On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 11:27, Dan Anderson wrote:
> > We dont' do hourly rates. We do it by the job. Therefore, the consumer
> > doesn't have to think about how much they're paying us per hour. The just
> > have to think about the benefits in relation to the cost. It also allows
> > us to get better profit margins, because we can automate in innovative
> > ways, and it doesn't cost us revenue.
>
> <rant>
> Hehehe but this can pose problems. Lets say you've got a contract to
> do foo by a week from today. You deliver on foo and do an amazing job
> and get it to the customer two days early. The client should be ready
> to bow down before you as lord -- this is how good the job is. So he
> does it, right?
>
> Well, in my experience it depends on the customer. If you get a
> customer who knows IT, then yes, they bow down before you and hire you
> again. But more often you get a customer who doesn't know IT, and
> didn't realize exactly what he or she was ordering. So you've got a
> client looking for revisions. But revisions mean substantially altering
> the code base and losing lots of time (and $$$).
>
> So what do you do? Sue them? Costs more then the client's contract is
> worth. Tell the customer to pay more? They may walk away and the
> deposit won't cover all costs. And if they say the contract wasn't
> consummated (it wasn't what they wanted) see the section on lawsuits.
> So now what, send them to collections? Maybe -- if you're big enough to
> get a contract with a national collections agency. If not you're
> basically consigned to bend over, and smile nicely as you get screwed
> over with revisions.
>
> </rant>
>
> (Anybody with suggestions on what to do with people like this please
> feel free to chime in. :-D)
What you needs is a better lawyer, to write tighter contracts.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
Spit in one hand, and wish for peace in the other.
Guess which is more effective...
