Charging by the hour is unfair!

[shabaz]

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.

"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."

No. That's not how products (hardware or software) are normally developed. You're focussing on some 'flying by the seat of your pants' way of working that only a tiny amount of orgs will use.

Every single thing a (reputable) business does is (ultimately) customer-focused. It has nothing to do with 'passing the risk' to the customer. You might be surprised to learn that subscription models work great for many customers. If it doesn't work well for someone, then that customer should not have been sold that particular product. You don't foist unwanted products or pricing models on your customers; you won't last long in that business if you do.

And, getting back roughly on point, it's a fallacy to think that customers feel they are being unfairly treated or receiving no benefit from a diagnosis or expert opinion if a repair is found to be not possible.

There are bad bargains to be had everywhere if you look for it. Read the terms, decide if you're comfortable doing business with someone, and then proceed on that basis. If you feel you didn't get what was contracted, then you can take them to court.

Even if say a lawyer is qualified, it doesn't mean they are any good. There are things that one could do, such as ask how long they have been practicing law or practicing repair, or ask others for feedback (TrustPilot etc) and use their answer(s) to further guide you. A lawyer or an engineer equally isn't going to last long in their respective professions if they are not any good.
There are well-established mechanisms for getting precisely what you've paid for, or compensation for one party or the other in some way concerning money, and those involve contracts.

[fmashockie]

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).

I know I said this before, but this will be my last point!  For someone who is so concerned about everyone in this thread not having empathy for the customer or the end user, I think it speaks volumes that if you were to look at each member in opposition to you; look at the history of their replies/comments, you would see the majority of their posts were aimed at helping others in this forum (for free btw).  Whereas you, the majority of your posts have been in this ridiculous thread you started.  Have a nice life. 

[SteveThackery]

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

Don't be boring by banging on about trolling.  It's very tedious.  If you've got nothing constructive to say, then please don't say anything.  The grown-ups are having a conversation, so don't interrupt.

I actually do think there is a cultural difference between the US and the UK when it comes to business practices.  I am not being facetious.  I think there is a much clearer and simpler attitude to profit in the US.  Making a profit is considered honourable and reasonable, and even laudable.  In the UK there is still a hint of "dishonour" or "greedy" about it.  We are just slightly uncomfortable with the idea of profit. The distinction between making a profit and profiteering is paper-thin on this side of the pond.

I think there is another cultural difference, too, around individualism. The US is far ahead of the UK in terms of individualism, and individuals looking out primarily for themselves.  Making a profit from failure (as I've been talking about above) seems to be morally OK in the US, because the culture is all about putting yourself first.  Others are responsible for their own success and well-being.  It's not your job to look after someone who struggles to look after themselves.

Since 1979 (when Thatcher was made Prime Minister) Britain has been on a journey away from collectivism, towards individualism.  We've a way to go before we catch up with the US, but we are certainly going that way.  Old bastards like me remember the time before Thatcher and regret the growth of individualism.

Maybe this is why I might be instinctively more reluctant to make a customer pay when I haven't repaired their product.  I don't know, maybe I'm talking crap.

----

Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out, and I have learned a lot from you all and taken on board many of your arguments. The one I simply cannot move on with a clear conscience is this (which I still find astonishing and hard to believe):

"I am being paid to work on the customer's product, not to repair it.  If it does get repaired, great, we're both happy.  But if not, I'm still going to charge the same amount because it's my labour that is being paid for, not the fruits of my labour."

To which my response is BULLSHIT! The customer doesn't want your labour, they want the fruits of your labour. Your business model is outrageously unfair on the customer, because you can fail, and fail, and fail again, and still go home every day with another $1,600 in your pocket. It's "Heads I win, tails you lose".

Your argument that "market forces" will weed out the numpties isn't much help to those poor customers, though, is it?  And if repairers are in short supply, market forces don't come into play.

It is also astonishingly arrogant to believe that your time is worth $200 per hour even when you've no clue what you're doing.  That's what happens when a computer expert gets an audio amp to fix.  You'll still charge $200 per hour, won't you?  We both know you will.

Anyway, we've hit the buffers on this debate and I've come away saddened by the arrogance some people have expressed ("I'm worth $200 per hour whether I know what I'm doing or not") and some people's lack of empathy for the customer ("Fix or no fix, you owe me $1600 for the day I spent poking at your audio amp and hoping for the best"). 

Nothing more to say, is there?

