I have heard about the "value" angle. But if you are strictly basing it on value, what about a lot survey where the lot is worth less than the fair cost for you doing the survey? What if the client doesn't see the "value" of having you survey the property.
If I have a professional surgeon to save my life, what is the "value" of saving my life, and should I pay him the cost of his work, and equipment cost, or should I be indebted to him for the rest of my life for the "value" of him saving my life? (okay that was a rhetorical question, but I don't know if the "value" argument is really everything. I should pay the value of a new house, I should pay a fair wage for professional services. The client often doesn't know what the value of a job is, nor does s/he know what actual work is involved, and they need to be able to trust a professional to not rake them over the coals). No lowballers, no overcharging.
Brian Allen, post: 453585, member: 1333 wrote: Either way, can we agree that it shouldn't be based solely on our cost to provide the service? How many other professionals base their fees on whether they work out of a home office or not?
I'm with you Brian.
While maintaining lower overhead (large or small operation) to optimize profit margins and minimize accounts payable is actually Business 101, it should only be a very miniscule factor in the valuation of services.
Laying out a portable shed for my BIL in his back yard may be technically similar to staking out a commercial building in both time and mechanics, but the values of your professional services (and liability) are vastly different.
Hack, post: 453583, member: 708 wrote: Do you mean to say that the smaller company should charge less because their overhead is less? I hope not. That thinking is our problem as Brian noted above.
The price of a professional service should be based on the value of the service to the client NOT the monthly rent/cost of your office space!!!
Too many of us still have that hourly mindset. The advent of technology which allows us to perform work at 20% of the time it took 30 years ago is the consumer's windfall not ours. We wonder why young people shy away from our "profession".Hack
Okay, but why should a small company get the same cost for overhead that the big company has? If your overhead multiplier is 2.3, you shouldn't be charging the big-engineering multiplier of 3.4 . You don't have to support 50 employees, and the cost of a huge office building, and a receptionist.
Am I the only one thinking the competitor really missed out and could have charged $11,800? (That is, as long as there weren't a ton of other proposals in between and the client was simply looking for bottom dollar pricing)
Jim in AZ, post: 453577, member: 249 wrote: dwayne,
That has nothing to do with it. Its the VALUE of the work, not the cost to perform it. I just don't understand why we keep promoting ourselves as tradesmen instead of professionals.
$12000 worth of value or $2000 worth of value? Professional conduct would dictate a similar level of services. I have some recall of Charles Breed writing that land surveying is an art expressing a particular type of truth and is to be held above the value of compensation.
Tom Adams, post: 453590, member: 7285 wrote: I have heard about the "value" angle. But if you are strictly basing it on value, what about a lot survey where the lot is worth less than the fair cost for you doing the survey? What if the client doesn't see the "value" of having you survey the property.
If I have a professional surgeon to save my life, what is the "value" of saving my life, and should I pay him the cost of his work, and equipment cost, or should I be indebted to him for the rest of my life for the "value" of him saving my life? (okay that was a rhetorical question, but I don't know if the "value" argument is really everything. I should pay the value of a new house, I should pay a fair wage for professional services. The client often doesn't know what the value of a job is, nor does s/he know what actual work is involved, and they need to be able to trust a professional to not rake them over the coals). No lowballers, no overcharging.
"What if the client doesn't see the "value" of having you survey the property."
I either educate them as to the value of my work or I don't do the work. This happens routinely. In the case at hand I was able to educate the client and I have the job at $12K. The client was quite interested to learn what E&O insurance was (other party has none).
Tom Adams, post: 453594, member: 7285 wrote: Okay, but why should a small company get the same cost for overhead that the big company has? If your overhead multiplier is 2.3, you shouldn't be charging the big-engineering multiplier of 3.4 . You don't have to support 50 employees, and the cost of a huge office building, and a receptionist.
Because the VALUE of the work to the client should be the same no matter who performs it.
Jim in AZ, post: 453618, member: 249 wrote: Because the VALUE of the work to the client should be the same no matter who performs it.
I get your point. I just don't know how a client is supposed to know the difference. I was playing a little bit of the devil's advocate above. It's a real problem, and I don't know the fix. I hate seeing surveyors who charge way more than a job is worth, just as much as I hate seeing the lowballers.