Author Topic: Charging by the hour is unfair!  (Read 12416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #50 on: July 03, 2024, 03:31:53 pm »
The "no fix = no fee" entitlement bullshit needs to die. If a business wants to offer it, good luck to them. I know a lot of electronics repairers and none of them operate this way. If you want me to use my skills and work on your equipment, you need to pay for it.

And yet in the previous para you describe doing that very thing: no fix, no fee.

No fix, no fee isn't bullshit, and it's not about "entitlement".  You said: "If you want me to use my skills and work on your equipment, you need to pay for it."

I simply cannot believe this!  Here we go again.  As a customer I want a repair.  I don't care HOW you achieve that.  I don't care whether you you use your skills or not. Feel free to "poke and hope" if that's all that's needed.  I don't care whether you "work on my equipment" or your dog does it. If you can see the fix in five seconds flat, then good for you.

Once again it seems you cannot see the difference between what you want to sell (your time, or your skills) and what the customer wants to buy.  The customer doesn't want to buy your skills and work, they want to buy a repair.  I find it quite extraordinary that I'm still having to explain this.

I have already agreed that there are various legitimate businesses models for how to charge the customer.  The only point I will not budge on is the practice of failing to give the customer what they want and still charging them for it.  That simply IS a rip-off.
 

Offline watchmaker

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 610
  • Country: us
  • Self Study in EE
    • Precision Timepiece Restoration and Service
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #51 on: July 03, 2024, 03:35:06 pm »
I would suggest that watch repair is a bad comparison to electronics repair.  It seems that parts for watches can either be purchased or fabricated relatively easily.  For electronics many parts are literally impossible to replace.  Vacuum tubes may or may not be available, and many custom ICs cannot be found.  While an experienced tech recognize the likelihood of this problem in a particular device, is the labor to verify that no repairable fault exists to be free?

I said precisely this in my first post.  However, the principles of small business apply.  Find a niche, limit the universe of devices you repair (the days of Lloyd's Fix It shop are done) and compete on service. 

TV repair was probably the closest analog to timepeice repair.  Just carry around a box of tubes. 

Overall, as I tell young watchmakers, charge to be fair to yourself.  If a gas lawnmower or chainsaw repairman makes more than you, change businesses.  Pulling parts off a shelf for an item of no historical importance, or draining oil is a lot different from knowing how to handle complicated (chronograph), expensive  or uncommon timepieces.  Plus the liability if things go south.

So if a lawnmower is charged at $45 an hour, what should be the charge for servicing timepieces?

The same with electronics service work.  A lot of education, tooling up, experience and knowing where to get replacement parts.

FWIW, my customers tend to be grateful, not feeling ripped off.  Part of it is qualifying the customer ("I am sorry, but I cannot serve you") and part of it is competing on service and not price.  In fact, they put up with me not working during the summer, waiting several months to send it in and then waiting a couple of months until it comes up, the service is performed and then 1 to 2 weeks to verify performance.

I did have several customers try to renege on their payment.  Small claims court took care of all but one.  The last was a restoration hangar.  I simply noted his business in Quickbooks and sure enough, three years later he sent another clock.  I billed him for the accrued interest on the first clock.  He told me to keep the clock he sent.  Tasty.  That was the only time I broke my policy of payment before shipment.  No invoices since.

At some point in every business transaction, one person holds both the money and the goods.  Business does not work without trust.  I just trust my character above others.
Regards,

Dewey
 
The following users thanked this post: SteveThackery

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #52 on: July 03, 2024, 03:52:49 pm »
In my experience the most common reasons for an item not being repaired are that it won't be economically viable (too many hours and / or parts required), or that the part(s) required are simply no longer available. Both are very real problems that service technicians face all the time and often you can't possibly know this outcome until you've spent a fair chunk of time on that job.

So far this is the best argument put forward in this debate. In some fields this is a completely real issue: parts not available, or so many needed it would cost too much.

I think there are two obvious approaches here. Firstly, you could explain the situation to the customer, return the item and eat the cost.  More realistically, you could have a policy of evaluating each job when it comes in for viability, and explain to the customer that this initial evaluation will cost $50 (say) regardless of the outcome. That is fine because you and the customer have AGREED UP FRONT that they will have to pay $50 and there is a risk attached to it. The customer is fully informed.  They can go ahead, knowing they might spend $50 and have nothing to show, or they can decide it's not worth the risk.  There is nothing morally wrong about that.

A nice little variant on that system is to say to the customer, "If you decide to go ahead I will knock the $50 off your final bill".  I've seen that a lot and it certainly buys a lot of goodwill. How you actually arrange that is a matter for your discretion.  :)

This is fundamentally different morally from taking on the job, failing at it, and still charging them.  That is what cannot be justified morally.

