Aerial costs?
 

"Edward W. Thompson" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 11:01:18 +0100, "Carpy"
wrote:


"Edward W. Thompson" wrote in message
.. .

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:11:01 +0100, "Doctor D"
wrote:


"Carpy" wrote in message
...
Found a few interesting pages regarding aerial costs etc. Read the
comments at the bottom of the pages too. I don't understand how some
of
these installers can claim to offer a new aerial installation with an
amplifier for £65?

http://www.whatprice.co.uk/prices/ho...l-install.html

http://www.whatprice.co.uk/howi/freeview_aerial.html


Easy.

"No income tax, no VAT, no money back, no guarantee."
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.

Your topic mentions cost not price, there is a major difference as you
know. If you consider 'cost' , cost will comprise the principal
elements of materials plus overheads plus labour.

Starting with labour, how much is it reasonable for an aerial
installer to 'earn' per year. Let's say £30,000 ( a little high
perhaps but we must start somewhere). On the assumption the number of
hours worked per year is 2000 that means a rate of £15/hour is
required if he can 'sell' all hours which isn't possible. If we
assume 60% of the time is 'chargeable' the hourly rate is £25/hour for
a salary of £30,000/year.

With respect to materials, I would guess the 'average' cost of
materials for most installations does not exceed £20 and likely
somewhat less. Obviously there will be installations where it will
cost more. So for an hours job the 'cost' would be, excluding
overheads, £45 for the 'average' job.

Assuming 'we' are in agreement so far, for a price of £60 the overhead
part would be £15. Referring to my previous 'assumption' that the
number of chargeable hours is 60% of 2000 hr/year, chargeable hours
are 1200hours therefore the annual contribution to overheads is
£15x1200 which is £18,000/year. Seems adequate to me.

Considering the type of work and the 'danger' aspect, I pose the
question why is erecting an aerial anymore dangerous than say that of
a 'roofer'? If the type of danger is equivalent why should an aerial
erector be compensated more for the risk than a 'roofer'?

Now having addressed the basis of 'cost', price is a different matter.
Price is set by the market and what the public are prepared to pay. It
is perfectly clear, to me at least, that many of those in the aerial
erection business are 'ripping-off' the gullible public. For the same
enquiry I have been quoted from £60 to £200 for the same job of
installing a dipole aerial for a DAB radio on an existing mast mounted
on a chimney at the end of my house. No roof work required, all
accessible from a ladder.

If you disagree with my figures (assumptions) then substitute your own
and you will arrive at what you consider to be the 'cost'. You will
then be able to compare your cost with the 'price' quoted and make a
judgment accordingly.

Edward your figures above are total ********. If you believed them why
would
you call someone who charged £65 for the DAB aerial install? That would be
£5 profit according to your figures. Or did you think this £5 was an
acceptable amount of profit for the installer?

snip

I have 'snipped' the abuse and am wondering why I am replying to a
fool. However, what profit are you talking about? I have not allowed
profit as a discrete element as the 'profit' is the £30,000 per year
return for work done.

If my figure and methodology are so wrong, (******** was the
expression I see) please show me how you would cost a job. I assume
you have no idea but perhaps you will surprise me when you respond,
although I won't hold my breath.

As a comment to all other contributors to the subject of the topic, I
have offered a costing, not pricing, of installing an aerial based
upon one hour work, as it appears this to be the 'average' time
required. I recognize that £30,000/year for an aerial installer may
be open to question (either too high or too low) and also £20 for
materials (average job) maybe too high but I don't think it to be too
low. To those that disagree, I assume you must have the 'correct'
figures. With the correct information perhaps we may all benefit.

What I will add is on my original post I did not make an allowance for
contingencies. When quoting without sighting the job it would be
reasonable to allow something for contigencies if the price is a fixed
price, perhaps 20% might be right. I suppose a contingency allowance
relates more to price than to cost as does VAT.

If you think my critique of your figures is "abuse" you must live a very
sheltered bourgeois existence. If you post on here asking for help or
clarification, you really need to be able to accept criticism of your posts
without resorting to derisive personal insults directed at those who are
best placed to help you. I accept my original reply to your post perhaps
wasn't the most helpful and I clearly misread part of your post, but your
manner in some of your posts is so unbelievably patronising it only serves
to rile people on here, me included. I still can't decide whether or not
this is intentional on your behalf.