[SteveThackery]

I know I said this before, but this will be my last point!  For someone who is so concerned about everyone in this thread not having empathy for the customer or the end user, I think it speaks volumes that if you were to look at each member in opposition to you; look at the history of their replies/comments, you would see the majority of their posts were aimed at helping others in this forum (for free btw). 

Helping others on this forum has nothing whatsoever to do with how you bill your customers.  I am incredibly grateful for all the help the major contributors give, including to me, and in turn I've tried to help in my small way here (but mostly on other forums to do with automotive and motorcycle engineering, where I have donated thousands of answers over the years).

That doesn't stop us from disagreeing vigorously on what business models we use, and the moral issues arising. It's just a debate - it isn't personal. We will (we must) agree to differ.

[fzabkar]

Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out, and I have learned a lot from you all and taken on board many of your arguments. The one I simply cannot move on with a clear conscience is this (which I still find astonishing and hard to believe):

"I am being paid to work on the customer's product, not to repair it.  If it does get repaired, great, we're both happy.  But if not, I'm still going to charge the same amount because it's my labour that is being paid for, not the fruits of my labour."

To which my response is BULLSHIT! The customer doesn't want your labour, they want the fruits of your labour. Your business model is outrageously unfair on the customer, because you can fail, and fail, and fail again, and still go home every day with another $1,600 in your pocket. It's "Heads I win, tails you lose".

Your argument that "market forces" will weed out the numpties isn't much help to those poor customers, though, is it?  And if repairers are in short supply, market forces don't come into play.

It is also astonishingly arrogant to believe that your time is worth $200 per hour even when you've no clue what you're doing.  That's what happens when a computer expert gets an audio amp to fix.  You'll still charge $200 per hour, won't you?  We both know you will.

Anyway, we've hit the buffers on this debate and I've come away saddened by your arrogance ("I'm worth $200 per hour whether I know what I'm doing or not") and your lack of empathy for the customer ("Fix or no fix, you owe me $1600 for the day I spent poking at your audio amp and hoping for the best"). 

Nothing more to say, is there?

Hear, hear. That's exactly how I feel.

If you want to see real examples of such arrogance and ineptitude, you only need to look at professional data recovery. The vast majority of data recovery professionals are little better than mechanics. When they encounter an electronic problem (ie something they can't fix from behind a keyboard), they break out a thermal camera and see what's hot and what isn't. Most either don't possess a multimeter, or don't know what to do with it. But they still charge like they are the experts at the top of the tree. Thankfully, there are many honourable individuals who operate on a no fix, no fee basis. That said, I've seen many cases where these bozos have destroyed any chance of data recovery by a competent person.

[tooki]

It is also astonishingly arrogant to believe that your time is worth $200 per hour even when you've no clue what you're doing.  That's what happens when a computer expert gets an audio amp to fix.  You'll still charge $200 per hour, won't you?  We both know you will.

Anyway, we've hit the buffers on this debate and I've come away saddened by the arrogance some people have expressed ("I'm worth $200 per hour whether I know what I'm doing or not") and some people's lack of empathy for the customer ("Fix or no fix, you owe me $1600 for the day I spent poking at your audio amp and hoping for the best"). 

Here we go again with your idiotic contrived situation. We established early on in the thread that EXPERTS can charge higher rates because of their expertise and experience. Nobody here except you is ever claiming that an incompetent technician is worth that.

[SteveThackery]

We established early on in the thread that EXPERTS can charge higher rates because of their expertise and experience. Nobody here except you is ever claiming that an incompetent technician is worth that.

I thought it would be clear that I was exaggerating the sums to make a point. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

I think the principle applies to all repairers though.  Not all are experts.  Some are experts now, after years of experience, but started out as numpties.  There are degrees of expertise.  There are differing labour rates.

The actual labour rate isn't important - it's the principle that matters.  The idea that even when you get things wrong, it's the customer that takes the hit, never the repairer.  That just ain't right.

[SteveThackery]

Thankfully, there are many honourable individuals who operate on a no fix, no fee basis. So

Thankfully, yes. And honourable - absolutely.

[T3sl4co1l]

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

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.

Here we go again with your idiotic contrived situation. We established early on in the thread that EXPERTS can charge higher rates because of their expertise and experience. Nobody here except you is ever claiming that an incompetent technician is worth that.

Can you please, kindly, fuck off with the personal attacks?

You're not furthering your argument, you're only making yourself look look like the asshole here.  And the rest of us by association, that we might seem to tolerate or even accept such behavior.  I for one see fit to call out such behavior.