I've had a few instances in the last 30 odd years where I've accepted a repair only to realise that I either didn't know enough to do the job or I could foresee the train wreck it would become due to the combination of customer and item / fault. In those cases I did no work on the item and refunded the upfront fee. Some of them were referred to other repairers with more specialist knowledge in the item concerned.

Excellent! Good for you - you did exactly what I'm arguing for: no fix, no fee.
 

Offline jonpaul

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3656
  • Country: fr
  • Analog, magnetics, Power, HV, Audio, Cinema
    • IEEE Spectrum
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #53 on: July 03, 2024, 04:03:38 pm »
ask any lawyer how he charges....
An Internet Dinosaur...
 
The following users thanked this post: David Aurora, tooki, fmashockie, SteveThackery

Offline T3sl4co1l

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 22436
  • Country: us
  • Expert, Analog Electronics, PCB Layout, EMC
    • Seven Transistor Labs
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #54 on: July 03, 2024, 04:11:31 pm »
You're apparently arguing that a service should always have the status of a good, but that's simply not how services work.

No I'm not. I'm arguing that a customer never wants to buy your time, because it is intangible and useless to them. They want to buy a repair.  That is a service, not a good.

What they NEVER want to buy is a "nothing". $200 for a non-repair.

You are mistaken -- I've seen plenty of people pay money for intangible and useless services!  Repeatedly and voluntarily!

Maybe your perspective is biased by your experience in a niche market.  I would perhaps be surprised -- but also would not rule it out -- that your clientele have, by and large, been intelligent, rational, economically minded people.

Or perhaps your mix is in fact more ordinary but you've internally excused the outliers -- perhaps they're just having a bad day; perhaps you've defensively taught yourself to forget such experiences.  But there is obviously some sort of bias at work here, that you would say such a thing, that you wouldn't be cognizant that "intangible and useless services" constitute billions (trillions?) of dollars of market share each year.

You also don't seem to appreciate that there are two sides to every deal.  I phrased my previous reply in such a framework, and it has fallen on deaf ears -- or been willfully ignored (e.g. because you consider it irrelevant, because you've long since evaluated and discarded that point and have forgotten that it would be important/germane to reply with what your reasoning for that conclusion was, etc.).  A contract is between two people.  There are buyers and there are sellers.  A deal is an agreement to exchange money.  If parties agree to exchange money for tenuous material reasons, who are you to tell them they are in the wrong?  That's quite rude of you!

But most of all, you claim your point as god-given truth, and refuse to hear any disagreement --  a point easily disputed, fragile as glass.  You've framed this as a question, a debate; but in fact, you only came here to pontificate.  You've abused our openness, our desire to exchange ideas; you are nothing but a troll.

You're welcome to change my mind on the above statements, but it is clear that the points you came here with, are not in dispute; these latter points are, it seems, the only truly meaningful matters to dispute here.

Tim
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electronic design, from concept to prototype.
Bringing a project to life?  Send me a message!
 
The following users thanked this post: fmashockie, SteveThackery, Rafiki

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #55 on: July 03, 2024, 04:29:27 pm »
In summary, I think there is one principle that we should all stick to: never surprise a customer with a bill, and never send them away feeling they've been ripped off.  (Hmmm... maybe that's two principles...)

Firstly, and most importantly, I think this means never taking on a job, failing at it, and then charging them for your time regardless.  This is utterly unacceptable and should never happen. It is unfair to the customer because it loads all the business risk onto the customer, while you take on no risk at all - fail or not, that'll be five hundred bucks, thank you kindly.  Dumping all the risk on the customer is morally indefensible.

Equally, taking on a job, failing at it and being unable to charge the customer (for good moral reasons) is equally unfair, but this time it is unfair on you.  In that model, you take on all the risk, and the customer takes on none.  They might like that idea, but it is unfair on yourself, as many of you have pointed out. 

So what is left? You and the customer share the risk.   And make it clear that either party can avoid any risk just by walking away.

Sharing the risk implies the following..... You tell the customer up-front that you need to evaluate the job, and that will cost $50 (say), regardless of the outcome (ie whether you can repair it or you can't).  At that point the customer can take that risk, or walk away with their money.  If they agree to go ahead, you get the money up front. Once evaluated, you say to the customer "I can do it and it'll cost $200" (say), or "I can't repair it because the parts are obsolete" (for example).

If the customer decides to proceed, stick to your estimate (that's your side of the risk equation).  Maybe you could agree to seek their approval if the bill is going to be more, but that does risk the customer feeling suspicious about being "gouged".

So, TL:DR:

1/ Tell the customer there'll be an up-front evaluation charge. They can either accept it or walk away.

After the evaluation:

EITHER
2a/ Tell the customer you can fix it for $n (and stick to that quote).

OR
2b/ Tell the customer the item is beyond economic repair.
 
