Getting a new boiler

paulmapp8306

a little OT from the OPs POV - but the whole profit on materials? bo**ocks is what i say. no tradesman should make a profit on materials IMO. in this modern day we can all go direct and get decent prices.

I totally understand the need to fund registration, ongoing training to keep current, buisiness tax etc - but these should all be factored into the Labour costs. so what if his labour goes up from (just for example and not related to actual costs) £20 to £30 per hour. I just find the whole "profit on materials" becomes a black art. things need to be transparent (in modern lingo). After all the tradesman isnt really buying the material - you as the customer . Its ending up in your house not the plumbers after all.

I actually had this discussion with a tradesman this weekend. Hes going to do our kitchen and was quoting great prices on worktops/appliances etc. when I asked how he did them at that price this was his answer - "i dont make profit on materials - all my profit is made from actually doing the job". If he can run a business that way - then all tradesman can. IMO it is the right and proper way to do things.

paulmapp8306

Oh - as an addition, I am registered with 2 professional bodies - and those registration costs come from my wage - ie the same as the tradesmans "work".

also, as the registration is a requirement of his job - the costs will be tax deducatable anyway - so effectivly free for the tradesman. all these "resons" why they make proffit on materials is just smokescreen.

cyclonebri1

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

a little OT from the OPs POV - but the whole profit on materials? bo**ocks is what i say. no tradesman should make a profit on materials IMO. in this modern day we can all go direct and get decent prices.

I totally understand the need to fund registration, ongoing training to keep current, buisiness tax etc - but these should all be factored into the Labour costs. so what if his labour goes up from (just for example and not related to actual costs) £20 to £30 per hour. I just find the whole "profit on materials" becomes a black art. things need to be transparent (in modern lingo). After all the tradesman isnt really buying the material - you as the customer . Its ending up in your house not the plumbers after all.

I actually had this discussion with a tradesman this weekend. Hes going to do our kitchen and was quoting great prices on worktops/appliances etc. when I asked how he did them at that price this was his answer - "i dont make profit on materials - all my profit is made from actually doing the job". If he can run a business that way - then all tradesman can. IMO it is the right and proper way to do things.

This is the reason that the difference in quoted job costs exists.


Of course it depends on size of business, numbers of staff etc. and time does have to be spent on procuring materials.
In a 1 man band that is simply taken up in the time charged, for outfits over say 5 employees, a profit is taken on the buyers labour otherwise what point trading.

More so the reason for the small family/local Co

keystone

Paulmapp8306

You miss the point. Please read my post above concerning mark-up. Mark-up and profit is not the same quantity. A tradesman can decide how his business model best works for him and thats for him to decide not be dictated by an outsider not even another tradesman.

He may decide that he makes no margin on materials but that will be reflected in an increased labour rate. For me with high ticket items like kitchens and bathrooms I encourage the client to buy direct mainly for the simple reason that it enables me to trade below the VAT threshold so my prices to customer don't attract the dreaded. With lower cost items such as general building materials yes I go and get them because it would be nonsensical to expect the client to do so and I use my fuel and my time to get them. My labour rates apply when I'm on the job working not running round buying bits and pieces. So these materials cost me money just in procurement. I apply a modest mark-up to those matareials to cover that cost. My accountant insists that I do. Why is that so unreasonable? Other people do things in a different way. Supply and fit everything against a fixed price. They may chose to apply a mark-up to materials and reduce their labour rate accordingly they may have no mark-up and a highger labour rate. That is there choice and nobody has the right to dissect how they run their business. The client is at liberty to get several quotes, chose one and pay the bill at the end.

You don't seem to understand and also misapply the word profit. As far as the tax man is concerned for the self-employed profit is equivalent to the difference between the costs of running the business and what is invoiced and he is taxed on that. He is not allowed to pay himself a salary. What he puts in his bank at the end of the month is what he has to live on after he's accounted for all his business costs including taxes.

If for his "tax deductible registration" he is required to attend a course then he must fund the cost of that course too and whilst he is on it he isn't working and if he isn't working then he isn't earning.

There is no doubt whatsoever that there are people trading out there taking the p.ss. They are easily weeded out. There are a lot of customers out there who take the p.ss too and I can guarantee that there are more cowboy customers than there are cowboy traders.

So yes please do carry on with the general tradesman knocking campaign if you so desire. You have started two threads today on which I can help you and on which I am competant and experienced to comment and can probably save you some money. There is no charge for doing so and there cannot be as I'm here by my choice.

However, right at the moment after reading this diatribe of yours I find myself disinclined to do so. I might change my mind later on.

Cheers

paulmapp8306

keystone wrote: »

Paulmapp8306


However, right at the moment after reading this diatribe of yours I find myself disinclined to do so. I might change my mind later on.

Cheers

Not quite how I meant to come across, and I do understand profit. Im not suggesting that the time taken to procure items for the job should not be charged - of course they should. if its a separate buyer, then there time should also be charged for.

what I meant, was that the quotes should be along the lines of:

1. "cost of materials" - exactly what they cost

2. "Labour costs" - ALL labour costs. not just X per hour for the time spent on the job itself - but the total time it will take to complete ALL tasks involved including buying items and travel times.

