On 6/29/07, MB Software Solutions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I look at it this way: how long am I going to be tied up with this job > if I get it, given the scope that has been defined? Let's say it's 2 > months....then I decide "Ok, it I want to bill $xxxxx this year, that > means I should bid 2/12 of $xxxxx for the job. Perhaps a bit more to > pad it for a little scope creep (that I would allow as a courtesy...but > not to be taken advantage of). Does this logic have any merit or is it > crazy too?
A little of both. I have had little jobs that turned into 2 and 3-year engagements with clients. And big jobs that turned out to be things that could be cranked out pretty quickly. For me, there's the entire issue of who is assuming risk on the job, and how that risk is shared. Rather than make my best estimate, add in a profit margin, and give the client a fixed bid, I prefer to offer a time-and-materials contract so I can deliver the client the system he or she needs and they can make the spending decisions on what they are willing to pay for. But that is another long religious discussion. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
