Charging by the hour is unfair!

[ifonlyeverything]

NOBODY WANTS TO BUY YOUR LABOUR, THEY WANT TO BUY THE FRUITS OF YOUR LABOUR!  AND IF THERE ARE NO FRUITS, WHAT ARE YOU CHARGING THEM FOR?

Compensation for time spent analyzing the device and determining whether or not a repair is feasible. If the repair is feasible then it's customary for additional time to be billed for the repair. I'm not an engineer -- I work in professional services. Consultation fees are customary in many professional services with absolutely no guarantee of outcome. The client pays for an expert intake analysis which determines the path forward, if any. If the consultation is "at no cost" then it's baked into other services -- there's no such thing as a free lunch.

[vk6zgo]

Final observation: the fact that you are calling the people in this thread sociopaths as you continue to 'like' every post made in opposition to you is also ironic.

It is not ironic!  "Liking" a post is my way of saying "thank you" to everyone who takes the time to contribute. And I am genuinely grateful, regardless of how vigorously we disagree. 

By the way, I didn't call anyone here a sociopath. I said that sociopaths "might feel comfortable" with the behaviour I was referring to because it showed a lack of empathy with the customer.  It's a way of drawing attention to what seems to me like extraordinary behaviour.

There is arrogance in this thread, but it has a singular source, and that source is you.
[/quote]

Wow! I don't believe I have shown any arrogance at all, but maybe we define arrogance differently.  I think there HAS been A LOT of arrogance and lack of empathy from the professional repairers in this thread.  For example, the very thought that a technician might sometimes end up doing work without pay fills them with horror and outrage, but they cannot seem to understand that this is EXACTLY ANALOGOUS to the customer paying money and getting nothing back.  The latter is fine, apparently, but not the former.

I know exactly what my opponents are going to say: "They aren't getting nothing back, they're getting half a day of my highly skilled work".  At which point I remind you of this, which I have been saying consistently from the beginning. 

NOBODY WANTS TO BUY YOUR LABOUR, THEY WANT TO BUY THE FRUITS OF YOUR LABOUR!  AND IF THERE ARE NO FRUITS, WHAT ARE YOU CHARGING THEM FOR?

Also, you keep using the analogy of an appliance.  You're discussing this with people who are mainly talking about the component level repair of PCBs.  Boards that generally don't have schematics available or have parts that have become obsolete.  It is a big difference. 

My use of the term "appliance" was just a generic term to refer to anything that needs fixing, in the context of this thread anything electronic.  It isn't an analogy.

I can't let the absurd claim that the only arrogance in this thread is from me. I'll show you plenty of examples later on.  Meanwhile, what's this "F... Fa... Fai" thing all about?
[/quote]

There is a member called "Faringdon", who often starts argumentative threads.
Yours is eerily similar.

[tooki]

NOBODY WANTS TO BUY YOUR LABOUR, THEY WANT TO BUY THE FRUITS OF YOUR LABOUR!  AND IF THERE ARE NO FRUITS, WHAT ARE YOU CHARGING THEM FOR?

Just because you want to only buy the fruits of your labor doesn't mean you're entitled to having that wish fulfilled!

The alternative -- which some service providers do choose to do -- is to bake the cost of unsuccessful repairs into the prices they charge the customers who have successful repairs.

To use your merchandise analogy: when you buy fish from a fishmonger, you can choose to take the whole fish (guts and all), the cleaned fish, or to have him filet it. But no matter what, he's going to put the whole fish on the scales first and charge you that price, regardless of whether you take home the guts, scales, head and bones or not. If you buy fish filets that are already fileted, then the cost of the waste bits of the fish has been precalculated into the price for the filets, which is much higher than for the whole fish. So you are paying for the guts, scales, head and bones, whether you realize it or not.

No product has 100% yield, and the waste is always calculated into the price, one way or another. It's bizarre that you think services behave any differently. But not as bizarre as the fact that you think people should work for free...

