"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"andrew" wrote in message
...



If you give people a 'job price' rather than a cost per hour, it's
easier for them to see exactly how much they will have to pay, (though
you do take a bit of a risk if it takes longer than expected.)

But sometimes they do not want to pay 'job price', because they don't
want
to pay for any potential profit that might be gained.


I have found with new clients that for regular maintenance its best
to quote per hour -

I too found this. But it took a bit of getting used too.
Prior to arriving in UK I did just about everything by price. Be that
cutting hedges, (priced at either cubic or square metre with prices ranging
according to hedge type and height)planting schemes, lawns, patios... you
name it, I'd work out a price. When the job was done and the customer
satisfied there was simply the matter of payment. At that point I cannot
reacall anyone asking; how much? How much had already being agreed before
work commenced.
The only people who I had ever known to charge per hour were cowboys whose
main aim was to drag things out, or the otherwise clueless.
On arrival to London, I adopted the same approach, but came up against a
wall.
The only way to stop me being taken advantage off, was to adopt the hour
rate. I still think it's a bad idea, both for me personally, my business and
the customer, but I guess; when in Rome...
Usually, if circumstances allow, I point out that I can either offer an
estimate, or a fixed price. But I find myself in the bizarre position of
having to outlline the differences. I point out that in monetary terms the
only difference is that I assume a risk in the case of the fixed price and
in order to make allowences for that risk, inclusive of absorbing the cost
of minor changes requested by him/her, the fixed price is around 10 to15%
more than the estimate. The estimate is based on calculations which tend to
be correct, but he/she assumes the risks (e.g. if more topsoil has to be dug
out than expected so as to reach subsoil layer for foundations/footings.),
but may just as easily turn out slightly cheaper.
The response has often being to take the 'job price', but then upon payment
time and based on their own calculations, object to the job price in favour
of the estimate.
I find borders along the lines of on sub normal intelligence. Crass
backwardness is more blunt.
They begin with "So... How much do I owe you NOW?"
There was just one occasion when, because of one thing or another, the job
price was slighly low, partly due to client changes and the client enquired
if it still stoods and naturally I have said Yes, off course. Not a lot like
him around.

Patrick

"Victoria Clare" wrote in message
. 240.12...
Rotax100uk wrote in
s.com:

I have been taking on work which at the moment is with retired women
who cant look after their own gardens, i have been to price jobs with
trouble as to how long a job will take me to complete. I have been
charging £10 per hour which most of the retired people are having
trouble with because of there pensions.

As you can see what problem i am faced with, i was just wondering if
anyone hear can advice me what to do with my pricing?

I feel as if i am charging people a high rate of £10 per hour, but i
am not getting any profit out of this


Your time has a value. You have no duty to work for anyone who cannot
afford to pay you properly, and there are people out there who
can afford to.

I think it's worth repeating the above sound advice; You have no duty to
work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly.
As advice, it's right up there with the best.
This becomes all the more pertinent when you encounter those who will seek
to impose just such a "duty" (like as in a form of Tax), by attempting to
prevail upon you to award them special low rates on account of how they were
your first customer in the area. yadda yadda ya.
The truth is that they gave you the job because at £10 per hour they were on
to a good thing. They gave you the work because it was to their advantage.
If it wasn't, then they wouldn't have.
And as for the advantage created, which lead to the next customer and so on,
those customers in turn do not and will not provide you with work for the
sake of the first customer.
As with the first customer, you work for the subsequent customers because
it is to their advantage. If you could not deliver on that service, then
they wouldn't have you and it is therefore worth underlining for future
reference that subsequent repeat customers are because of YOUR efforts and
not some pathectic cheapskate who endevours to bleed you for even more than
you are already providing.
There are times when some sort of award scheme is appropriate. And I don't
just mean the kind of kickbacks awarded to architects etc.
I once had a customer who feigned a sense of insult because I would not give
him such special rates. He protested that if it wasn't for him... etc. But
there was a problem with his demands. He was and had never being the first
customer in any area, nor would any of his neighbours employ me as a favour
for him. They didn't much like him. He was a horrible man if ever there was
one. And so I delighted in telling him that I do have just such a pricing
policy for the right customer. I had specific, % commission incentives, for
such customers and therefore he too could be one . All he would have to do
is deliver on his claims. He never could. Mind you, that didn't stop him
demanding just such discounts the following years. (& me reminding him how
things really work!)
So, do rememeber;
You have no duty to work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly.
You have no duty to work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly
You have no duty to work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly.
It is not the accuracy of whatever financial honesty or pretence that is
presented to you that you most be most careful about. It is when it comes
loaded with attempts to impose their financial burden onto you, or in order
to impose an illusion of real "duty" upon you.
There are lots of two legged leeches out there. Watch out!
&
You have no duty to work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you
properly!!!!!