Anyway, your figures are still ********! Let me explain. Find me a roofer
that will come out and spend an hour clambering about on the roof replacing
tiles for anywhere near £25 per hour labour charge. You won't. You might
find a bloke with a set of ladders granted, but it will be touch and go
whether he breaks more tiles than he replaces. Likewise find me an aerial
rigger who will come and install an aerial properly, for £60. You won't. Yes
you'll get someone to clamp an aerial to your current mast and shrug his
shoulders when it doesn't work. but you could have got your window cleaner
to do that. Your £60 DAB guy is clearly not competent nor confident enough
in his abilities to charge the proper rate, hence he comes out to you
without any means of testing the signal, and ends up not charging you a
penny. He will be out of business in a years time.

I regularly come across pensioners (and some non pensioners) who are in a
terrible pickle with regard to the setup / operation of their AV equipment.
They've had their TV aerial problems sorted out by me so they've now got
good reception, and they've paid up. Now I could just flash a smile and
speed off down the road, but I generally take the time to stay for as long
as it takes to rewire everything properly then run them through everything
step by step. I sometimes write things down for those who I think will be a
bit forgetful. These people know they can call me without feeling silly if
they have any problem or have forgotten which button to press. They also
know that if they call me in 3 years time I will still be around and in
business. Can you see the value they get here as opposed to just the cost?

Your ideas of what each particular trade should be paid is presumably based
on your assumption of how easy you believe the job to be, or how skilled you
think one trade is compared to another? On what basis do you deduce that a
roofer receives less or more remuneration than an aerial rigger, or leads
you to believe £30,000 is "about right" for a self employed aerial rigger?
There is no £30,000 cap on earnings if you're a self employed roofer /
aerial rigger / whatever. There are also huge variables depending on what
level in the market you are operating in, the customers / clients /
organisations you have working relationships with & ultimately your
reputation & how good you are. You've made it quite clear you think the
aerial installation trade isn't even a trade, and is a job that can be done
by anyone with a set of ladders and only a few brain cells. While this is
partly true for the low end of the market (of which you are well versed in
now) it's increasingly untrue as you move upmarket. You'd probably be
surprised to learn what some of us thick & lowly riggers did for a living
before choosing to go down this path.

Talking about roofers, I've got an old school friend who is a self employed
roofer. He's recently moved into a £500,000 house just around the corner
from me. His customers (I've met quite a few) are very happy with him & his
work, so where's the problem? You can't knock someone for being successful &
earning good money in return for providing a good service, so long as the
customers are happy and still knocking on your door trying to book an
appointment. It's free market economics and customers can & will shop around
to their hearts content these days but their choice of who to use should
never be based on price alone. You've experienced first hand what happens
when you only consider the price. I agree with you however that this
situation may regress slightly for some industries / trades to more resemble
the cost plus pricing that you hold in such high esteem once the credit
crunch starts to really bite. At least then people will realise that the
£20,000 debt on their credit card is real and needs paying back, and their
house isn't a cash machine nor an investment, but a home. Coincidentally, a
lot of work lately has been people ditching Sky and wanting to totally
rewire their house for Freeview reception to escape the monthly repayments.

Just to get back to your costings, £20 for materials is way off unless you
want the cheapest of the cheap which won't last more than a few weeks before
they snap / rust away / fall to bits / bend etc. For a decent installation
that will last you have to spend much more to get the best materials. You
might have been able to get all the bits required for £20 a decade ago, but
no chance these days. I don't know if you drive a car now but if you don't
then it might surprise you that it costs me £100 now to fill up my Transit
van with diesel! A belly buster breakfast down the local greasy spoon is now
about £6.50! I forgot to make a packed lunch recently so had to pop into a
sandwich shop for some lunch. A small roll and a bottle of water set me back
nearly £6. Anyway I digress.