[Smokey]

Hmmmm..  a user who makes wacky posts and then proceeds to argue with everyone while also liking every post....
Doesn't that sound familiar.....   F...  Fa...  Fai..... Fair....

Sorry - I have no idea what this alludes to.

If that's really true then you should never take a 23andMe genetic test.  There is a good chance you have a brother you don't know about.....

[MK14]

But not as bizarre as the fact that you think people should work for free...

You can (or use to), encounter such a concept, at least in the UK.

Consider a hairdresser.

There is the standard charge, for simplicity, lets call it £10(-) .. £15(+) for a haircut, by a standard, experienced/qualified hairdressing professional.

The same hairdresser, my occasionally offer reduced prices (or even free), I can't remember exactly, by I think it was something like half-price, or reduced price, as a minimum.

If you let the trainee hairdressers, cut your hair.

So, a similar concept, could apply, to an upcoming, not yet properly experienced/(qualified if/as necessary)/equipped/etc, repair individual/shop/entity.

I suspect the right/better way to do it, is for the repair person/company, to offer such a service (free, unless we succeed in repairing your device), on a case by case basis.

I.e. Only with certain types of repair, and certain (trustworthy/suitable) customers, with perhaps other stipulations.

E.g. Some faults, by their description, can sound like the repairer, has a reasonable or better idea, as to what is wrong.  So, success is likely, and finding out it is unrepairable/uneconomic etc, would be reasonably quick.

If it was a PC, an estimation of the parts and repair time, is not too difficult.  So for a competent PC repair technician, accepting a free, unless we fix it.  Wouldn't sound too bad.

But other electronics repair, especially to the individual electronic component level, can be problematic/expensive/risky, as already mentioned by many others, in this thread.

But if it is building up, an upcoming repairer's, experience level.  Without them needing to pay (possibly lots of money), paying for learning resources (such as actual qualifications).  With perhaps significant upfront costs, no guarantee of final success.
Possibly needing financial resources, that the person involved, simply doesn't have access to, at the moment (i.e. a sort of chicken and egg situation).

Then maybe, it could be a solution.

[SteveThackery]

NOBODY WANTS TO BUY YOUR LABOUR, THEY WANT TO BUY THE FRUITS OF YOUR LABOUR!  AND IF THERE ARE NO FRUITS, WHAT ARE YOU CHARGING THEM FOR?

Just because you want to only buy the fruits of your labor doesn't mean you're entitled to having that wish fulfilled!

Re. that final point.

Loads of contributors to this thread take the same position: their labour should be rewarded whether or not they succeed in repairing the customer's appliance/widget/whatever.  They are horrified and outraged at the very suggestion that they might have to work for no pay.  Hence the universal rejection of the "no fix/no fee" concept.

These same people seemingly cannot put themselves in the shoes of their customers. "No fix/no fee" is an outrageous idea, but "fee/no fix" is perfectly fair, apparently.

I observe that these contributors have a degree of arrogance that makes me uncomfortable - the absolute certainty that they can do no wrong. If they succeed it shows how smart they are and how valuable - $200 per hour valuable. If they fail it's never that they have actually failed, it's that the spares are unavailable, or it's not cost-effective, or any other excuse, but NEVER that they have reached the limit of their skillset.  So that'll be $200 per hour please, thank you kindly.

I don't think I've come across any other group who show such hubris, who will not even consider the possibility that sometimes they will try and fail.

Which brings me to my original and fundamental point. No matter what you like to tell yourself, no customer wants your labour - they want the fruits of your labour. I wish you guys would at least consider the customer's position when you cannot deliver what they want.

[tooki]

 

Repeating your delusions one more time won’t make them any less unreasonable than they were the first time around. 

[ifonlyeverything]

I've never seen someone so insistent on working for free, with a complete disregard for his most precious and uncertain commodity (time.)

[David_AVD]

"No fix/no fee" is an outrageous idea, but "fee/no fix" is perfectly fair, apparently.

