Mark-up (was Steinway parts)

[Porritt, David]

Back when I was doing outside client work I used to use what I called a
Bestimate.  It was a Bid in that it was the most I would charge and it
was an Estimate because it could be less.  As you, Paul, I made it a
point to find any hidden problems before giving my not-any-higher-than
price.

 

dave

 

David M. Porritt, RPT

dporritt at smu.edu

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On
Behalf Of paulrevenkojones at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 9:47 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: Mark-up (was Steinway parts)

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: William R. Monroe <pianotech at a440piano.net>
To: Pianotech List <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 7:46 pm
Subject: Re: Mark-up (was Steinway parts)

SNIP

	 We have never, not once, raised our price on a job after the
estimate is signed. And we have eaten a lot of mistakes and unseen stuff
over the years. 
	
	Keeps us on our toes!
	
	
	
	Paul

Paul, Ed, and others,

 

Note: what follows is my own personal business philosophy, and should be
taken as just another perspective.  No disrespect intended.

None taken.

 

I truly don't understand not being paid for work you do.

Neither do I, which is why we have gotten really good at our estimating
skills.

  Mistakes, mind you, are another thing, and I wouldn't think of
charging clients for errors in procedure or judgment.

Which is what a bad estimate is.

  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. 

 

I don't think it serves either my clients or me to either write an
estimate to include every possibility of things that could be found, or,
conversely, to eat the cost if it goes over.  Neither do I see the
lesson to be learned in absorbing unexpected costs.  For my person, I
think that would lead me toward creating artificially high estimates to
cover the "just-in-case" scenarios.  Actually, I suppose one could do
that, thereby allowing them to come in "under-budget" and end up
charging the client less than the initial estimate.  I suppose that
would be reasonable too.

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. 

 

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.

 

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? 

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

Paul

 

My thoughts,

William R. Monroe

________________________________

More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?nci
d=aolcmp00050000000003> !

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20080220/9c592289/attachment.html