I personally have a long waiting list of customers who are more than willing
to wait a while and pay my rates, as I'm sure the other decent installers
here such as Glenn & Bill do. It's clearly not ripping the public off. The
customers know the price beforehand, they are happy with it and agree to it,
and they get exactly what they want. I'm not talking about vastly inflated
prices either, but more a sensible & fair price that probably sits about
halfway between the cheapest & most expensive quotes you will get. I can
fully understand your concerns about pricing being on a fixed income,
especially with CPI being so rampant (and the actual non fiddled inflation
figure being about 3 times more so) but sitting down and calculating to the
nth degree what you think the price should be isn't going to solve your DAB
reception problems. For what it's worth I think DAB reception is perfectly
possible where you are, based on the fact that your internal aerial is
picking up most stations albeit with a bucket load of errors (boiling mud)
thrown in for good measure.

Why not get yourself a £10 DAB dipole and fix it outside, even just at head
height. Just make sure to try it on all sides of the house. Shouldn't be too
difficult. Run the cable loose back to the receiver and see what you get. As
has been said to you before, DAB is designed to picked up lower down than
other services, so you might be pleasantly surprised.

Aerial costs?
 

Let me recap. The thread started when someone questioned the 'cost'
to supply and erect an aerial (I assume a TV aerial) and raised the
question of the 'price' I believe of £60.

I responded showing using the following assumptions:

Cost of materials (aerial, cable, clips, brackets etc)
£20
Annual remuneration of erector £30,000/year
Chargeable hours per year
1200
Overheads/year
£18,000
Average time of job
1 hour
Hourly Labour Rate
£25

This provoked howls of indignation and suggestion my figures and
assumptions were totally wrong (********) but no datafrom my critics
indicating the correct figures. Please bear in mind we are discussing
'cost' not 'price'.

To appease my critics, I doubled the annual remuneration to £60,000
and material cost to £40 to arrive at £90.00 cost price to supply and
fit an aerial for the average job. This still appears not to satisfy
my critics and still they consistently decline to table their own
figures, I wonder why. Incidentally, I am assuming that the price for
materials paid by the 'trade' is significantly less than the consumer
retaill price.

I also note, with some amusement, that the methodology used for
costing a job is considered out of date. So cost of labour plus cost
of materials plus overheads is no longer used? Will someone kindly
advised what is now used?

To end my contribution to the thread, a local reputable CAI contractor
has quoted £50 to supply and fit a DAB dipole to my existing mast if
it is accessible by ladder only (which it is) or £90 if it must be
accessed from the roof. I assume the difference being whether it is a
one or two man job.

Aerial costs?
 

tim..... wrote:
"Silk" wrote in message
...
charles wrote:
In article ,
Silk wrote:
What's wrong with someone who doesn't waste money on a posh van, is
professional enough not to need insurance and relies on skill rather
than gadgets? Hmm?
Who suggested a 'posh' van - but you probably need a reliable one. How
does being 'professional' remove the need for insurance?
If you're a proper professional you won't be making any mistakes or having
accidents.

Then insurance for same would cost almost nothing.

It doesn't. Why do you think that is?

It's because having insurance makes people more irresponsible. If people
were more accountable for their mistakes.

Aerial costs?
 

In article ,
Edward W. Thompson wrote:


Let me recap. The thread started when someone questioned the 'cost'
to supply and erect an aerial (I assume a TV aerial) and raised the
question of the 'price' I believe of £60.

I responded showing using the following assumptions:

Cost of materials (aerial, cable, clips, brackets etc)
£20

where did you get your figures? Yes, you probably can get a bit of bent
metal for that sort of price - it might even be sold as an aerial - but to
get one that works properly,I doubt it.

Annual remuneration of erector £30,000/year
Chargeable hours per year
1200

optimistic, I would suggest, since that equates to 5 hours a day. Unless
you make travelling time chargeable - which then probably makes for a 2
hour job.

Overheads/year
£18,000
Average time of job
1 hour
Hourly Labour Rate
£25

your 'hourly rate' doesn't (by my arithmetic) take into account the
overheads.

This provoked howls of indignation and suggestion my figures and
assumptions were totally wrong (********) but no datafrom my critics
indicating the correct figures. Please bear in mind we are discussing
'cost' not 'price'.

To appease my critics, I doubled the annual remuneration to £60,000
and material cost to £40 to arrive at £90.00 cost price to supply and
fit an aerial for the average job. This still appears not to satisfy
my critics and still they consistently decline to table their own
figures, I wonder why. Incidentally, I am assuming that the price for
materials paid by the 'trade' is significantly less than the consumer
retaill price.

but that will probably only apply if they buy in quantity. That will mean
storage facilities, and capital tied up in 'stock'.

