I hope the appeal succeed.
That said, I’d like to respectfully challenge your conclusion. Just because the process has become more difficult doesn’t mean the experts here are any less capable or helpful. Many applicants have credited their success to the guidance and insights shared in this forum, even recently.
It’s understandable to feel frustrated, but suggesting that no one here can help because they applied during a different phase feels unfair. If you believe your rejection stemmed from weak guidance, I invite you to share the evidence you submitted and the feedback you received. That way, it will help us know what the issue is. Was your evidence package reviewed here, can you please quote, let’s see what the experts suggested that did not help you.
Global Talent endorsement is about substance. If your profile meets the criteria, timing alone shouldn’t disqualify you. Please applicants should focus on strengthening their evidence rather than discrediting the support network.
I messaged you personally as well. But it’s true. Look at the rejection rate now. I would love it if those who have received talent endorsement can come up and share their voices. But till then, we are repeatedly seeing an astronomically high rejection. We need to know what TN is looking for and not keep on applying 2023-25 standards for the evidence quality/types
yeah I agree and the “experts” should stop milking money off people thinking that they could be helpful with the advice or consultation. I think nobody can guarantee an endorsement in this new version of Tech Nation…as you rightly said the “experts” got endorsed in a time where Tech Nation was extremely lenient…however that has significantly changed now and probably not a single “expert” would get endorsed.
all of the advice written on this forum recently seems to be AI slop and therefore getting an “expert” advice is as meaningful as simply asking AI.
my own rejection was strange.
at the end of the letter, the assesor mentioned that my application would have been more suited for Promise probably because a bulk of my activities started around 2022 but I have 9 years of experience which i cant write off.
the general tone in the proforma is my stuff is good but “modest”. i submitted a review anyways. nothing to lose.
But your feedback here is a little bit confusing. You mentioned 'strategic application, you also highlighted the screenshot … but it does not speak to the concern and fact that ‘already accepted evidence in the initial application’ was denied .
Also the applicant never mentioned anything related ‘evidence timeline feedback’ .This might be your own assumption as we do not even have a clarity on how the assessors think. But I hope his appeal would give him more insight into the application.
For clarification, the reason I shared the screenshot is to show that beyond the evidence you submitted, TN still evaluates whether the overall narrative, skills, and achievements clearly align with the eligibility requirements. Also, I quoted this from the applicant post “In my September application, my Research Peer Review evidence was acceptable, and this time I submitted more…” and he said "I initially applied last September, " - Lat year is 2025, right?
Putting both together, I am just saying perhaps, narrative changed.
Also, I have done a post to answer this question before
but it does not speak to the concern and fact that ‘already accepted evidence in the initial application’ was denied.
A friend who got approved in Dec 2024 told me the assessment process has changed . He said he never submitted half of what people are submitting now but still got endorsed. Everyone around him also got endorsed too. They already had good tech profile , so they just did a things and got approved easily.
I would advise anyone that plan to pay anyone to be very careful and not bother . The so called experts probably have no clue themselves . They also probably got approved at a time when the process was easier and certain.
No one has a certain/sure way of how the endorsement is done . I think Tech Nation might update their criteria any time. The feedback these days seem so different from the stated criteria on the website.
All the best to everyone !!
Please if you have received feedback , please let us know and keep the conversation going . A lot of people are really anxious …lol
If I’m being honest with myself, I think the level of rejection is really discouraging, sincerely. Except some people are getting endorsed and not sharing it. But I believe their appeals will get them success, and I stand with part of what @kontrol said. Things really have changed, and if we don’t know what it is, we’ll all just be applying blindly and keep appealing blindly, and having evidence that once accepted, rejected, creating a different kind of confusion.
yea exactly…trust me unless the “experts” are in direct contact with the assessors nobody can tell you anything precisely. it will all be speculative based on past stuff posted on this forum which anyone can look up or use AI to look it up.
stop giving your hard earned money to these “experts” that will give you the false hope of approvals. use AI tools and stuff posted on this forum to make a call yourself.
I dont want to discount a lot of help people and experts have given here. I dont want to comment about moentization model of that help as well. It’s a business like any other.
But in interest of others who are applying now- TN has changed. People go through other people’s evidence on the old threads and think- I’ve so much more. I am a sure shot. Go through months of work, apply , get rejected. Go to the thread asking for appeal review, get rejected. Reapply again! Year of work wasted a- all because they got a glimpse of hope by reading a advice of past evidence shared by other people. I am not against experts.
neither am i. but i just don’t think experts are adding any significant value here. the reason being none of these experts know what changes are happening internally or how the assessors are evaluating each application. they are just as speculative as we are.
i am just saying if any expert tries to trap you in with exorbitant fees guaranteeing an approval just don’t waste your time on that. because this business model works on desperate visa holders trying to figure out immigration and ready to pay any amount for the false hope of getting an approval
But let’s go back to what the forum is set up for a.k.a stage one waiting times …lol
Please who has gotten feedback today ? Has anyone who got referred to Tech Nation during the week (Feb 9 - Feb 14 ) received feedback? I think they skipped a whole week or something
Hi everyone, I understand our frustrations, and my thoughts and prayers are with all of us. I’m not responding as an expert right now but as a human who genuinely cares. I also want to make a few clarifications. I believe what most experts do here is offer guidance, based on the information provided and not guaranteed advise.
We are all aware that things have changed, which is why you often hear phrases like “going by the recent feedback” or “I suggest you take 3–6 months to work on your application.”
Please note that most of the feedback given here is high‑level, not because we want it to be vague, but because of the limited information applicants usually share, often for confidentiality reasons. For example:
I got three national awards from two independent awarding bodies, both received within the last 2 years.
There are many things to verify before determining whether those awards are reputable or credible. Like selection criteria, judging process, recognition level, the kind of evidence presented to justify the claims.
I am not here to defend experts, but to say that I feel your pain, and part of acknowledging that is not ignoring what you’ve all expressed.
I’m rooting for every one of you. It’s not over until you win.
From what I figured out by analyzing the forum, they usually reject or endorse applications in batches. Every endorsed batch seems to come after a rejected batch. The most recent rejected batch was on 19 February and rejection was on 28 march. I’m not completely sure, but based on my analysis, candidates who applied before 19 February may be endorsed. This is just my observation from reading forum comments, mostly from candidates from August 2025 onward.
Hope for best In sha Allah.