Steve, for his part, has been nothing but calm and patient with his point.  Insistent, unable to (or refusing to) reach or explain a common point of reference, but not "schizophrenic".  At worst, "troll", an accusation first raised by myself, and I stick to the reasoning given therewith: to the extent that reasoning applies, it's a factual statement, not a personal attack.  That's exactly as far as I meant to go with it, and no excuse for anyone else to go further.  It is certainly not reason to make it personal.

Tim

[Smokey]

...
Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out...
...
Nothing more to say, is there?

.... then immediately makes three more posts...

[SteveThackery]

...
Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out...
...
Nothing more to say, is there?

.... then immediately makes three more posts...

😄😄 Touche!  I felt it would be discourteous to ignore those posts.

[David_AVD]

The idea that even when you get things wrong, it's the customer that takes the hit, never the repairer.  That just ain't right.

Hmmm... Your take on "things go wrong" seems to include "repair is not viable / possible". How is this the repairers fault? It's your item and you asked someone to look at it.

[fzabkar]

The idea that even when you get things wrong, it's the customer that takes the hit, never the repairer.  That just ain't right.

Hmmm... Your take on "things go wrong" seems to include "repair is not viable / possible". How is this the repairers fault? It's your item and you asked someone to look at it.

I don't think I've ever been asked to "look" at a faulty item except with a view to providing a quote for its repair. So far I haven't charged for quotes, and I can't foresee a situation where I might need to. There have been occasions where I've overestimated the amount of labour and cost of parts, and I have actually reduced the final invoice by a corresponding amount. But I don't ever recall asking the customer to eat the cost of my underestimates, and there have been plenty.

As for non-viable repairs, how is that the client's fault? You are the expert, so it's up to you to assess whether something is repairable, otherwise you should take the hit if it turns out not to be.

Personally, my self-esteem would prevent me from accepting payment for a repair that wasn't finalised, unless the client was fully aware that this was a possibility.

[David_AVD]

I don't think I've ever been asked to "look" at a faulty item except with a view as to providing a quote for its repair. So far I haven't charged for quotes, and I can't foresee a situation where I might need to.

Many years ago I never charged an upfront fee. Some people brought in their items and despite me advising them of the costs involved, they didn't collect their item (fixed or not) because they'd changed their mind in the meantime and bought a new one. Others would backtrack on our verbal agreement and not want to pay for my time. This was despite me advising them upfront about the costs involved. The upfront fee has filtered out most of the time wasters. I still get people who ask (mostly via phone) about repairing an item and once I tell them about my fees, they go no further. That's fine too. I'm not twisting their arm to book their item in and pay me.

There have been occasions where I've overestimated the amount of labour and cost of parts, and I have actually reduced the final invoice by a corresponding amount. But I don't ever recall asking the customer to eat the cost of my underestimates, and there have been plenty.

I will often err on the high side of the range when some asks for an estimate, but I don't take that as an invitation to charge that if it ended up taking less time (or parts). I have charged customers a little more than estimated (remember I didn't quote a firm price) when things took a little longer or the job needed extra parts. You have to use common sense of course and the discussion that takes place at booking in time comes into it. It's very rare for someone to be upset at that and I do explain why the end price was higher than estimated. Sometimes it's a result of finding something else that needs doing to make the item reliable, and almost every customer has appreciated me doing that for them.

As for non-viable repairs, how is that the client's fault? You are the expert, so it's up to you to assess whether something is repairable, otherwise you should take the hit if it turns out not to be.

I can only think that the items you work on are pretty straightforward. I work on a lot of equipment that can be difficult to diagnose, or is part of a larger system. I've been repairing electronics for over 40 years and I still don't have a crystal ball insight into every issue presented to me. See my point above about wasted time.

Personally, my self-esteem would prevent me from accepting payment for a repair that wasn't finalised, unless the client was fully aware that this was a possibility.

That's been what I've talked about many times in this thread. Repairers need to proactively communicate with their customers. However, there are customers that simply don't listen to what you say and I've had a few over the years. Luckily it's a tiny percentage though. I've gotten better at sussing out potential trouble customers and will sometimes decline to do work for them.

[David Aurora]

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

Don't be boring by banging on about trolling.  It's very tedious.  If you've got nothing constructive to say, then please don't say anything.  The grown-ups are having a conversation, so don't interrupt.