I also note, with some amusement, that the methodology used for
costing a job is considered out of date. So cost of labour plus cost
of materials plus overheads is no longer used? Will someone kindly
advised what is now used?

About 20 years, maybe longer, ago an accountant friend of mine was
attending a seminar run by a major brewer. Someone asked why a pint of
their beer cost nearly double in London what it cost in Yorkshire. The
answer was "because the market will bear it."


To end my contribution to the thread, a local reputable CAI contractor
has quoted £50 to supply and fit a DAB dipole to my existing mast if
it is accessible by ladder only (which it is) or £90 if it must be
accessed from the roof. I assume the difference being whether it is a
one or two man job.

let us know how you (or they) get on.

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Aerial costs?
 

To end my contribution to the thread, a local reputable CAI contractor
has quoted £50 to supply and fit a DAB dipole to my existing mast if
it is accessible by ladder only (which it is) or £90 if it must be
accessed from the roof. I assume the difference being whether it is a
one or two man job.

Where is this you live again that DAB is so bad that you need an outdoor
aerial?..
--
Tony Sayer

Aerial costs?
 

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
To end my contribution to the thread, a local reputable CAI contractor
has quoted £50 to supply and fit a DAB dipole to my existing mast if
it is accessible by ladder only (which it is) or £90 if it must be
accessed from the roof. I assume the difference being whether it is a
one or two man job.

Where is this you live again that DAB is so bad that you need an outdoor
aerial?..

It might be due to the construction materials used in the house.

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

Aerial costs?
 

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Max Demian
scribeth thus
"Glenn Millar" wrote in message
et...
Silk wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
Silk wrote:
What's wrong with someone who doesn't waste money on a posh van, is
professional enough not to need insurance and relies on skill rather
than gadgets? Hmm?
Who suggested a 'posh' van - but you probably need a reliable one. How
does being 'professional' remove the need for insurance?
Public Liability insurance should be required by law. Insurance is there
to protect both the professional installer as well as the customer.
Insurance is there to make large profits for the insurance companies and
give customers a false sense of security.


Drive your car uninsured then?.,,..

The same applies. I'm sure the vast majority of people only insure their
cars because they have to. Also, you need to consider that a motor
insurance claim can run into millions.

Aerial costs?
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Max Demian
scribeth thus

Insurance is there to make large profits for the insurance companies and
give customers a false sense of security.


Drive your car uninsured then?.,,..

Motor insurance is compulsory.

If it wasn't I'd still buy it, including comprehensive insurance if the car
is reasonably new.

Insurance is only worthwhile if the insured event is very rare, and the loss
very great.

--
Max Demian

Aerial costs?
 

In article , Silk
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Max Demian
scribeth thus
"Glenn Millar" wrote in message
et...
Silk wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
Silk wrote:
What's wrong with someone who doesn't waste money on a posh van, is
professional enough not to need insurance and relies on skill rather
than gadgets? Hmm?
Who suggested a 'posh' van - but you probably need a reliable one. How
does being 'professional' remove the need for insurance?
Public Liability insurance should be required by law. Insurance is there
to protect both the professional installer as well as the customer.
Insurance is there to make large profits for the insurance companies and
give customers a false sense of security.


Drive your car uninsured then?.,,..

The same applies. I'm sure the vast majority of people only insure their
cars because they have to.

Yes thats called a Law and there for a good reason like at lot of other
ones!..

Also, you need to consider that a motor
insurance claim can run into millions.

Well lets hope I don't have the misfortune to run into you anytime
then;!...
--
Tony Sayer

Aerial costs?
 

In article , charles
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
To end my contribution to the thread, a local reputable CAI contractor
has quoted £50 to supply and fit a DAB dipole to my existing mast if
it is accessible by ladder only (which it is) or £90 if it must be
accessed from the roof. I assume the difference being whether it is a
one or two man job.

Where is this you live again that DAB is so bad that you need an outdoor
aerial?..

It might be due to the construction materials used in the house.


Well I'm sure that Dave P will be along to say that he can drive his
Motah anywhere in the UK with perfick DABble reception;)...
--
Tony Sayer