That seems to be the only way that the risk is shared - it's as fair as possible to you and as fair as possible to the customer.  Nobody feels ripped off because both parties knew what risks and costs were involved up front.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2024, 04:49:11 pm by SteveThackery »
 

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #56 on: July 03, 2024, 04:43:04 pm »

You also don't seem to appreciate that there are two sides to every deal.


The opposite is true.  See my post just above this one.  I've been arguing that charging for your time even if you fail is one-sided. The rest of that post describes how to make the risk properly two-sided.


But most of all, you claim your point as god-given truth, and refuse to hear any disagreement


There is only one small point in my original, wider-ranging argument, that I refuse to move on, and that is presenting the customer with a significant bill AND their unrepaired appliance.  You are right, I won't move on that one.  But I have conceded all the other points!


You've abused our openness, our desire to exchange ideas; you are nothing but a troll.


Hey, come on now - just because I find an argument entirely unconvincing and illogical does NOT make me a troll.  How about me calling you a troll for continuing to insist it's OK to charge a customer even when you aren't up to the job of fixing their widget?  Defending that position looks awfully troll-like to me!


You're welcome to change my mind on the above statements, but it is clear that the points you came here with, are not in dispute; these latter points are, it seems, the only truly meaningful matters to dispute here.


I refer you to my previous post, which I believe addresses the entire discussion, whilst defending my one and only non-negotiable.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2024, 04:45:19 pm by SteveThackery »
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13156
  • Country: ch
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #57 on: July 03, 2024, 06:35:34 pm »
Reading another thread on this topic got me thinking about all the things wrong with charging by the hour.

...

Maybe every job should start with an up-front firm quote to the customer, and should include a no fix / no fee commitment.  If that is too restrictive, then give the customer an estimate and say that you will contact them to ask their agreement to proceed if you find you need to charge more for the repair.  But again, NO FIX, NO FEE!

What say you?
I would say you're delusional.

I get it, that from a customer POV, you want a quick, fixed-price transaction.

But the fact is, everything you pay for (including goods you buy) are ultimately paying for someone's time. (OK, with the big exception of corporate profit and other forms of rent-seeking.) That's all labor is -- someone's time. And even raw materials are just the cost of people's time to collect the material, or to manufacture the tools needed to collect the material.

Having worked as a computer technician, think of it from the technician's point of view: you don't know what's wrong with the thing. It might be simple, or it might be something completely unexpected that takes hours just to diagnose. If you don't charge for diagnostics, then with every repair, you're gambling. You have no idea what the issue is and whether you'll be able to fix it. And the nature of the fault is something you have zero control over!

Would you gamble with YOUR income, based on a factor that's outside of your control? How is that fair to the technician?

Sometimes repairs are complex, and success can only be determined after doing a lot of work. Is it fair for the technician to invest lots of time and parts (which could be expensive) only to discover that it cannot be repaired, meaning that all the parts and labor are donated for free?

Some technicians/companies choose to offer free estimates/diagnostics and/or "no fix, no fee". But what that means is that the cost of those services is baked into a higher price for all the services that do get performed: paying customers are then subsidizing those free services. Is that fair to them?


I work as an in-house electronics technician at a university, and one of my duties is repairing lab equipment. We have literally hundreds of magnetic stirrers, including probably hundreds of just one model. Because of that fact, it made sense for me to invest hours into reverse-engineering the control circuit and figuring out the various failure modes, because a fault I encounter once, I am likely to encounter again and again. I have had multiple units where the failed component is a resistor. Literally a 1 cent part. But given the hours it took to figure out how the circuit works, just to make it possible to diagnose a bad component, is only worthwhile because the labor cost is spread across many units. If it were a device that we only had one of, my boss would have told me to spend an hour on it at most, and then declare it BER (beyond economical repair). Only because we have literally hundreds was it worth investing more time.


Imagine if a customer came into a repair shop with one of those things, which they'd never seen before, with the same broken resistor. Is it fair to the technician to spend 6 hours on diagnostics, and then only be able to bill the customer the 10 minutes it takes to open the housing, replace the resistor, clean the board, and close it back up? Plus the one cent for parts? Certainly not. Would a typical customer be willing to pay you to spend 6h to fix it, when that is more than the unit cost new? Likely not. So in practice, you'd take only a quick look at it and declare it unrepairable.

Fixed-price repairs are sometimes offered. But because of the unpredictability, they tend to cost more than the average for that type of repair might cost on a per-hour basis. Or they are moderately priced but come with VERY strict prerequisites. (Ever wonder why Apple won't perform a battery replacement, which they offer as a fixed-price repair, on a phone that has any visible damage whatsoever? It's because you don't know what unexpected problems that damage might cause. For example, and I have had this happen when attempting to do a repair on a device, if the screen bezel is deformed even a tiny bit, then once you get the screen out, you won't be able to get it back in, at the risk of causing the screen to shatter.)