Which brings me to my original and fundamental point. No matter what you like to tell yourself, no customer wants your labour - they want the fruits of your labour. I wish you guys would at least consider the customer's position when you cannot deliver what they want.

You keep missing the point. You're paying for someone to work on your equipment. Ideally the outcome will be that it is repaired, but it is not the only possibility. I do agree that repairers need to be clear up front about this. If the repairer guarantees that it's fixed or no charge, that's fine. I have seen computer repair people offer that, but there is always a * next to that statement. I haven't looked carefully, but I expect that it means the "no fix, no fee" doesn't apply if you simply decline due to costs or whatever and that's completely fair too.

By the way, I got my work van back from the dealer later that day with a report and quote to fix the issue. I declined to go ahead with the fix due to the cost and down time (the issue is not related to safety or roadworthy). Did I hope it might have been something simple and covered under the minimum fee? Yes, but it wasn't. I paid the $165 diagnostic bill and was not bitter about it at all. They did their job.

[all_repair]

Repairer is not god, they are more like Doctor or lawyer.  Talk "no fix no fee" to them, one shall refer you to mental hospital, another shall happily talk endlessly with you.  And when you are done, charge you for every second of his time talking to you.

Some problem cannot be fixed, best is don't even try in the first place.   Money back, is a no fee from me.

[CatalinaWOW]

The troll comment may well apply because:

You have said you substantially agree with the widely accepted practice of charging an evaluation fee which non-refundable, and substantially agree with attempt to repair with no guarantee of success as long as that is presented ahead of time.

Yet you continue to complain.

Perhaps you represent the intersection of those who choose not to read a contract before signing with those who don't at least summarize the contract verbally before presenting to the customer.  But you appear to be unsatisfied until everyone here says "You are right"

You rail about the difference between the results of labor and labor itself.  But the difference is fuzzier than you present.  The universe is full of broken items.  There is a gradient between those broken items that anyone can repair and those that are unrepairable almost regardless of the skill set and resources of the repairer.  Technically I don't think there is anything that is unrepairable, given enough resources.  An unobtainable chip?  Just set up a semiconductor fab for the appropriate technology (including all of the feedstock and everything), reverse engineer the chip and fab it.   This would take literally millions of dollars, but doesn't break any physical laws.   I believe there is value to the customer in knowing where in that gradient their precious lies, even if the repair is deemed impractical.  That is what you are buying, not the hours.  It may not be what you intended to buy, but that is a misunderstanding.  The blame for that misunderstanding is shared by both parties in the transaction.

[tooki]

But not as bizarre as the fact that you think people should work for free...

You can (or use to), encounter such a concept, at least in the UK.

Consider a hairdresser.

There is the standard charge, for simplicity, lets call it £10(-) .. £15(+) for a haircut, by a standard, experienced/qualified hairdressing professional.

The same hairdresser, my occasionally offer reduced prices (or even free), I can't remember exactly, by I think it was something like half-price, or reduced price, as a minimum.

If you let the trainee hairdressers, cut your hair.

So, a similar concept, could apply, to an upcoming, not yet properly experienced/(qualified if/as necessary)/equipped/etc, repair individual/shop/entity.

I suspect the right/better way to do it, is for the repair person/company, to offer such a service (free, unless we succeed in repairing your device), on a case by case basis.

I.e. Only with certain types of repair, and certain (trustworthy/suitable) customers, with perhaps other stipulations.

E.g. Some faults, by their description, can sound like the repairer, has a reasonable or better idea, as to what is wrong.  So, success is likely, and finding out it is unrepairable/uneconomic etc, would be reasonably quick.

If it was a PC, an estimation of the parts and repair time, is not too difficult.  So for a competent PC repair technician, accepting a free, unless we fix it.  Wouldn't sound too bad.

But other electronics repair, especially to the individual electronic component level, can be problematic/expensive/risky, as already mentioned by many others, in this thread.

