Home cinema - Aerial costs?

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

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 00:39:52 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:

To all the professional installers, here's a bit of philosophy:

Gentlemen, just once in a while you meet a customer like Edward. You all
know from experience that arguing with him is a waste of time. You all
should know that the thing to do is bid him a civil 'good afternoon' and
then drive off. He might be right; he might be wrong. He might be a decent
chap; he might be bounder. But who cares? Just drive away. You aren't here
to put the world right, you're here to make a big fat wedge of money every
single day.

The skill is in identifying these people before you are committed. Once
you
have the ladders off the van it's harder to withdraw. Once they owe you
money they have you over a barrel.

Remember that the 0.1% of people who are trouble are the 0.1% of your
income
that you pay your highest tax rate on. So don't be afraid to drive away.
If
you have gone for a year and you haven't sussed out Mr Trouble at least
twice, then you are making your life unneccessarily hard.

Always have the thought in your mind: I can just disengage at this point.
All I have to do is drive away. There's no glory in struggling with these
situations.

By the way, in the old days all the riggers in this area would take back
aerials that weren't paid for, and would write 'won't pay' on the chimney
(out of sight of the ground). We also used to ring round and warn each
other
about awkward people.

Those who read this group will know that I believe strongly in giving
people
a far deal and doing a top class job. But I also believe in looking after
number one, and that means ditching customers who set out to make things
difficult.

I've no doubt that someone who isn't self-employed will berate me for this
post. Well, never mind.

Bill

You disappoint me. You clearly have either not read or choose not to
understand the whole thread which started with a question as to the
cost of supplying and erecting an aerial. I suggested a costing model
which I acknowledged was based upon assumptions and suggested others
may like to correct both the assumptions and the figures used.

The response was interesting and I assume came from those in the
trade. The response was not to suggest correct figures or the basis
of the 'model' but to personally attack me, as you have done. No one
has provided alternative figures or an alternative costing model.

We've covered this at length. You just can't accept that your ancient model
isn't applicable any more.

A reasonable person would no doubt assume that those in the trade have
something to hide, that is they are pricing their work well over the
cost, gouging I think it is called. It appears that the concept of
'fairness' and 'honesty' by many (certainly not all) trades persons
are foreign, from you contribution(s) you and 'Carpy' come to mind.

Are you suggesting Bill & I are dishonest? You really are new here aren't
you. Everyone else here knows exactly what kind of people we are and the
high standards we strive to maintain. You really couldn't have picked worse
targets to label dishonest.

I hope many of those who have resorted to abuse in this thread may
reflect and feel somewhat ashamed, for others I am afraid they are
simply nasty pieces of work. If the cap fits, wear it!

There's been no abuse from anyone apart from you old boy. We've all been
relatively gentle with you even though you've been terribly rude and awfully
condescending towards many of us. Panic not Edward we forgive you! You're a
reminder of our old friend Spiney who was equally as easy to communicate
with.