I actually do think there is a cultural difference between the US and the UK when it comes to business practices.  I am not being facetious.  I think there is a much clearer and simpler attitude to profit in the US.  Making a profit is considered honourable and reasonable, and even laudable.  In the UK there is still a hint of "dishonour" or "greedy" about it.  We are just slightly uncomfortable with the idea of profit. The distinction between making a profit and profiteering is paper-thin on this side of the pond.

I think there is another cultural difference, too, around individualism. The US is far ahead of the UK in terms of individualism, and individuals looking out primarily for themselves.  Making a profit from failure (as I've been talking about above) seems to be morally OK in the US, because the culture is all about putting yourself first.  Others are responsible for their own success and well-being.  It's not your job to look after someone who struggles to look after themselves.

Since 1979 (when Thatcher was made Prime Minister) Britain has been on a journey away from collectivism, towards individualism.  We've a way to go before we catch up with the US, but we are certainly going that way.  Old bastards like me remember the time before Thatcher and regret the growth of individualism.

Maybe this is why I might be instinctively more reluctant to make a customer pay when I haven't repaired their product.  I don't know, maybe I'm talking crap.

----

Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out, and I have learned a lot from you all and taken on board many of your arguments. The one I simply cannot move on with a clear conscience is this (which I still find astonishing and hard to believe):

"I am being paid to work on the customer's product, not to repair it.  If it does get repaired, great, we're both happy.  But if not, I'm still going to charge the same amount because it's my labour that is being paid for, not the fruits of my labour."

To which my response is BULLSHIT! The customer doesn't want your labour, they want the fruits of your labour. Your business model is outrageously unfair on the customer, because you can fail, and fail, and fail again, and still go home every day with another $1,600 in your pocket. It's "Heads I win, tails you lose".

Your argument that "market forces" will weed out the numpties isn't much help to those poor customers, though, is it?  And if repairers are in short supply, market forces don't come into play.

It is also astonishingly arrogant to believe that your time is worth $200 per hour even when you've no clue what you're doing.  That's what happens when a computer expert gets an audio amp to fix.  You'll still charge $200 per hour, won't you?  We both know you will.

Anyway, we've hit the buffers on this debate and I've come away saddened by the arrogance some people have expressed ("I'm worth $200 per hour whether I know what I'm doing or not") and some people's lack of empathy for the customer ("Fix or no fix, you owe me $1600 for the day I spent poking at your audio amp and hoping for the best"). 

Nothing more to say, is there?

At the end of the day it's this simple- your entire point is based on arguments and situations you've made up in your own mind. You've worked yourself up over imaginary events that never happened and then spent 6 pages screaming at people about how unfair the conditions in your hallucinations are. Seek help.

Also, how do you not understand that every repairer who has responded to you also uses the services of other professionals? Whether it's mechanics or doctors or HVAC technicians or whatever, does it actually register in that thing inside your skull that we as repairers are also customers and therefore understand both sides of this?

[David_AVD]

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.

Of course this a bad situation for the customer, but the market does seem to weed out most businesses that are like this. Sure, it could take a while to happen but you could apply this to most businesses. Reputation and reviews are useful and so much easier to verify these days.

[vk4ffab]

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

"I am being paid to work on the customer's product, not to repair it.  If it does get repaired, great, we're both happy.  But if not, I'm still going to charge the same amount because it's my labour that is being paid for, not the fruits of my labour."

To which my response is BULLSHIT! The customer doesn't want your labour, they want the fruits of your labour. Your business model is outrageously unfair on the customer, because you can fail, and fail, and fail again, and still go home every day with another $1,600 in your pocket. It's "Heads I win, tails you lose".



Nothing more to say, is there?

In my experience, the way its typically done here (Australia) is, and this is dependent on industry, but assuming electronics repair, is that a repair shop will charge a flat fee for diagnosis, plus repair time and parts on top of that only off the customer agrees to the quoted price.

When you bring something in for repair, you are not paying just for labour, you are paying for the skills and knowledge required to diagnose what the problem actually is and then quote on the repair.

This covers all bases, customer is knows upfront what their out of pocket will be to find out what the problem is and if its financially viable to repair and then is not hit will bill shock when hit with a repair bill higher than the product is actually worth.

I would not take my item for repair to a shop that does not have a fixed service charge to determine what the problem is before any work is undertaken. My mechanic does that, I know that I am up for the equivalent of 1 hours labour for him to diagnose the problem with my car, even if it takes him 4 hours to do so, and then I pay for time and parts after he has quoted me those costs. There is never any bill shock, I know exactly what I am getting before we start. Plumber, electrician etc etc all the same, call out fee to determine scope of works and quote on the actual repair.