But if it is building up, an upcoming repairer's, experience level.  Without them needing to pay (possibly lots of money), paying for learning resources (such as actual qualifications).  With perhaps significant upfront costs, no guarantee of final success.
Possibly needing financial resources, that the person involved, simply doesn't have access to, at the moment (i.e. a sort of chicken and egg situation).

Then maybe, it could be a solution.

Years ago, my mom used to sometimes get her hair cut at the local hairdressing school. Haircut practically free, done by a student stylist under the supervision of a teacher, as I understand.

Regardless, this thread isn’t about trainees, though. I don’t think anyone would consider it reasonable to charge customers full price for a novice trainee to do the work on their own. Troubleshooting electronics requires a lot of experience, as you know.

What is perfectly fair IMHO is for a shop to let a trainee do certain things under the supervision of an expert, but bill only the time it would have taken the expert to do it.

Or to draw from a recent experience, a friend had a plumber over to do some work (several distinct things). The plumber came with an apprentice, who did some of the work at the same time the graybeard did others. So even with the “downtime” of the expert explaining things to the apprentice sometimes, in total  there were about 1.5 persons worth of work being done. The billing was for the expert plumber only, the apprentice’s work was essentially free.


When I first started working as an onsite Mac consultant, for the first month or so, my boss had me tag along to meet all the clients and show me their configurations. (Most of the clients had us come every week or two.)  And of course so the boss could get a feel for whether I was good enough to unleash on the clients unsupervised. So on the first couple of visits at a given client, they got me there for free. Once I knew the client and their setup well enough, then I would go on my own, or on big jobs, boss and I would both go and then bill for both of us.

[SteveThackery]

Repeating your delusions one more time won’t make them any less unreasonable than they were the first time around. 

I believe they aren't delusions, I believe them to be valid points.  It's a poor way of arguing to resort to terms like "delusions".

You keep missing the point. You're paying for someone to work on your equipment.

No, no, NO!  YOU keep missing the point!!.  I am NOT paying for "someone to work on my equipment".  What possible value or purpose is there in someone "working on it"?  I DON'T WANT YOU WORKING ON IT!  I WANT YOU FIXING IT!!

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Repairer is not god, they are more like Doctor or lawyer.  Talk "no fix no fee" to them,

Bad analogy.  There are entire companies of accident claim lawyers who work on a "no win no fee basis". It's a normal business model.

The troll comment may well apply because:

Stop calling me a troll. Insulting each other has no place in a polite discussion.  I believe my argument to be completely valid.  You believe your argument to be completely valid.  I believe you are totally wrong, and actually immoral in the way you conduct your business.  You believe it's OK for a customer to pay for a non-repair, I believe it's not OK. You believe I am totally wrong and some kind of a nutter for suggesting a technician might have to do some work without pay.  I believe you are equally nuts to suggest a customer should have to pay for nothing.

You clearly have a very low opinion of me.  I won't tell you what I think if you because I'm polite.

We are clearly at an impasse, so there is no point in continuing.

However, I would like to thank everyone who has engaged in the debate constructively. It's a shame one or two didn't, but I guess any group of people has one or two disagreeable members.

[fmashockie]

There's too much to try and quote from you SteveThackery, but Idk how someone who has been on this earth for at least 45 years (you said you've worked on watches that long) doesn't understand this concept.  Even after it has been explained to you by people who are in the business.  Which is why I assume you are a troll because you seem to lack an understanding of how the world works (whether intentionally or you are just that niave at say ~50-60 yrs old?).

  I assume you think when you buy a perscription drug, an artpiece, or anything for that matter, you are just buying the phsyical object that is in front of you?  Well you are not.  All that is factored into that price is time spent, the labor, the materials, the R&D.  It is no different for someone offering a repair service.  It doesn't matter what you think you are paying for, that IS what you are paying for; the time spent working on it; the materials put into it; the knowledge/expertise/wisdom used to diagnose it.  That is what you are paying for in reality.  It doesn't matter what you think you are paying for in your head. 

