Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

idiallo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 458 posts

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#261

Post by zrobotics »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #220
prof1le wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were mentioned studies in the book "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion" that mirrored what your parents experienced. Long story short, a jeweler was trying to move some turquoise and told an assistant to sell them at half price while she was gone. The assistant accidentally doubled the price, but the stones still sold immediately. Turns out there's a phenomenon where humans automatically associate price to…

Same for brown diamonds.

Honestly, you don't even need to specify 'brown', regular diamonds would apply. DeBeers has some awesome marketing, diamonds are one of the least beautiful gemstones.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#262

Post by dorgo »

selflesssieve wrote: post #238
stronglikedan wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But also, charge accordingly, if you don't have to post your prices (as your parents probably did). A lawyer is likely willing to pay a lot more for the same website than a tailor shop, and I'll gladly take both of their money.

The term is price discrimination. Offering coupons through the mail, online ad codes etc. You are reaching out to different demos using different marketing techniques and offering or not offering discounts accordingly.

Or just show different prices to different users. Iphone users usually pay more.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#263

Post by shams93 »

The larger your company is the more costly it is to do something even as simple as a static html page. That's because everything that goes out to the public has to be subject to a heavy review process. You're not being paid to write an html page you're being paid to shepherd new information to the public. That's why you can never just estimate cost only on how hard you think it would be to do the task you need to get enough information about the customer's process to understand how much work its going to take not just to complete the task but to shepherd it through their review process and the larger the company the more layers of review and process they are likely to have.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#264

Post by radiator »

pault wrote: post #102
_bxg1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just restated the problem in more detail. What I'm asking is, if the above system encourages managers to waste money, why hasn't anyone come up with a better system?

I think the disconnect is that you are describing it as a system, when in reality it's just a bunch of misaligned incentives and plain old human nature. It's unfixable.

It might be both of those things at the same time. This book claims so https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemantics.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#265

Post by kortilla »

dorgo wrote: post #262
selflesssieve wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term is price discrimination. Offering coupons through the mail, online ad codes etc. You are reaching out to different demos using different marketing techniques and offering or not offering discounts accordingly.

Or just show different prices to different users. Iphone users usually pay more.

Where? This anecdote is oft repeated with little evidence. The only I example I remember is some place getting caught doing it and having to stop because of the bad press.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#266

Post by leetcrew »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #247
lone_haxx0r wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, at least in the case of highly regulated markets and when the state creates artificial monopolies (e.g. electricity). I'll correct my original comment then: At least private companies that compete in a relatively free market are losing their own earned money when they're inefficient, not someone else's.

It’s still not right. Private companies are losing money on behalf of their owners or shareholders.

a key difference is that the largest shareholders are proportionally affected by the waste, and have a proportionately large amount of power to do something about it.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#267

Post by conanbatt »

crispyambulance wrote: post #178

My parents had been running their own tailor shop in the 80's, barely making ends meet, pulling in less than $20K a year. It wasn't for lack of business, father was a master tailor trained in Italy and capable of elite bespoke craftsmanship. They had as much business as they could handle. The problem was that they were charging what they thought the work was worth rather than what their customers were willing to pay.…

Its not the same customers.

Welcome to marketing!

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#268

Post by dymk »

gk1 wrote: post #195
dymk wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna disagree that hourly billing makes no sense for the contractor. He clearly just didn't charge enough per hour; $75/hour is way too low for contract work, and his $21k could have been $56k at $200/hour. What if the project was billed at a fixed cost, he negotiated $21k, but the project took a year to complete because the company moved so slowly? That'd be a terrible salary. He'd have to quit and somehow bill…

> What if the project was billed at a fixed cost, he negotiated $21k, but the project took a year to complete because the company moved so slowly? Simple: Charge $21k per month. If the company drags it for a year then you make $252k.

Okay. Why not charge $X per 2 weeks? Or X per week? Or X per day? Or X per quarter?

The granularity here is entirely arbitrary. Hourly billing is by far the industry standard. That's why we default to it. It's easy to justify in court, it's easy to reason about contracts which use it.

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#269

Post by biztos »

crispyambulance wrote: post #178

My parents had been running their own tailor shop in the 80's, barely making ends meet, pulling in less than $20K a year. It wasn't for lack of business, father was a master tailor trained in Italy and capable of elite bespoke craftsmanship. They had as much business as they could handle. The problem was that they were charging what they thought the work was worth rather than what their customers were willing to pay.…

I'm not sure this is totally applicable to say a tailor shop, but I do wish more craftspeople would try charging more money for quality work.

For example say I want some shelves built. If my shelf-builder charges $X that's fine, but what if I would happily pay $2X?

On the one hand, I might be personally miffed to know I'm paying 2X instead of the X someone else is paying. On the other hand, I'd probably be the more satisfied customer if I don't know (or have the discipline to ignore) the price gap, because the shelf-builder is probably going to give extra effort in hope of getting more jobs from the 2X clientele.

It would be interesting to explore what would make your 2X client feel good even if they know they are paying double. And would that scale to 4X or 40X clients?

Re: I Charged $18k for a Static HTML Page

#270

Post by whamlastxmas »

notahacker wrote: post #157
cosmodisk wrote: post #114

I used to live with this guy when we were studying. He got himself a job with the largest DIY retailer in the country.It was an office job with a relatively good salary. Eventually I moved out nad only saw him again after half a year or so. I asked how's the job to whoch he replied thst he quit after 3 month.I asked why..He said he used come to the office every day and ask around if he could help with anything.. Ever…

The early winners of the UK Apprentice were awarded £100k jobs as a prize, which didn't actually entail doing anything, because the only reason they had been created was as a prize for winning a TV competition. One of them sued for 'constructive dismissal' on the basis she felt that not creating any work for her was an attempt to force her to quit. She lost, presumably on the basis that most people given nothing to d…

To be fair it can hurt your long term prospects to have a do nothing job, especially if it's public knowledge it's a do nothing job. It's an understandable thing to be unhappy about if you were told otherwise.
Post reply on HN