3. "Sundry costs" - things like petrol costs to collect materials, which should be itemised.

What i hear (and see) is "some" tradesman quoting what appears to be random costs for items. the often quoted "cost plus a bit". Thing is there is no transparency and no definition of "a bit".

I just think actual costs of materials are just that - and its the customer buying them not the tradesman (ultimately - as i say they end up with the customer). If the customer wants the tradesman to source and collect the buts - then of course they should be charged for that service, but it should be included in the labour costs - because thats what it is.

Ultimately, the cost to the customer "should" be the same either way - but the way I show just means its transparent - the customer can tell what has been charged for what. with a mark up on materials the customer has no idea if hes being charged reasonably (most of the time) or take to the cleaners (those unscrupulous gits that exist in all walks of life).

keystone

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Not quite how I meant to come across,

In which case I apologise for taking it ill but you tend to react to the words on the page.

1. "cost of materials" - exactly what they cost

2. "Labour costs" - ALL labour costs. not just X per hour for the time spent on the job itself - but the total time it will take to complete ALL tasks involved including buying items and travel times.

3. "Sundry costs" - things like petrol costs to collect materials, which should be itemised.

Actually I just don;t agree that you have the right to that sort of breakdown at all. Would you ask Sainsbury's for a similar breakdoen off your weekly shop? Would you ask Ford for the same breakdown when buying a new car? I've been caught before by giving total transparency to a client who then used that transparency as a means to nickel and dime me to get the price paid down from the fixed price quote they had been given in the first instance even when I had absorbed the cost of certain "extras" unforseeable at the time of quoting.

What i hear (and see) is "some" tradesman quoting what appears to be random costs for items. the often quoted "cost plus a bit". Thing is there is no transparency and no definition of "a bit".

Yes I see your point and there are always peeps who will take the p.ss on BOTH sides of the equation. The thing is that its people that do business not companies. There has to be trust and if you do not trust the tradesman and he does not trust you or either of you give the other reason not to trust one another then there is no basis for a commercial arrangement in the first place.

I just think actual costs of materials are just that - and its the customer buying them not the tradesman (ultimately - as i say they end up with the customer). If the customer wants the tradesman to source and collect the buts - then of course they should be charged for that service, but it should be included in the labour costs - because thats what it is.

Thats fine as far as it goes until some clever !!!!!! comes along and argues about the labour costs expecting people to work below cost or at a rate that inhibits his desire/need to have a resonable existence. Once again it comes down to how the individual tradesman establishes his business model as I stated previously.

Cheers

PS. Oh and I will contribute on your other threads but not now. The van is having a new catalytic converter (grrrr - more £££££s) [STRIKE]tomorrow[/STRIKE] today so I will have some time during the day at some stage.

southcoastrgi

I'm sorry paul but your simplictic view of things won't work, so if things are done your way then not only will it take the trade alot more time to itemise the things you want who is going to pay for this time ? so you say just put the labour costs up then all that does is make it look like we are charging too much on an hourly basis & most people will just moan about that, whatever you buy or who ever you buy from they will have made a profit on it so why are we the only ones that should supply it at cost, cake & eat it.

paulmapp8306

i get your points guys.

On the profit thing - the tesco/ford analogy doesnt stand up for me. the equivilant those charge is the markup the suppliers charge, ie the wholesalers, B&Q tradepoint or whatever. you could argue the tradesman is the supplier to the customer I guess.

the rest of it is just a change of outlook - on both the tradesman AND the customer. The hourly rate wouldnt go up as such - but the amount of hours would. The customers need to understand the amount of hours listed isnt just those spend at the job - but also those spent supporting the job.

Maybe Im just an idealist and I guess the issue is maybe with the internet and direct selling. In the past the tradesman got the materials/items "at trade" then charged the customer "commercial cost" - which would be the same or often slightly less than the customer could source things themselves. Now thats not the case most of the time - theres enough stuff available to the general public at trade prices that it maybe just "seems" like the tradesman are charging too much.

Still - whatever i think, and whatever the reasons for/against or why, things arnt going to change, but I would (and have) given work to tradesman who accurately breakdown their costs over someone who doesnt but is cheaper. I just like that transparency.

fred7777

WLM21 wrote: »

I feel the plumber knows best.

Getting back to the original question and away from how a business should make profit, get the plumber to quote for supply and instillation of everything for the following reasons:

1. There is one person to kick if anything goes wrong. Otherwise it's easy to be stuck with the boiler supplier and installer blaming each other and the problem not getting fixed.

2. A good plumber will be getting at least as good as online prices and probably better anyway.

3. If you have an old system at the moment then the majority of the cost will be in installation and other bits such as pipework, holes in walls, removing tanks, piping condensate and digging soak aways etc

4. A plumber will also have a better idea of reliability and maybe know if any particular boiler should be avoided for your area (e.g. I live in a very very hard water area)

Also don't bother with British gas get several quotes from local plumbers.