Kevin, Bob and Forumites: <Note: I have tried to frame the following as "business practices" and not pricing. It is not my intent to apply any specific values to any specific services here. >
I get the pricing thing and I teased Bob last night about how much longer it took him to respond than I thought it would, if in fact I had crossed a line. But to be clear - I only posted because I thought it was a valid topic and I guess enumerating values is where the line is drawn. In hindsight, would I have better served the forum (and dodged the decorum cops) if I had simply benchmarked in percentages? If I said that another fee was 1/6 of ours, is that acceptable for contextual purposes? Because the issue of pricing and business practices is a legitimate topic for conversation and AFSA could actually help to inform our industry family with regard to basic business management skills because that will be EXTREMELY helpful on a larger scale. Our industry's overall value is being dragged down by companies that go low, flame out and disappear and thus, they leave us with the after-effects of their failures, i.e. customers that hate FP contractors and downward pressure on pricing. I don't claim to be a great businessman but I know what I know and more importantly, I also know what I don't know. I'd love to have an MBA right about now, but the bottom line is that I don't, and most business owners don't either. Bob - you were the person who most informed me most many years ago about overhead and how you have to track the impact of your indirect costs based on volume. You can't make it very long just putting "25-and-10" on your cost estimate, right? And you can't buy high-quality goods and services if you're not willing to pay for them, but there's a robust market for 2nd and 3rd tier versions of most things these days, and they all come at lower price points. Back to what I said yesterday, you don't get to complain if you're not pricing the service fairly and if you're not a part of the solution then you're part of the problem. Several years ago, our firm lost a project another local contractor who had only been in business a couple years, mostly doing tilt-up barns and retail shells. We put a big number on a full city-block residential project in downtown San Diego that entailed 6 standpipes, a butt-load of sprinklers, miles of plastic pipe, etc., etc. We were 2nd low, with about a 3% gap between us and 3rd place, which we could attribute to the fact that we were the 2nd or 3rd-largest consumer of CPVC in SoCal at that time and we were getting really good numbers from the supplier. But the low bid was just stupid, like 2/3 of our number so I called the owner of that firm and when he picked up my call, before I had a chance to say a word he said, "I know it's you Steve and before you go off maybe you should consider that our guys are just that much more efficient than yours." So I thought about that for a hot second and came back with, "Maybe. But here's the thing: let's say you're THAT much smarter than me and everyone else in town and your guys are THAT much better than the entire rest of the trade. That means that you can have every single project you want and the rest of us will just have to avoid you because we can't compete. But if that's really the case, you're dumber than I thought because let's say you CAN do this project for the bid price. You work through it and in a couple years, after you get final inspection, the owner of the project calls you down to the site and offers you a bag with $200,000 in it. By your way of thinking, you're going to turn him down and walk away and that's not the mark of a smart businessman." The point is that we are all in this together to some extent and we should all put a high value on what we know, what we do, how what we do it. I'm not naïve enough to think that the trunk slammers will go away, but we don't have to follow them down the rabbit hole either. Steve (Don't Taze me Bro) -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2021 6:56 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Kevin Hall <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Airing of Grievances Regardless of your legal opinions on the matter, please refrain from pricing discussions as Bob stated earlier. As a reminder this forum has a specific set of rules that you agreed to when you signed up. Failure to adhere to the following will result of a loss in posting privileges. 1. *Never, ever discuss pricing issues.* Doing so can be construed as a violation of anti-trust laws and can endanger the continuation of the SprinklerForum and the tax-exempt status of AFSA. Due to the sensitivity of these issues, those who violate this rule will not be allowed to post messages in the future. Note there is a difference in pricing and costs. It is OK to say the AHJ charges a certain fee for inspections. It is NOT OK for you to say you price your fees at $XXX per inspection. Any time someone can compare their pricing (not costs) to yours, you are on dangerous grounds. 2. *Never, ever use the Forum to solicit employment or advertise for open positions*. This is a technical Forum, not a job forum. 3. *Never, ever use the Forum to promote yourself or your company or solicit business*. 4. *Never use the Forum as a method to email a single individual*. Over 700 people receive email from this Forum, so stop and think before you click “send.” Do those 700 people want to see your reply? If not, then send your message by private email — not the SprinklerForum. 5. *Never argue*. You may disagree with an interpretation or an answer and you should disagree respectfully. If you can’t respond respectfully, don’t respond. 6. *Don't Go off technical topics.* This Forum does not exist to pass along personal stories, jokes or opinions not related to technical issues. When subscribers go off on a non-technical tangent, we get flooded with emails asking “can’t you control these people and keep them on technical topics!” Happy Festivus! On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 9:43 PM å... .... via Sprinklerforum < [email protected]> wrote: > I don't always agree with Steve, but on this I could not agree with > Steve MORE. Open discussion of pricing is the opposite of price fixing. > What forum is better for discussing pricing? > Surely not the NFPA, who can't even reveal how they select new > committee members. > I know your warning, Mr. Caputo, is meant to protect this Forum, and > respect for that. > I do not perceive how Steve's comment is anywhere near the line. > There need be a place to talk openly about money numerically. > This is because after preserving their own reputations and salary, > money is the next most important issue to management and most of their > decisions. > > Let in the marketplace determine where the line is. > We had White House Executive Branch employees leaking free > international marketing spots for a federal employee's jewelry > side-hustle jewelry business. > Where is the line on talking marketing and money? > > There has been a steady erosion of press freedoms in the last several > years (with but a handful of private-source exceptions* bucking this > trend ) > > Stifling honest debate (in particular numerical debate) is an > effective way to not just paralyze a democracy, but it can pave the > road to the end of civilization. > Sounds extreme? Review humanities geopolitical history. > Some things are worth fighting for. Freedom of numerical expression and > open talk about money are worth fighting for. > As far as I can see, democracy has not been doing so well lately. I > respect your viewpoint Mr. Caputo. I agree with your goal: to keep > the AFSA forum open. > But for the advancement of accurate judgment, numbers in debate need > be increased in use, not reduced. > And money, money is arguably one of the most important numerical > measurements we make We need more, not less, money-numbers in debate. > Government regulators who are too thick to separate price fixing from > our healthy debate here, need be demoted a pay grade. > > > * Private-source exceptions to the trend of capping open, honest > numerical > debate: > > 1. Dalio at Bridgewater Hedge Funds, > 2. Netflix's Reed Hasting > 3. Musk, when he is not pumping and dumping DogeCoin (which I argue > IS price fixing) > > Best of the rest of the year to all, > > Scot Deal > Excelsior Fire Engineering > gms: +420 606 872 129 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org > -- Kevin Hall, M.Eng., P.E., ET, CWBSP, PMSFPE Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services American Fire Sprinkler Association _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