None of this I will rip everyone off cause i can crap. I would not deal with people like that.

[fmashockie]

Can you please, kindly, fuck off with the personal attacks?

You're not furthering your argument, you're only making yourself look look like the asshole here.  And the rest of us by association, that we might seem to tolerate or even accept such behavior.  I for one see fit to call out such behavior.

Steve, for his part, has been nothing but calm and patient with his point. 

What thread have you been reading Tim?  Here's a few of Steve's quotes.  Not including putting words in other member's mouths including my own under the guise of 'paraphrasing':

"I've noticed a worrying number of contributors to this thread seem to have the attitude "I'm incredibly smart and wonderful and my time is incredibly valuable (even though I can't fix the appliance), so I'm going to charge the customer the full whack anyway, and they can eat shit" (to paraphrase, obviously!).  In other words all the risk is on the customer, none on the technician." - Steve

"The arrogance I've seen in this thread has been extraordinary. "If I can't fix it, it can't possibly be because I'm incompetent, it must be the fault of the appliance" seems to embody the attitude of a worrying number of contributors" -Steve

"Psycopaths and money-grabbing sociopaths might feel comfortable with that level of arrogance and the complete lack of empathy for the customer, but I don't." -Steve

"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)." -Steve

But yea, personal attacks are bad.

[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

Don't be boring by banging on about trolling.  It's very tedious.  If you've got nothing constructive to say, then please don't say anything.  The grown-ups are having a conversation, so don't interrupt.

I actually do think there is a cultural difference between the US and the UK when it comes to business practices.  I am not being facetious.  I think there is a much clearer and simpler attitude to profit in the US.  Making a profit is considered honourable and reasonable, and even laudable.  In the UK there is still a hint of "dishonour" or "greedy" about it.  We are just slightly uncomfortable with the idea of profit. The distinction between making a profit and profiteering is paper-thin on this side of the pond.

I think there is another cultural difference, too, around individualism. The US is far ahead of the UK in terms of individualism, and individuals looking out primarily for themselves.  Making a profit from failure (as I've been talking about above) seems to be morally OK in the US, because the culture is all about putting yourself first.  Others are responsible for their own success and well-being.  It's not your job to look after someone who struggles to look after themselves.

Since 1979 (when Thatcher was made Prime Minister) Britain has been on a journey away from collectivism, towards individualism.  We've a way to go before we catch up with the US, but we are certainly going that way.  Old bastards like me remember the time before Thatcher and regret the growth of individualism.

Maybe this is why I might be instinctively more reluctant to make a customer pay when I haven't repaired their product.  I don't know, maybe I'm talking crap.

----

Well, guys, I think I'm about talked out, and I have learned a lot from you all and taken on board many of your arguments. The one I simply cannot move on with a clear conscience is this (which I still find astonishing and hard to believe):

"I am being paid to work on the customer's product, not to repair it.  If it does get repaired, great, we're both happy.  But if not, I'm still going to charge the same amount because it's my labour that is being paid for, not the fruits of my labour."

To which my response is BULLSHIT! The customer doesn't want your labour, they want the fruits of your labour. Your business model is outrageously unfair on the customer, because you can fail, and fail, and fail again, and still go home every day with another $1,600 in your pocket. It's "Heads I win, tails you lose".

Your argument that "market forces" will weed out the numpties isn't much help to those poor customers, though, is it?  And if repairers are in short supply, market forces don't come into play.

It is also astonishingly arrogant to believe that your time is worth $200 per hour even when you've no clue what you're doing.  That's what happens when a computer expert gets an audio amp to fix.  You'll still charge $200 per hour, won't you?  We both know you will.

Anyway, we've hit the buffers on this debate and I've come away saddened by the arrogance some people have expressed ("I'm worth $200 per hour whether I know what I'm doing or not") and some people's lack of empathy for the customer ("Fix or no fix, you owe me $1600 for the day I spent poking at your audio amp and hoping for the best"). 

Nothing more to say, is there?

It's been tricky for me to reply to your post, but I will try.

"Don't be boring by banging on about trolling.  It's very tedious.  If you've got nothing constructive to say, then please don't say anything.  The grown-ups are having a conversation, so don't interrupt."

Seems to be accusing me of going or being off-topic.

Yet, the rest of your post, seems to be a long political or similar post, with little to do, with the thread topic.  If my quick glances at it, indicate correctly.

