referall fees

[Tom Servinsky]

Terry,
One of the things we do which seems to alleviate any miss-communications
with pricing, especially with refinishing, is have the refinisher meet with
the customer and let him/her evaluate the piece and then set the price. We
have tried several ways: in house, subcontracting, and a duel contract
approach.  We have found that with refinishing it works better for us to
have two separate contracts with the refinishing and internal work. Since we
made the decision not to offer in-house refinisher we either were going to
have to sub the job and have some type of understanding with the refinisher.
The refinisher has his own contract and we we have ours. When the refinisher
is completed with his work, which is before we have completed ours, he gets
paid by the customer and he's happy.  We get paid our take when our is
completed.
Tom Servinsky,RPT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Farrell" <mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: referall fees


> You make good points Jim. I like how you described ethics and trust. I
> suspect that as we move further away from dealing with another technician,
> prices can wander more. What I mean is, I agree with you in your example
in
> working with another piano technician. When subbing work out to a
> refinisher, I think one may feel a little more comfortable with getting
> whatever they can for a refinishing job. I have subbed two refinishing
jobs
> out. The first on a small ebony grand, I quoted the client $1800 for
> refinishing. I paid my subcontractor $3000 to refinish (yea, yea, yea -
long
> sad story). I charged my client $1800 for refinishing. Other job I quoted
> $1200 for refinishing an upright. I got someone to do a really nice job
for
> $600. I charged my client $1200. Both clients were very pleased with the
> work.
>
> I'm not sure why, but I would likely not do that with another technician
> (like if I were to sub out a board replacement, etc.). I would tend to
want
> to share the profit on the upright job. But then again, I know I would
> likely not find anyone that would cut me a break just because I goofed on
> the bid like in the grand example above. I guess it just seems more like
> purely business when the subcontractor is not in the same business as you.
> Does that make any sense? Am I gonna get flamed for it???  :-)
>
> Terry Farrell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JIMRPT@AOL.COM>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:51 AM
> Subject: Re: referall fees
>
>
> >
> > In a message dated 27/08/01 5:05:52 PM, tompiano@gate.net writes:
> >
> > <<" Jim,
> >
> >   I guess I opened a can of worms and ruffled a few feathers along the
> way.
> > ">>
> >
> > Tom...worms are good for the soul occasionally and you ruffled not 'my'
> > feathers. :-)
> > Ethical concerns didn't even enter my mind in my response.......hmmmm
> perhaps
> > I need to think about that one.(?)
> >
> >  The primary tech has the right to set whatever price he and the
customer
> > agree on and the primary tech needs to take into account his own
business
> > needs.....................
> >
> >  Our own experience does indeed color our opinions and attitudes for
> > example...........severrrrral years ago I undertook the rewhatever of an
> S&S
> > with the *stated* price of *8,400* with 20% going to the primary tech.
> After
> > the job was done, and several months later, the customer called me to
tune
> > the piano since the primary tech was out of town. While I was there she
> > mentioned how pleased she was with her piano and that she thought the
> price
> > of *14,200* was really well spent. The customer did not know that I had
> done
> > the work. I asked her who had done the work and she told me....yada
> > so&so..........................and pulled her copy of the contract out
of
> the
> > bench along with her other records of the piano. The price quoted was
> indeed
> > 14,200, it was 'my' quote printed on the other techs letterhead.
> > Unethical?...... Between the customer and primary tech? No absolutely
> > not....Unethical between the primary tech and
myself?...........'possibly'
> > not really...... except that I had been told the quote was for 8,400 and
I
> > agreed to work with those figures. Will I 'ever' work with that tech
> again?
> > Absolutely not. Did the primary tech do anything wrong? Not really, but
> they
> > can now do that "nothing wrong" with someone else.
> >
> >  The question of "ethics" never entered my mind but the question of
> 'trust'
> > certainly did. Subcontracting and/or cross referrral is a great thing
for
> > everyone involved. As long as the playing field is honest, open and
> > trustworthy......... This includes the 'add-on' contracts you describe.
> >
> >  So we really agree Tom..huh?
> > Jim Bryant (FL)
> >
> >
> >
>