Anyhow, this is just scratching the surface of the topic. There are many ways to price technical services. But one thing I can tell you: consumer tech support and repairs are the worst business. Consumers need support that is ultimately often just as difficult and time-consuming as business stuff, but they aren't willing and/or able to pay for it. This is why e.g. computer tech support services come in exactly two price categories: high-schoolers charging $15-40/h doing it as a hobby, and professionals charging $100-500/h. What doesn't exist is a middle ground. I tried it. What happens is that consumers penny-pinch every minute. Business customers are happy to pay your $200/h.

When I went back to school in 2003 after already being an established computer consultant, and did some support on the side, for business clients I used this billing model : $75/h (with one hour minimum) plus a $75 flat charge to cover travel (within a reasonable distance). In other words, you had to pay $150 for me to show up, up to an hour. Then beyond that billed in 15 minute increments. The business clients didn't bat an eye at this (even if the outcome after 30 minutes is "it's broke, you need to buy a new one"). (My former employer used a different model: no base charge, but $90/h. Cheaper for short visits, but more expensive for long ones.)

At the same time, I tried (and quickly abandoned) doing a lower rate for consumers, $35/h + $35 base charge w/1h minimum. But it just wasn't worth it. Taking a half hour to drive over, another half hour back, and then even two hours there, for $105 just ain't worth the time, mileage, and tools you need to have. But moreover, consumers would try and haggle you down, trying to get you to round down 90 minutes to an hour, or to only charge 30 minutes for a 30 minute visit (even though it was still an hour travel in total). And they'd always come up with another "quick question" after writing you the check...

I felt somewhat bad at having to leave those people without support, but it simply wasn't worthwhile, and dealing with the penny-pinching is just plain unpleasant. It makes you feel like they don't value your time and expertise.

I kept the business customers only.
 
The following users thanked this post: djsb, SteveThackery

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13156
  • Country: ch
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #58 on: July 03, 2024, 06:41:03 pm »
The more competent you are the higher your hourly rate.

Doubles as an excellent filter.
Yep.

When my sister (who is a singing teacher) went into business for herself, I gave her exactly that advice: price filters out the clients you don't want. The ones who recognize your value as a professional-tier teacher (as in, she teaches professional singers how to improve) will be happy to pay a high rate and won't complain.

High rates also send a really strong message outwards about how good you are claiming to be. Or more importantly: if you charge too little, many clients won't take you seriously. So paradoxically, you often get more business by charging more!
 
The following users thanked this post: SteveThackery

Offline watchmaker

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 610
  • Country: us
  • Self Study in EE
    • Precision Timepiece Restoration and Service
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #59 on: July 03, 2024, 06:56:51 pm »
I agree; I sell my time.  And it is a non renewable resource.  Once used it is gone forever.  Regardless of what physics sez.

Discount parts; never your time.
Regards,

Dewey
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, SteveThackery

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13156
  • Country: ch
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #60 on: July 03, 2024, 07:00:49 pm »
If you aren't competent enough to find and fix the fault, why should you still get your $200 per hour reward?  Can't you see how wrong that is?  What other business rewards incompetence and failure as generously as competence and success?  That is why it is so wrong to send the customer home with a still-broken appliance and a few hundred bucks less in their wallet.

And one last time: if you aren't smart enough to fix my appliance, why the heck do you expect me to pay you? If you aren't smart enough, your time is worth nothing.  No fix/no fee is a moral imperative.
The ability to fix the device is not predicated solely on the technician's competence! Even a highly skilled technician can run into things that cannot be repaired at all, or that cannot be repaired at a cost that makes any sense to do.

And with most electronics these days having no schematics or service manuals, and with more and more of the "secret sauce" tied up in the code of a microcontroller, even the most skilled of technicians will encounter faults they categorically cannot repair. MCUs are a great example: if one of them dies, that's it, the device is toast. Even if you can identify and replace the MCU, the device won't work because your replacement MCU is blank. Without the code, which you don't have, you cannot restore functionality.

What a more experienced (not just skilled) technician will have is a larger bank of experience to identify faults they've seen before, such that they can say "I know this problem, and it can't be fixed for less than the cost of a new device". The experienced people also know where to source obscure parts, and where to look for information resources. All this is why more experienced technicians can command higher rates than novices, even with the same level of training and inherent skill.
 
The following users thanked this post: djsb, SteveThackery

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #61 on: July 03, 2024, 07:05:55 pm »

I would say you're delusional.

I get it, that from a customer POV, you want a quick, fixed-price transaction. [...]

Having worked as a computer technician, think of it from the technician's point of view: you don't know what's wrong with the thing. It might be simple, or it might be something completely unexpected that takes hours just to diagnose. If you don't charge for diagnostics, then with every repair, you're gambling. You have no idea what the issue is and whether you'll be able to fix it. And the nature of the fault is something you have zero control over!

