Thoughts on Pricing

If you hang around forums long enough, you are likely to see some rather strange theories. Recently a post on PaintTalk claimed:

Painting on the other hand...especially faux or industrial is so subjective that
a lot of considerations are simply not relevant. Simply think about what the
client is willing to pay then double it.

This is some of the oddest advice I've read in a long time. How is one to know what the "client is willing to pay". Apparently, estimating requires some form of ESP, rather than a working knowledge of the trade. In addition, why just double that number? Why not triple it? Or why not multiply it by Pi? No explanation was given.

Here is another one:

When you own a company, profit (i.e. what you make after everyone is paid
(bills, employees, etc.) is essentially the same thing as your salary.

This is a particularly interesting concept, in that it reveals why 99% of painting contractors fail. The premise underlying this statement is that you first pay everyone, and whatever is left you get to put in your pocket. There are several things wrong with this.


First, the owner's salary should be a part of overhead. It should be a defined amount that is built into the price of every job. Second, in the above statement the owner isn't really drawing a salary--he is getting whatever crumbs happen to be left. I don't consider that very motivating. Third, profit is what is left after everything--including the owner--is paid.

I sometimes wonder what motivates such comments. I suspect that the writers simply don't know any better. But that is no excuse for positing oneself as an expert. Fortunately, such comments are usually challenged and corrected by others.


© BEP Enterprises Incorporated 2008