Patrick


--

In article , tuin man aquachimp@aquac
himp.freeserve.co.uk writes


I think it's worth repeating the above sound advice; You have no duty to
work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly.

Absolutely! Though equally you can choose to if you wish.

As advice, it's right up there with the best.
This becomes all the more pertinent when you encounter those who will seek
to impose just such a "duty" (like as in a form of Tax), by attempting to
prevail upon you to award them special low rates on account of how they were
your first customer in the area. yadda yadda ya.
The truth is that they gave you the job because at £10 per hour they were on
to a good thing. They gave you the work because it was to their advantage.
If it wasn't, then they wouldn't have.

Not necessarily - I have given work to people starting up mainly to give
them a leg up. But again that is my own free will and I wouldn't expect
repayment. So maybe you are right - the special pleaders had ulterior
motives, it's your oldest customers who don't make a fuss who were the
ones who had an element of altruism when they first gave you work ;-)


--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"

"Kay" wrote in message
news
In article , tuin man aquachimp@aquac
himp.freeserve.co.uk writes


I think it's worth repeating the above sound advice; You have no duty to
work for anyone who cannot afford to pay you properly.

Absolutely! Though equally you can choose to if you wish.

As advice, it's right up there with the best.
This becomes all the more pertinent when you encounter those who will
seek
to impose just such a "duty" (like as in a form of Tax), by attempting to
prevail upon you to award them special low rates on account of how they
were
your first customer in the area. yadda yadda ya.
The truth is that they gave you the job because at £10 per hour they were
on
to a good thing. They gave you the work because it was to their
advantage.
If it wasn't, then they wouldn't have.

Not necessarily - I have given work to people starting up mainly to give
them a leg up.

Yes off course. I accept that entirely and it was an unfortunate ommision
for being so often all the more necessary.
I had sat here for a while before sending thinking... now what was that
other thing which was just as important. (-:
The same principle applies when choosing a quote, which is why the price
rank (top/middle/lowest quote) should not always be the deciding factor.

But again that is my own free will and I wouldn't expect
repayment. So maybe you are right - the special pleaders had ulterior
motives, it's your oldest customers who don't make a fuss who were the
ones who had an element of altruism when they first gave you work ;-)

True. And recipricol. Especially if they are also the ones who point out
that the "going rate" for gardening is unsustainable and do something about
it. Quite a contrast to the special pleaders (-:

Patrick

Rotax100uk wrote in message ws.com...
I am now starting my own gardening business at the age of 20 and i would
like to know if anyone here has any advice which you think i should
need.

(snip...)

Please can somebody help or have any of you people on hear and been in
the same situation and want to help me out?

What about some formal training and certification?

I'm currently working in an office and the only thing that keeps me
going (maybe a little dramatic!) is the dream that one day I'll be in
a position to start my own gardening business.

I've enrolled on a City and Guilds course in garden design and
construction at a local college mainly to improve my knowledge but
also with the assumption that formal qualifications will - in my dream
- help to pull in the business. Am I wasting my time?

"Baz Quirk" wrote in message
om...
Rotax100uk wrote in message
ws.com...
I'm currently working in an office and the only thing that keeps me
going (maybe a little dramatic!) is the dream that one day I'll be in
a position to start my own gardening business.

I've enrolled on a City and Guilds course in garden design and
construction at a local college mainly to improve my knowledge but
also with the assumption that formal qualifications will - in my dream
- help to pull in the business. Am I wasting my time?

No, you are not wasting your time. The formal qualifications will be
immeasurably valuable to you. You will come to realise that in quite a short
time.
But.
You may find their value to be largely a more personal award.,, i.e a source
of considerable, and I do mean considerable personal satisfaction, albeit
that it wont pay the rent.
I think it was Rod who mentioned the problem that gardening rates of pay are
low because it seems to be taken that anyone can do the job. (according to
an RHS article some months back, a qualified gardener's pay = £15000 / year,
whilst a trainee gardener... £8k)
This is what you have to compete against and added to that, there are those
who do not want to know about your qualifications because it soothes their
conscience to pay less on the strength of an assumption on your lack of
qualifications.
Personally, I'd suggest to anyone to continue with the educational process,
adopt gardening as a hobby, but keep the day job, which will also have much
more kudos (no matter what it is if it's "working in an office").
The interesting thing about that 'anyone can do it' concept is how it gets
exposed as a falsehood so very often.
E.g. Mr S. resents paying pretty much anything for his gardeners labours,
but does so because he sees himself as cash rich, time poor. Anyone with
half a brain cell could do gardening, he thinks and says. In his mind, which
by contrast he sees as superior, he merits his success and really, he should
have gardeners provided by the council for free as well.
But then one day, when he does have time, he is called upon to assist an
elderly relative/neighbour with a bit of gardening because the OAP can't
afford a gardener. He refuses with profuse apologies. He would love to help,
but, oh the regret, alas, he doesn't know anything about gardening and
wouldn't even know where to begin.
(-;

Patrick