Would you gamble with YOUR income, based on a factor that's outside of your control? How is that fair to the technician?

Sometimes repairs are complex, and success can only be determined after doing a lot of work. Is it fair for the technician to invest lots of time and parts (which could be expensive) only to discover that it cannot be repaired, meaning that all the parts and labor are donated for free?

Some technicians/companies choose to offer free estimates/diagnostics and/or "no fix, no fee". But what that means is that the cost of those services is baked into a higher price for all the services that do get performed: paying customers are then subsidizing those free services. Is that fair to them? [...]

Imagine if a customer came into a repair shop with one of those things, which they'd never seen before, with the same broken resistor. Is it fair to the technician to spend 6 hours on diagnostics, and then only be able to bill the customer the 10 minutes it takes to open the housing, replace the resistor, clean the board, and close it back up? Plus the one cent for parts? Certainly not. Would a typical customer be willing to pay you to spend 6h to fix it, when that is more than the unit cost new? Likely not. So in practice, you'd take only a quick look at it and declare it unrepairable. [...]

Fixed-price repairs are sometimes offered. But because of the unpredictability, they tend to cost more than the average for that type of repair might cost on a per-hour basis. Or they are moderately priced but come with VERY strict prerequisites. (Ever wonder why Apple won't perform a battery replacement, which they offer as a fixed-price repair, on a phone that has any visible damage whatsoever? It's because you don't know what unexpected problems that damage might cause. For example, and I have had this happen when attempting to do a repair on a device, if the screen bezel is deformed even a tiny bit, then once you get the screen out, you won't be able to get it back in, at the risk of causing the screen to shatter.) [...]

Anyhow, this is just scratching the surface of the topic. There are many ways to price technical services. But one thing I can tell you: consumer tech support and repairs are the worst business. Consumers need support that is ultimately often just as difficult and time-consuming as business stuff, but they aren't willing and/or able to pay for it. This is why e.g. computer tech support services come in exactly two price categories: high-schoolers charging $15-40/h doing it as a hobby, and professionals charging $100-500/h. What doesn't exist is a middle ground. I tried it. What happens is that consumers penny-pinch every minute. Business customers are happy to pay your $200/h. [...]

I kept the business customers only.

OK, well that is basically a comprehensive review of all the arguments against my position in this thread. I don't think I need to reiterate any part of my argument - I've done it to death by now.  Nobody has convinced me to drop my "no fix/no fee" position, but the other arguments, about different charging models, are interesting and instructive, and I appreciate the time taken by all the contributors to this thread.

In parting, there is one thing I would respectfully but vigorously beg of you:

If there is any chance that the customer might have to pay for a non-repair (regardless of the reason), please warn them in advance!  That way they can choose whether to take the risk or not.  Surely that is entirely reasonable.
 

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #62 on: July 03, 2024, 07:14:44 pm »
By the way, and not really a continuation of the argument... In the world of horology (clock and watch repairs), practitioners are so scarce that anyone, with the most limited skills and knowledge, can set themselves up in the trade.  Their crap work means they rarely get repeat business, but they don't need it. Even if nobody ever comes back, there is enough latent demand out there to keep them in food and beer for years.

Unlike electronics, in horology it is easy to get away with rubbish workmanship. So long as the damn thing ticks, it goes out the door. The customer can't tell if it's a fine job or a bodge.

Thank goodness being an electronics technician is so much more demanding!  The standard of practitioners is vastly higher.
 

Offline David_AVD

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2864
  • Country: au
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #63 on: July 03, 2024, 09:11:30 pm »
I've had a few instances in the last 30 odd years where I've accepted a repair only to realise that I either didn't know enough to do the job or I could foresee the train wreck it would become due to the combination of customer and item / fault. In those cases I did no work on the item and refunded the upfront fee. Some of them were referred to other repairers with more specialist knowledge in the item concerned.

Excellent! Good for you - you did exactly what I'm arguing for: no fix, no fee.

No, this was not the "no fix, no fee" you keep talking about. It was a "declined to work on it, refunded fee" situation and a very rare one.

You are also seem convinced that every customer is only interested in the fixed result with no regard for the diagnosis. I have plenty of customers who will ask for me to assess the issues and let them know what I find. They know that diagnosing things costs money. Sometimes that's accompanied by a agreement that if the total repair price is in a certain range then I am ok to proceed without consulting them.
 
The following users thanked this post: djsb, tooki, fmashockie, SteveThackery

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3925
  • Country: de
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #64 on: July 03, 2024, 09:32:45 pm »

And yet again you ignore the point.  I'll have one more go.  If you aren't competent enough to find and fix the fault, why should you still get your $200 per hour reward?  Can't you see how wrong that is?  What other business rewards incompetence and failure as generously as competence and success?  That is why it is so wrong to send the customer home with a still-broken appliance and a few hundred bucks less in their wallet.