[SteveThackery]

Thanks for your considered reply, @fmashockie.

I just want to check how the following scenario works in your mind.

I am a bit rubbish at electronics. I have relatively little experience or training. I try to fix things, but I really struggle if I can't find a circuit diagram. Several times I have come across a complex electronic product, and my lack of experience means I cannot identify what each part of a circuit board actually does. I often have to give up on a repair because I just can't work out what is wrong with it.

Nevertheless, I rather like the idea of making a living by repairing electronic products. I know I'll do well because I can charge $200 per hour no matter how long it takes me, and I can even charge the same labour rate if I fail to find and fix the fault.  So I set myself up as an electronics repair shop.

@fmashocie, would you bring a device for me to repair?  I doubt it, because you know about electronics and you've read my confession above.

How comfortable are you that other people - unsuspecting people - are bringing me stuff to repair, and being charged the same hourly rate as you? Wouldn't you want to warn them against using me? 

But everything that has been said in this thread implies that I should be allowed to carry on. Me charging $200 per hour is completely fine because you think I should never work for free, even when I'm out of my depth.  All I'm expected to do is "work on" the product for that time, even If I'm just poking around with a scope probe and hoping for the best.

Is that really OK?  I know that you will say "That bloke will soon go out of business", but customers rarely know when they've been ripped off because they weren't able to fix it either.  Are you comfortable with me setting up shop a couple of doors away from you and being a competitor?  You might say market forces will sort things out, but that can take a long time.

I'm putting this argument because it gives an illustration of what is wrong with your preferred business model. According to that model, all labour is valuable and must be paid for, no matter what.  No matter how long he takes to do a simple job, and no matter how often he returns an unrepaired item.  But honestly, would you REALLY support that guy?

I'm just trying to illustrate how questionable your argument is - it takes no account of the real skills a repairer might be offering.

[tooki]

Repeating your delusions one more time won’t make them any less unreasonable than they were the first time around. 

I believe they aren't delusions, I believe them to be valid points.  It's a poor way of arguing to resort to terms like "delusions".

It’s obvious you believe them. But that doesn’t make them valid.

A paranoid schizophrenic who is suffering from delusions doesn’t realize they’re delusions, either. Yet objectively, they are.

You keep missing the point. You're paying for someone to work on your equipment.

No, no, NO!  YOU keep missing the point!!.  I am NOT paying for "someone to work on my equipment".  What possible value or purpose is there in someone "working on it"?  I DON'T WANT YOU WORKING ON IT!  I WANT YOU FIXING IT!!

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Please quote others properly. If you have multiple quotes, and only the first contains an author attribution, it is assumed that subsequent quotes are from the same author. In this case, it makes it appear as though I said the “You keep missing the point!” when in fact it is from someone else. Misattributing quotes is a way to get yourself hated hard, fast.

[tooki]

Thanks for your considered reply, @fmashockie.

I just want to check how the following scenario works in your mind.

I am a bit rubbish at electronics. I have relatively little experience or training. I try to fix things, but I really struggle if I can't find a circuit diagram. Several times I have come across a complex electronic product, and my lack of experience means I cannot identify what each part of a circuit board actually does. I often have to give up on a repair because I just can't work out what is wrong with it.

Nevertheless, I rather like the idea of making a living by repairing electronic products. I know I'll do well because I can charge $200 per hour no matter how long it takes me, and I can even charge the same labour rate if I fail to find and fix the fault.  So I set myself up as an electronics repair shop.

@fmashocie, would you bring a device for me to repair?  I doubt it, because you know about electronics and you've read my confession above.

How comfortable are you that other people - unsuspecting people - are bringing me stuff to repair, and being charged the same hourly rate as you? Wouldn't you want to warn them against using me? 

But everything that has been said in this thread implies that I should be allowed to carry on. Me charging $200 per hour is completely fine because you think I should never work for free, even when I'm out of my depth.  All I'm expected to do is "work on" the product for that time, even If I'm just poking around with a scope probe and hoping for the best.

