| Electronics > Repair |
| Charging by the hour is unfair! |
| << < (25/40) > >> |
| PlainName:
I wonder if those 'explaining' that an hourly rate is the only way to do business might be in the camp that abhors the switch from one-off fee for a perpetual license to a subscription model for software. Of course, the difference is that here most are on the supplier side of the fence for repairs and think the customer should cough for their (the repairer's) right to make a profit in their chosen field. For software, it's the vendors responsibility to make a business out of what someone is will to buy. |
| CatalinaWOW:
--- Quote from: PlainName on July 06, 2024, 03:15:56 pm ---I wonder if those 'explaining' that an hourly rate is the only way to do business might be in the camp that abhors the switch from one-off fee for a perpetual license to a subscription model for software. Of course, the difference is that here most are on the supplier side of the fence for repairs and think the customer should cough for their (the repairer's) right to make a profit in their chosen field. For software, it's the vendors responsibility to make a business out of what someone is will to buy. --- End quote --- The subscription model in the repair industry has a different name. It is called insurance. The difference from the software industry is that it is optional. What they software and insurance industry have in common is that there is at most a carefully limited guarantee of performance. |
| SteveThackery:
--- Quote from: fmashockie on July 06, 2024, 02:57:15 pm --- I'm going to assume you're talking about yourself here and your lack of skills. But if you wanted to do that, then go ahead. Doesn't mean you're going to get continued business or bad reviews. And not because your policy is 'no fix, no fee', it is because you suck at what you do. And like any service you pay for, if you're smart, you research it before you move forward with it. You look at reviews and reputation. Again, here you go using extreme examples to prove your ridiculous point. It's like saying "well it would be preposterous to go sky-diving at all, because there's going to be someone who isn't going to check your parachute beforehand; and for that reason no one should be able to take anyone sky-diving". --- End quote --- OF COURSE I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT MYSELF! SHEESH! I spent a good part of my career as an electronics bench tech. I'm constructing an example that apparently passes all your criteria for a professional repairer - and therefore is free to charge $200 per hour whether successful or not - to illustrate how absurd your argument is that said repairer is completely entitled to charge $200 for providing a shit service AND THERE IS NOTHING THE CUSTOMER CAN DO ABOUT IT! According to you guys the inept repairer - who has spent all day pissing about resoldering the PCB - is acting COMPLETELY FAIRLY by charging the poor customer $1600 for eight hours labour and returning it still broken. Come on, get real!! Yes, OF COURSE I'm exaggerating to describe one end of the spectrum, but let's get real, guys: EVERY ONE OF YOU is somewhere on that spectrum! The level of expertise will vary between you. You must acknowledge that sometimes you just get it wrong. My exaggerated example gets it wrong every time, but YOU get it wrong some of the time. You do, don't you?! I reckon you will agree with me that the inept repairer I constructed as an extreme example probably shouldn't get paid at all. So if you are anywhere on that spectrum that has him at one end, then maybe there's the odd time when you don't deserve to be paid either. Once you have become a perfect repairer who never gets anything wrong, ie you're at the extreme opposite end from my imaginary man, maybe then you should ALWAYS deserve to be paid. But not until you arrive there. I've got a theory. My theory is that almost all the respondents on this thread are American. If so, it suggests that the concepts of honour and fair play don't extend across the Atlantic from my country (UK). |
| MK14:
--- Quote from: SteveThackery on July 06, 2024, 03:36:54 pm ---I've got a theory. My theory is that almost all the respondents on this thread are American. If so, it suggests that the concepts of honour and fair play don't extend across the Atlantic from my country (UK). --- End quote --- At this point, it looks like you are Troll Baiting, in the quoted section, or whatever it should be called. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_bait |
| PlainName:
--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on July 06, 2024, 03:29:02 pm --- --- Quote from: PlainName on July 06, 2024, 03:15:56 pm ---I wonder if those 'explaining' that an hourly rate is the only way to do business might be in the camp that abhors the switch from one-off fee for a perpetual license to a subscription model for software. Of course, the difference is that here most are on the supplier side of the fence for repairs and think the customer should cough for their (the repairer's) right to make a profit in their chosen field. For software, it's the vendors responsibility to make a business out of what someone is will to buy. --- End quote --- The subscription model in the repair industry has a different name. It is called insurance. The difference from the software industry is that it is optional. What they software and insurance industry have in common is that there is at most a carefully limited guarantee of performance. --- End quote --- I don't think they are much different at the bottom. In software the developer spends time and money on something they hope will attract buyers, but it may not and they will then make a loss after all that effort. The repairer, in that context, would attempt the repair but in the end may not manage it and make a loss. I can see that the repairer can have unforeseen costs - parts that weren't obviously broken (or are replaced just to make sure), or a cascade of issue. But the software developer has similar unforeseen costs. The main difference is that (for fixed price) the developer would price his work at the end whereas the repairer would have to price it at the start. However, in essence they are very similar - the repairer may under-quote and be lumbered with a below-cost price, but the developer may expend all those costs assuming his product could sell for X whereas no-one will buy unless it is X/2 and he's similarly lumbered with a below-costs return. The subscription model makes software development like the repair job - instead of the developer carrying the cost of development and then attempting to recoup it through sales, the purchaser (subscriber) carries the cost and may not end up with a better product (and may even not want a 'better' product!). It is all about moving the risk from the developer to the purchaser, and with repairs that risk is already with the purchaser. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |