Mark-up (was Steinway parts)

[paulrevenkojones at aol.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: William R. Monroe <pianotech at a440piano.net>
To: Pianotech List <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:36 pm
Subject: Re: Mark-up (was Steinway parts)

















Bill:

My inserted responses below :-)


Paul,


?


Thanks for the 
follow-up.? Responses below:


?


? However, when we discover a 
surprise - whether during a rebuild or a house call - fix it (with approval), 
and charge accordingly.

Apples and oranges, Bill. I should know what's 
in a piano, even a Chickering from 1910 :-), and the dangers and risks and 
possibilities. If I don't, my bad. If a string breaks, properly put in the 
passive voice, since good technicians never break strings :-), I discuss the 
situation with the client and charge accordingly. I'm responsible for the 
restoration of the piano in major work, and cost accordingly. I'm not 
responsible for the minor aches and pains of the household piano or piano owner. 


? When?I 
am?tuning and a string breaks, I charge for that.? I didn't expect a 
string to break, but?I won't replace strings for free because I didn't 
anticipate it happening.? To me, it's the same in a rebuild 
situation.

It's not the same at all. 


?


Interesting.? This may be semantics.? Example: S&S Action 
rails, covered in crud.? I wouldn't necessarily put action rail 
replacements in the initial estimate.? Upon cleaning, discover rails have 
fractures.? Surprise.? Though not precisely "the same," I do think 
that both events could be classified "surprises," and I won't eat that 
cost.

First of all, we charge a good buck for "estimates", and we now do a very thorough look at the piano, including inspection of rails vs. crud. If we missed it, it's our problem. We'll look closer the next time. 








  

  

We do neither. We give an estimate (proposal) for a rebuild and 
  the cost stands. Over time, we may have made extra on a job (man, I wish I 
  could remember when that was!), and we certainly have lost some money on a 
  job. But they balance out over time. 


  

  
I just prefer not to 
  depend upon the "balancing out" act.? Just charge for everything, give 
  back an overage.

See my response to David Love about this. The balancing out is so miniscule against the overall cost. 


  
?
In my business, however, I 
  specifically have a clause in my contract that stipulates?that?there 
  are occasionally?unseen issues, and if I can solve it within? [X] % 
  of the estimate, I will proceed with the repair without any additional contact 
  with the client.? Their signature on the contract is written 
  approval.? If it exceeds [X] %, I will obtain additional written 
  permission before I proceed.

That's an interesting idea. I'm glad it 
  works for you. Personally, I've seen overage percentages on lots of different 
  kinds of contracts, and you know what? In almost all cases, the overage was 
  charged. Hmmm. Bad estimating? Probably not. Probably perfect estimating, 
  including the overage. We have done what we do for over 30 years, and the 
  losses balance the gains, but the real gains are in 1) client trust and 
  referral, and 2) our increased savvy at estimating and costing, what we 
  consider good business practices.



  
Hard to argue with 
  success.? I do think 1) and 2) above can be achieved with other 
  methods.

Better methods? Or other methods? I'm open to "better"! :-)? 

  
?

  
Certainly, I think it behooves us 
  all to be very thorough in assessing pianos for rebuilding, and not just 
  writing a "form estimate" letting all the details be discovered at 
  teardown.? But I think as long as we are conscientious and thorough 
  during our initial assessment, the infrequent surprises that surface should be 
  billed accordingly.

How big a surprise will you hand your 
  client? A new keyboard because the keys turn to be too punky to rebush? A new 
  back action because you weren't familiar (I know you are) with Steinway 
  short-arm underlevers? Where do you stop? 


  
Good 
  question.? I certainly agree, too, that having to call the client for 
  approval for more $$ doesn't breed confidence, regardless how much you may 
  warn, prepare, or otherwise educate your clients that it is a potentiality. 
  ?You've prompted me to do some looking.? In the last three years, 
  I've only one contract that I had to exercise the overage clause.? I 
  guess that means I'm estimating reasonably well.? And, yes, I've had a 
  couple contracts that "came in under" and lead to a smaller final 
  billing.? Either way, I think I'm succeeding reasonably well at 1) and 2) 
  above.

I would venture that you're closing in on a "mature" business where the teeter-totter you're standing on (the fulcrum is your client) is always moving but more in balance. 





I think when it 
  comes right down to it, a variety of contract philosophies?can work well 
  when the initial estimates are thorough and well-thought.? 
  



  
Simplicity says: create 
  situations from which you will learn. Thanks for your full response, Bill. 
  


  
So I 
  guess you won't be adopting my strategy any time soon??? 
  ;-]

Perhaps not fully, but it all goes into the stew, goulash, paella, whatever, it's tasty, smells good, and lasts for a long time in the fridge. :-)

Paul




 


________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20080220/d0c8321c/attachment.html