Given that you seem to have the UK flag set, and be talking and trying to sound like someone from the UK.

How come, all your prices are in dollars ($), e.g. see the post I just quoted.

Is that a Freudian slip-up, or is there another explanation?

[bookaboo]

Pretty sure the OP is a troll, but the thread reminds me of something I heard quipped during a supplier-customer debate about costs.
The supplier who was being pressed to write off large swathe of labour retorted:

"All these other people you know who work for free, bring them to me for I have work aplenty for them"

[fzabkar]

Pretty sure the OP is a troll, but the thread reminds me of something I heard quipped during a supplier-customer debate about costs.
The supplier who was being pressed to write off large swathe of labour retorted:

"All these other people you know who work for free, bring them to me for I have work aplenty for them"

Who is asking you to work for free? Is this just more troll bait?

Unless you are lucky enough to be involved in a niche market with little competition, as I was, then you face obvious constraints. The first is that you can't just set your terms in a vacuum, and the second is that your ultimate price has to be much less than the replacement cost of the device. The second condition alone should be enough to kill off any open-ended hourly rate business model.

[coromonadalix]

6 pages already ...   

[SteveThackery]

It's been tricky for me to reply to your post, but I will try.

"Don't be boring by banging on about trolling.  It's very tedious.  If you've got nothing constructive to say, then please don't say anything.  The grown-ups are having a conversation, so don't interrupt."

Seems to be accusing me of going or being off-topic.

Yet, the rest of your post, seems to be a long political or similar post, with little to do, with the thread topic.  If my quick glances at it, indicate correctly.

Given that you seem to have the UK flag set, and be talking and trying to sound like someone from the UK.

How come, all your prices are in dollars ($), e.g. see the post I just quoted.

Is that a Freudian slip-up, or is there another explanation?

I'm sorry for being rude, but it really pisses me off to be accused of being a "troll" when I am no such thing.  I am arguing for something I believe in passionately, and every statement I make - including the critical ones - is heartfelt and genuine.

So for those who continue to label me as a troll, kindly piss off. 

The "political" stuff you refer to is completely on-topic. It became clear that the practices most people on the thread find completely normal and acceptable, I find the opposite, and I was wondering if there could be a cultural basis to our different attitudes.

You asked about dollars.  I got the impression that most people in this debate are American, so I used dollars as a small courtesy.

I'm also pissed off by people misrepresenting my position.  I am not advocating open-ended working for free.  I am putting forward an argument that - just as you sometimes expect the customer to pay for nothing*, sometimes it might be morally appropriate for you to work for nothing. This would be rare, but sometimes fair.

(*) And no: the argument that the customer is paying for your labour, not the fruits of your labour, is self-serving and so full of holes it's laughable.  I don't feel the need to spell all that out again for you - we've done it to death.

I hope that has clarified the matters you raised. And again, I'm sorry for being rude, but I am NOT a fucking troll, and if anyone reading this is tempted to accuse me of such, either piss off or try to read and understand what I am actually advocating.

[PlainName]

6 pages already ...   

Has Dave implemented some test, based on the contents of this thread, which you have to complete before you can read a different thread? Or can you still just shrug and ignore the entire thing if it's not to your liking?

[all_repair]

So much academic discussion, in practice, the first thing practising electronics repairer does is to reject requests as politely as fast as they can. No, no one wants to take advantage of the client, their reputation is worth much more than that.  Most of the time, it is the client that has not rationalised the cost and benefits, and kept wanting to hold to their wishful thinking and wanting to transfer all risk to the repairer and they get the benefits, and don't want to feel the pain of discarding their item.  Repairer must not try to get into rationalising for the client, what is the value of their down time?  What is the value of their sentimental attachment?  What is the value of their item (that mostly can check) ?    What repairer just do is reject the work if it is not worthy at all, client can change their mind easily and deposit cannot cover their time.  If risk is low and cost ifls low, offer no fix no fee, or hourly rate.  If risk is high and cost is high, either reject the work or offer only hourly rate.
At the end of the day, what repairer aim to achieve is not just fixing the item, but giving happiness to the client.  That shall bring more businesses.  So of course aim for maximum profit , and serve the client that can pay.  Worst is if you charge low, or below cost, on site with your petrol and car, and then ending making the client unhappy.  You can charge high, and yet giving happiness.  You can also charge low, or free, and yet not giving happiness.  If you think the deal cannot make a happy outcome, don't close the deal.  At the end, clean up the exterior and give free good quality batteries if you can.