And who are you to judge my competence? You have agreed to my contractual conditions beforehand, when I took your device for repair. If you don't like the conditions of my contract you are free to go elsewhere with your gadget. Or to repair it yourself. You are obviously sufficiently competent yourself since you are able to judge the competence of the repair shop merely based on that they are being honest with you.

That I can't fix something in the first 2 hours and tell you that no, this can't be fixed in two hours because I have discovered the problem is more serious, how is that incompetence?

If there is such contract, that means that it is either very likely it will be not worth fixing the device - and in that case I am actually saving you money.  Or that the problem could be much more expensive to fix than originally estimated because of  problems that couldn't be seen before actually opening it and spending time diagnosing it. Then I call you and it is your choice to either say OK, continue - or you pay me only for the spent time and get your gizmo back.

Some people have no fix no fee policy, some don't - go to any car mechanic and see whether they will spend 2-3 hours working on your car for free if the problem can't be fixed in two hours because e.g. it turns out the engine is shot after they took it apart. Good luck!
 
Or do you think you could determine what needs to be fixed by looking at the box of the broken device your client brings you?

A light-hearted analogy would be to walk into a shop and ask for a can of tomato soup.  The proprietor says "I'm sorry, we're out of stock.  That'll be $1.20 please."

Sorry mate, but this argument is complete bollocks. Unlike that proprietor that can see whether the soup is on the shelf outright, I don't have Superman's x-ray vision to determine what's the fault is by merely looking at the unopened case and without doing any diagnostics. Which takes time, effort and in some cases also consumables (and also the overheads for the shop). That you don't understand that the time isn't free and I am not able to work on another job while I am busy with your gadget doesn't change anything on that.

It seems like you cannot put yourself in the customer's shoes, even for a moment.  But try, please. 

And one last time: if you aren't smart enough to fix my appliance, why the heck do you expect me to pay you? If you aren't smart enough, your time is worth nothing.  No fix/no fee is a moral imperative.

If you are so smart as to determine that the repairman is incompetent because they can't fix your device by merely looking at it then you will save a lot of money - and me trouble because I would never accept your business. Simply not worth the trouble. You can preach about moral imperatives only once you are paying my bills. Not before.

And with that I am done here because it is obviously a complete waste of time trying to explain you something this elementary.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2024, 09:38:39 pm by janoc »
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #65 on: July 03, 2024, 09:51:18 pm »
No, this was not the "no fix, no fee" you keep talking about. It was a "declined to work on it, refunded fee" situation and a very rare one.

OK, understood.

You are also seem convinced that every customer is only interested in the fixed result with no regard for the diagnosis. I have plenty of customers who will ask for me to assess the issues and let them know what I find. They know that diagnosing things costs money.

You make a good point, and you have highlighted that I am oversimplifying things by concentrating only on repairs.  Your point isn't really in disagreement with me, though.  In those instances the customer is specifically asking for, and paying for, a diagnosis (rather than a repair), so of course they are willing to pay for it. 

Sometimes that's accompanied by a agreement that if the total repair price is in a certain range then I am ok to proceed without consulting them.

Likewise, if you tell them in advance the price range for the repair, and they are happy with it, then once again they will be willing to pay.  This is because you have guaranteed that they will not be stung with a bill AND a non-repair, which is what I've been banging on about for the past two pages.

That must surely be clear to everyone: you've done an assessment (paid for separately as a service in its own right), and you have guaranteed that if the repair goes ahead the cost will be within a range agreed with the customer. Therefore you have guaranteed they will not be stung with a bill for a non-repair. 

Here is what I wrote earlier:

Quote

So, TL:DR:

1/ Tell the customer there'll be an up-front evaluation charge. They can either accept it or walk away.

After the evaluation:

EITHER
2a/ Tell the customer you can fix it for $n(*) (and stick to that quote).

OR
2b/ Tell the customer the item is beyond economic repair.
 
That seems to be the only way that the risk is shared - it's as fair as possible to you and as fair as possible to the customer.  Nobody feels ripped off because both parties knew what risks and costs were involved up front.


(*) The only difference between us is you quote a price range rather than a single price, but the principle is identical.

So, you see, we agree!  You have described exactly what I was advocating.
 

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #66 on: July 03, 2024, 09:59:56 pm »
If you are so smart as to determine that the repairman is incompetent because they can't fix your device by merely looking at it then you will save a lot of money - and me trouble because I would never accept your business. Simply not worth the trouble. You can preach about moral imperatives only once you are paying my bills. Not before.

I'm not smart, I'm dumb in comparison with you.

Even so, you seem not to have read what I wrote:

Quote
So, TL:DR:

1/ Tell the customer there'll be an up-front evaluation charge. They can either accept it or walk away.