Is that really OK?  I know that you will say "That bloke will soon go out of business", but customers rarely know when they've been ripped off because they weren't able to fix it either.  Are you comfortable with me setting up shop a couple of doors away from you and being a competitor?  You might say market forces will sort things out, but that can take a long time.

I'm putting this argument because it gives an illustration of what is wrong with your preferred business model. According to that model, all labour is valuable and must be paid for, no matter what.  No matter how long he takes to do a simple job, and no matter how often he returns an unrepaired item.  But honestly, would you REALLY support that guy?

I'm just trying to illustrate how questionable your argument is - it takes no account of the real skills a repairer might be offering.

I think it’s been a (perfectly reasonable) assumption that we are all discussing technicians who are:
1. Trained and competent in the type of work they offer
2. Honest

Your contrived situations of dishonest, untrained rip-off artists do nothing to validate your point. But they do make you look like a disingenuous crank.

[fmashockie]

Thanks for your considered reply, @fmashockie.

I just want to check how the following scenario works in your mind.

I am a bit rubbish at electronics. I have relatively little experience or training. I try to fix things, but I really struggle if I can't find a circuit diagram. Several times I have come across a complex electronic product, and my lack of experience means I cannot identify what each part of a circuit board actually does. I often have to give up on a repair because I just can't work out what is wrong with it.

Nevertheless, I rather like the idea of making a living by repairing electronic products. I know I'll do well because I can charge $200 per hour no matter how long it takes me, and I can even charge the same labour rate if I fail to find and fix the fault.  So I set myself up as an electronics repair shop.

@fmashocie, would you bring a device for me to repair?  I doubt it, because you know about electronics and you've read my confession above.

How comfortable are you that other people - unsuspecting people - are bringing me stuff to repair, and being charged the same hourly rate as you? Wouldn't you want to warn them against using me? 

But everything that has been said in this thread implies that I should be allowed to carry on. Me charging $200 per hour is completely fine because you think I should never work for free, even when I'm out of my depth.  All I'm expected to do is "work on" the product for that time, even If I'm just poking around with a scope probe and hoping for the best.

Is that really OK?  I know that you will say "That bloke will soon go out of business", but customers rarely know when they've been ripped off because they weren't able to fix it either.  Are you comfortable with me setting up shop a couple of doors away from you and being a competitor?  You might say market forces will sort things out, but that can take a long time.

I'm putting this argument because it gives an illustration of what is wrong with your preferred business model. According to that model, all labour is valuable and must be paid for, no matter what.  No matter how long he takes to do a simple job, and no matter how often he returns an unrepaired item.  But honestly, would you REALLY support that guy?

I'm just trying to illustrate how questionable your argument is - it takes no account of the real skills a repairer might be offering.

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". 

[CatalinaWOW]

I am sorry the troll word offends the OP.  I am equally offended by his dismissal of my constructive comments afterward explaining why I said that that word might apply.

I agree with the OPs example of an incompetent technician charging for non work being unfair.  But as others have pointed out, that is a business model that doesn't survive long and isn't representative of an industry.

OP uses the injury lawyer industry as an example of the no win no pay business model.  But neglects to mention that that industry charges extremely high rates when winning, typically one third of any awards, and sometimes adding expenses to the fee.  It is the reason this industry is called without affection "ambulance chasers"  This is exactly the situation discussed earlier where those with successful repairs are amortizing the costs of unsuccessful repairs.

[SteveThackery]

I am sorry the troll word offends the OP.  I am equally offended by his dismissal of my constructive comments afterward explaining why I said that that word might apply.

i haven't dismissed anything!  What's wrong with you?

I have read carefully every post in this thread and - apart from one - I appreciate them all.  As it happens I disagree with most of them, but that is NOT dismissing them!

[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]

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.

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]

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".

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]

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).

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]

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.

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.

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.