Because pricing transparency is more fair and market efficient. People and contractors can make better (and fairer) decisions when the pricing is not distorted and each party can make an informed decision based on true costs and true benefits. Same reason that laws call for truth in labelling.
Not that I have any objection to sharing the info, but what difference would that make? If you have a valid reason for knowing, then I would be happy to share that info with you.
The only thing that really matters is the total cost of the job. Assuming that the quality of materials and workmanship are equal in both cases, what difference does it make if one guy charges $100 for materials and $400 for labor, and another guy charges $200 for materials and $300 for labor? The final cost is the same either way. If you maintain that one bid is "better" than the other because the cost breakdown goes one way instead of another, this would seem to me to indicate a need for therapy.
Stop looking and acting like a rich naive yuppie? :-)
Not sure how you judge this. I am willing to pay market price adjusted up or down for the quality of the work and any other side benefits or deficiencies (e.g., faster job, better reputation, warrantee)
I could care less how much profit you make. I care only that when I buy something as a DIY that I don't pay a marked up price that bears no relationship to the actual cost and margin of supplying the product (as evidenced by someone else getting the same part for significantly less)
You should follow the thread more closely because you have misinterpreted my point thoroughly. First, I have said repeatedly that I am talking about buying parts for my own DIY repair so your situation of warrantying work is not relevant.
Second, even if I would hire someone else to do the work, I want to have materials represent materials cost and labor represent labor cost. If labor profit is built into the cost of materials then why bother even giving me separate parts and labor costs? Also, if there is a problem after the job then I would have assumed that the cost of replacing the materials would be borne by the supplier (and calculated into his margins) while the cost of redoing the labor would be built into the price you charge for labor.
That has not been my experience.
Actually, both cases have led to corrections in pricing.
Whatthehell difference does it make? You write the guy *one* check for the
*entire* job. Why do you care how he breaks the costs down?
Your NOT a contractor then, should we ASSume ???
I don't entirely disagree -- total cost is at the end of the day most important. But if you are not going to give me true material and labor costs, then why bother even splitting them out. Also, knowing what material and labor costs should be (relative to market rates) helps one identify a total bid that is either unrealistically low or unrealistically high.
Touche but unfortunately I don't really do a good impression of being one :)
Correct. Otherwise, presumably I would just show my magic badge and get my deserved discount :)
I don't entirely disagree -- total cost is at the end of the day most important. But if you are not going to give me true material and labor costs, then why bother even splitting them out. Also, knowing what material and labor costs should be (relative to market rates) helps one identify a total bid that is either unrealistically low or unrealistically high.
My stepfather was a very successful contractor. He quoted the entire job and never broke down materials and labor. People that knew his work were willing to pay what he asked. He'd never quibble over price either. When you are good, there is no need to work cheap; you just walk away and go to the next job.
(Jeffrey
Yup--you gotta "find" the discounts, like me..........clue here is you aint gonna get em at home cheapo....
I agree that if reputation is excellent and price quote is reasonable then no need to break quote into part and labor. My complaint is more against the deceptive practice of breaking up pricing into parts and labor when the breakout is really into (parts + labor) + labor.
A bid is always a scope of work/bottom line issue. It really doesn't matter what line items they list. The only wild card is whether they finish on time and do a good job. The volume discount on the materials may not cover the bureaucratic costs of a company big enough to get top tier discount.
I was hoping I might be able to draw some analogy between this issue and whatever it is you do to put food on your table.
As long as I'm asking, have you ever owned a business? Have you ever worked in the "trades"?
DJ
This is Turtle.
Huuuuummmmmm , Well Home Depot sells a 3 ton condenser only no labor for $1,121.00 . I buy it for $411.00 + [ 30% $123.00 ] = $534.00 X 2 = $1,068.00 my cost of condenser installed with labor included. Now do you see the profit margin of the HVAC industry is a different story than what you see on a 10K filing.
TURTLE
You sure sound like one.
actually it would be more along the lines of
1)parts and expenses(relative to just getting to the job....including initial consult, time spent to work up the bid, and time to get materials,tools and workers to the job)PLUS
2)labor(which covers employee wages, taxes and hopefully a little bit of money for the contractor to pay himself while leaving money for the business(I.E. profit) )------------------- Chris Perdue "I'm ever so thankful for the Internet; it has allowed me to keep a finger in the pie and to make some small contribution to those younger who will carry the air-cooled legend forward" Jim Mais Feb. 2004
Again -- what difference does it make how the costs are split out? It's the
*total* that you should be concerned about.Utter nonsense. Unrealistically high or low bids are readily identified by comparing totals.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.