After the evaluation:

EITHER
2a/ Tell the customer you can fix it for $n (and stick to that quote).

OR
2b/ Tell the customer the item is beyond economic repair.
 
That seems to be the only way that the risk is shared - it's as fair as possible to you and as fair as possible to the customer.  Nobody feels ripped off because both parties knew what risks and costs were involved up front.

You see? I'm advocating a paid-for evaluation (this is in response to the arguments made in this thread).  No X-ray vision required.  @David_AVD advocates a price range rather than a single price, and I think that sounds like a great idea.  In any case, by evaluating first and then quoting for the repair, you have guaranteed not to charge for a non-repair.

That is what I've been advocating.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2024, 10:07:32 pm by SteveThackery »
 

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #67 on: July 03, 2024, 10:04:14 pm »

If you are so smart as to determine that the repairman is incompetent because they can't fix your device by merely looking at it....

Don't you dare put words in my mouth - I said no such thing! Misrepresenting your opponent is despicable. You owe me an apology.
 

Offline David_AVD

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2864
  • Country: au
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #68 on: July 03, 2024, 10:42:12 pm »
Even with an estimated price range, there will be times when the true nature of the fault reveals itself and the item becomes uneconomical / impossible to repair. In those cases the upfront fee covers me for at least some of my time. In those cases the customer is out of pocket with no result. Occasionally I'm effectively out of pocket too if I've spent more time and parts on it than I can recover.
 
The following users thanked this post: SteveThackery

Offline thm_w

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7521
  • Country: ca
  • Non-expert
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #69 on: July 03, 2024, 11:14:42 pm »
Yes, 99% of repairers charge by the hour.

Its not true for a lot of cell phone repairs. Most of the rates are fixed, eg. battery replacement iphone xyz $60, screen replacement iphone xyz $100, etc.
But that is because: the fault is known, the repair time is known, and the parts cost is known.
If you know all of these and provide them to the person performing your repair, I'm sure many would be happy to take a fixed rate.

The up-front diagnostic fee and then a quote will work for most situations, probably most things like appliances, but not all. If the device is incredibly complex, or a part is needed to be ordered to test further, they might find more problems as they go on (as mentioned above a few times).
Profile -> Modify profile -> Look and Layout ->  Don't show users' signatures
 
The following users thanked this post: SteveThackery

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #70 on: July 03, 2024, 11:52:18 pm »
Even with an estimated price range, there will be times when the true nature of the fault reveals itself and the item becomes uneconomical / impossible to repair. In those cases the upfront fee covers me for at least some of my time. In those cases the customer is out of pocket with no result. Occasionally I'm effectively out of pocket too if I've spent more time and parts on it than I can recover.

Yes, I agree that sometimes, even after the evaluation and agreeing the price range, it can happen that it is beyond economic repair after all.  This is an example where you both lose out a little.  The customer has spent the evaluation fee without getting a repair; you have spent whatever time was required to reach that conclusion, so you have lost out, too. That is fair and equitable - you've both lost out a bit.  The customer willingly paid the evaluation fee - in effect they were willing to take that risk - so they aren't getting stung.

Compare that with the approach advocated by so many in this thread, whereby in that circumstance the customer always loses and you never do; you get your $200 and the customer eats shit.
 

Offline SteveThackeryTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 812
  • Country: gb
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #71 on: July 04, 2024, 12:18:30 am »

Its not true for a lot of cell phone repairs. Most of the rates are fixed, eg. battery replacement iphone xyz $60, screen replacement iphone xyz $100, etc.
But that is because: the fault is known, the repair time is known, and the parts cost is known.
If you know all of these and provide them to the person performing your repair, I'm sure many would be happy to take a fixed rate.


Thanks for correcting me, @thm_w.  Earlier in the thread we discussed a similar circumstance, whereby the time to fix the most common faults in most cars is determined (or even dictated) up front.  This is because car makers and mobile phones repair companies know what I've been saying all along: the customer just wants a price for the repair, so they can make a go/no go decision.

Further debate established that that approach is tilted too far in the customer's favour, and against the repairer, when the repairer has no way of knowing how long the repair might take.  The solution advocated for by others in this thread - where the customer gets stuck with the full labour cost incurred AND gets a broken appliance back is, in my opinion, too far in favour of the repairer. The customer takes all the risk and has no control over the final bill.  The repairer takes none of the risk and gets the full fee every time, successful or not.

That's why I think the middle ground is the only fair way.  The customer pays you to do an initial evaluation, knowing that whatever happens next, that money is gone.  They know they are buying an evaluation, and they know how much it will cost.  They have the choice to take it or leave it.  If they decide to proceed with the evaluation, they are knowingly taking a risk, because they might be told it's irreparable, or it might be a higher repair cost than they are willing to pay.  In that case they take their appliance and walk away, and you keep your evaluation fee.

