Anyone interested in removing this oak?

[skyhuck]

4 hours ago, agg221 said:

 

This thread really doesn't do the image of tree surgery any favours. A member of the public had a tree they wanted removed and had a perception on the price. When people put up an indicative price which was double that and the OP commented to that effect, the response was aggressive and then the thread descended into moderately homophobic abuse. A parallel has been drawn with surgeons - imagine what you would think if you were discussing a procedure with your surgeon and he called in a second opinion which degenerated into a slanging match. Not very professional. The OP has then validated his opinion by having the job done for half the indicated figure, and the response is to suggest that he had it done badly or by cowboys. This gives an impression of the trade which does not paint it in a favourable light.

 

If you want people to understand why something costs what it does, it helps to give a breakdown. With that in mind, I have quoted Skyhuck's post as it is one of the few constructive posts on this thread. I'd be interested in an assessment of the following:

 

Assume a tree work company of 4 is charging £1050/day and is running at 40% overhead. I am basing this on standard SME rates. This figure may be slightly high as a manufacturing company would have similar capital cost and higher site costs. I am making the assumption that the running costs (insurance, lighting heating, fuel etc all balance out).

 

Assume an earning year of 45wks, allowing for annual leave, public holidays and illness.

 

Assume 4 days earning, 1 day called off/maintenance etc per week.

 

That means gross labour income of £113,400. Assume the team includes a couple of early career groundies on £20k, that leaves £73.4k divided between the two experienced staff, which sounds a bit low.

 

However, there is also pricing jobs based on competition to take into account. That tree had already been dismantled - it was just the stem to chog down and cart out (plus the grinding). From the limited photos, it didn't look like there was any difficult rigging out to avoid targets. That puts it within the range of a smaller or less experienced team, so if the bigger, more experienced company with the experience to do more complex jobs wants the job, they will have to price down to it - if Michelangelo had offered a service emulsioning your ceiling at the weekends, he could not have charged the rate as for painting the Sistine chapel.

 

It sounds like a it was a fairly early finish. That suggests a team of 3 could have done it. The same figures as above for a team of 3 would see £93.4k divided between the two experienced staff which sounds quite reasonable.

 

Skyhuck - would you care to comment on my wet finger estimated figures?

Alec

 

 

I’m a climber, who runs a business in order to maximise my income. So business doesn’t come easy. I don’t know the figure, but I would imagine my overhead is well over 40%, probably nearer 60%

[Clutchy]

12 minutes ago, skyhuck said:

I’m a climber, who runs a business in order to maximise my income. So business doesn’t come easy. I don’t know the figure, but I would imagine my overhead is well over 40%, probably nearer 60%

But could that be because your income is lower per day than what it ought to be? Therefore a higher percentage? 

 

Theres so many factors that would vary the percentage but I think 30-40% is about right 

[Chipperclown]

On 26/04/2021 at 09:47, agg221 said:

 

This thread really doesn't do the image of tree surgery any favours. A member of the public had a tree they wanted removed and had a perception on the price. When people put up an indicative price which was double that and the OP commented to that effect, the response was aggressive and then the thread descended into moderately homophobic abuse. A parallel has been drawn with surgeons - imagine what you would think if you were discussing a procedure with your surgeon and he called in a second opinion which degenerated into a slanging match. Not very professional. The OP has then validated his opinion by having the job done for half the indicated figure, and the response is to suggest that he had it done badly or by cowboys. This gives an impression of the trade which does not paint it in a favourable light.

 

If you want people to understand why something costs what it does, it helps to give a breakdown. With that in mind, I have quoted Skyhuck's post as it is one of the few constructive posts on this thread. I'd be interested in an assessment of the following:

 

Assume a tree work company of 4 is charging £1050/day and is running at 40% overhead. I am basing this on standard SME rates. This figure may be slightly high as a manufacturing company would have similar capital cost and higher site costs. I am making the assumption that the running costs (insurance, lighting heating, fuel etc all balance out).

 

Assume an earning year of 45wks, allowing for annual leave, public holidays and illness.

 

Assume 4 days earning, 1 day called off/maintenance etc per week.

 

That means gross labour income of £113,400. Assume the team includes a couple of early career groundies on £20k, that leaves £73.4k divided between the two experienced staff, which sounds a bit low.

 

However, there is also pricing jobs based on competition to take into account. That tree had already been dismantled - it was just the stem to chog down and cart out (plus the grinding). From the limited photos, it didn't look like there was any difficult rigging out to avoid targets. That puts it within the range of a smaller or less experienced team, so if the bigger, more experienced company with the experience to do more complex jobs wants the job, they will have to price down to it - if Michelangelo had offered a service emulsioning your ceiling at the weekends, he could not have charged the rate as for painting the Sistine chapel.

 

It sounds like a it was a fairly early finish. That suggests a team of 3 could have done it. The same figures as above for a team of 3 would see £93.4k divided between the two experienced staff which sounds quite reasonable.

 

Skyhuck - would you care to comment on my wet finger estimated figures?

Alec

 

 

It's interesting to me that some of you/us feel that  you/we should breakdown costs to therefore justify our quotations based on a photograph. Also interesting that the size of a company and time of which we/u finish work is worth mentioning.  Work is work, skill is skill. I work directly and  also indirectly (as a subcontractor at times) with arborists whom are simply excellent at their job, better than me and more knowledgeable (even though I try) in every area. However I charge more than the majority as I am a business who provides a good service  (I think) and whom expects to be rewarded via a wage for doing so.

 

You/we are professionals in general, why under value such a serious business when all is said and done?

 

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Chipperclown

[Mick Dempsey]

Anyone who works and gets paid is a professional.

 

What’s your point?

[Retired Climber]

😀

On 26/04/2021 at 14:18, skyhuck said:

I’m a climber, who runs a business in order to maximise my income. So business doesn’t come easy. I don’t know the figure, but I would imagine my overhead is well over 40%, probably nearer 60%

That's the problem with a lot of small businesses. It's a bit of a paradox really; those who tend to end up running the businesses are usually those who've been good at the actual work, but are not necessarily any good at running a business. 

It's probably why tree surgeons websites are pretty much universally bad.

Edited April 28, 2021 by Retired Climber

[Mick Dempsey]

I think you confuse the website of a company with the company itself.

 

I know of a couple of small lucrative tree companies that have no website or a very simple one at best.

 

Its not all about SEOs or engagement or hits. It’s about equipment and expertise.

Websites are just a tool to get you in front of the client (if it’s a new client) or for your existing clients to get in touch with you.

 

 

[eggsarascal]

11 minutes ago, Retired Climber said:

😀

That's the problem with a lot of small businesses. It's a bit of a paradox really; those who tend to end up running the businesses are usually those who've been good at the actual work, but are not necessarily any good at running a business. 

It's probably why tree surgeons websites are pretty much universally bad.

There's a bloke about this parish that seems to have a good reputation for building arborist websites.

[Chipperclown]

19 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Anyone who works and gets paid is a professional.

 

What’s your point?

Anyone?

[Chipperclown]

Just now, Chipperclown said:

Anyone?

Not sure about

 

Just now, Chipperclown said:

Anyone?

 Not sure about that mick!

 

[Mick Dempsey]

1 minute ago, Chipperclown said:

Not sure about

 

 Not sure about that mick!

 

Are you having a stroke?