In the spirit of sharing the risk, you agree to do the repair for a particular price (or price range). If the customer accepts it, and it turns out to be irreparable after all, then you give the appliance back to the customer for no extra charge.  That is your share of the risk - you've done some work you can't charge for.  But this risk-sharing is fair and equitable, unlike a system which dumps all of the risk on one party.
 

Offline David_AVD

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2864
  • Country: au
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #72 on: July 04, 2024, 12:27:22 am »
Coincidentally I just dropped my work van into the dealer to have the gear shifter looked at. They charge AUD $165 for the diagnostic and if the fault is solvable within that time (1 hour I think) that's all I'll pay. I do expect however that it will need parts, but they will call before doing more. If I decline I still have to pay the minimum $165 which if fine by me.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, SteveThackery

Offline vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7852
  • Country: au
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #73 on: July 04, 2024, 12:34:21 am »
One could equally well argue that, hey I put in however many hours doing the thing, work is work, pay me.  You've constructed no argument from moral principles (which framework, even!), you've just asserted that you think it is so.

I've already explained this: no customer wants to buy your time or your work, they want to buy a repair.  The customer doesn't need to know or care how much time it took you - they go away with a repaired appliance or they don't.

If someone quotes an extortionate price, but is sure to repair the device, then you would be happy?
The ultimate result of such a policy is that the price of your, or anybody else's repair is inflated to compensate for those repairs which would otherwise incur a loss to the repairer.

Such a policy would work well if the repairer was in the business of selling new devices, and/or modules which make up a large part of the device, as they have a good bargaining point towards using either of the latter options.

On top of that, not all devices are created equal------- some manufacturers go out of their way to make things difficult, others don't!
Those who do often also "charge like wounded buffaloes" for parts.

When I worked at the hearing aid place, we were also the accredited calibration & repair site for audiometers & other hearing test instruments.

One such device displayed its results on a 9 inch black & white CRT display, which was really a small picture monitor, which could be unplugged from the instrument.

 We received one with collapsed vertical scan.
As we were not set up to fix monitors, normal practice was to remove the display & send it to the USA, where the manufacturer would send us back a refurbished display, charging $A1200.
On contacting them, we were informed that they no longer refurbished the displays, so we would have to buy a new one at a very much higher price.

Our customer said "EEEK!" when we approached them, & had to check with higher management.
About this time, I had a few free moments to look at the PCB of the display, which looked vaguely familiar, but of course, we had no schematics, & the IC part numbers had been sanded off.

On a hunch, I contacted a former workmate, who arranged the loan of a workshop manual for an Electrohome 9 inch BW picture monitor.
With the aid of the EH schematic, I was able to confirm that our display was virtually identical.

With the EH monitor, there was a standard fault which caused loss of vertical scans, failure of an underrated diode.
Upon replacement, the display was normal---all for the cost of a $1.00 diode!

The customer was happy as they paid less & got their revenue earning device back faster, we were happy, but that was just the blind luck that I recognised the architecture of the display.

If I hadn't, as there was no fixed price for the repair, unlike for the calibration, at least we didn't have the invidious choice of "eating" the extra cost of a new display, or charging nothing & handing the customer back a useless piece of equipment.
The customer wouldn't have been happy with either of those choices!

Needless to say, a photocopy of the "Electrohome" monitor schematic found its way into the equipment file!!

 
The following users thanked this post: djsb, tooki, SteveThackery

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5569
  • Country: us
Re: Charging by the hour is unfair!
« Reply #74 on: July 04, 2024, 01:08:36 am »
The discussion of who is taking the most risk requires further discussion.  The two parties are not equally invested in this process. 

The customer has a broken device that is worthless to him.  His options are all costly, and some involve risk.  If it is still under warranty he can send it back to the manufacturer either for replacement or repair.  If the device is still in production he can buy a new device.  He can buy a different device that performs a similar function.  He can try to fix it himself.  He can do without the device.  Or he can try to get someone to service it for him.  But every option except doing without means he really wants the device and wants some combination of rapid restoration of function and low price.  All of the options listed will not exist for every device, but by the time the customer walks into the repair shop door he has made a significant decision and commitment to expenditure of time and money.  This model even applies to the eBay reseller with a subset of the options.

The repair shop owner has a very different perspective.  All that is in play for him is an increment of business.  In many cases there is far more work than he needs or can handle (for example sewing machine repairmen in my area have literally months of work backlog.  I have been forced to learn sewing machine repair to keep my wife's machines in operation).  Taking on a lengthy repair will negatively impact his performance for other customers.  He is aware that bad service can result in reducing or eliminating that backlog, but there is no emotional, operational or significant financial investment in any one repair.  His issues are paying the bills.

The very different customer/repairer investments result in completely different risk analyses. 
 
The following users thanked this post: SteveThackery


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf