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

Myth of the Flat Fee

80beans.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#21

Post by dasil003 »

raganwald wrote: post #18
dasil003 wrote: post #14

Of course this is a good message to send to big clients with big projects who merely "don't get it". On the other hand, there are a lot of small businesses and other clients with very limited means who have maybe $1000-$10000 for a project. Web development is new territory for them, and they have no other way to approach the problem other than to put a fixed-budget stake in the ground, and of course their requirement…

Learn to use off-the-shelf software to build lots of functionality quickly in a predictable fashion (WordPress, Drupal, Expression Engine) Bravo. This is the way I look at it: if it has been done before, somebody, somewhere has productized it. If it isn't a full-blown CMS, it's a bundle of Rails plugins and all I'm doing is writing glue code. If it hasn't been done before, because it's really specific to a client's d…

Interesting tangent to this, after doing PHP from 2000 to 2005, I hopped on the Rails bandwagon full-bore and was using it even for small clients. 6 years later I feel that it was a bit self-serving because those old Rails sites are creaky and painful to upgrade—or even to find someone else to work on—compared to my PHP sites from the same era.

Now that I have ample outlet for my creativity I can be a bit more objective and admit that as much as I love Rails, it's a terrible platform for build-it-and-forget-it. Rails shines for core business apps under continuous evolution.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#22

Post by roytomeij »

nickburdick wrote: post #20

I think this statement is extremely poignant, "Because you're looking for a sense of security when you're spending your budget on a web app". I think a big problem is lack of knowledge on the part of the client. Most people just have no idea what it takes to build web apps. $1000 (or even $5000) just doesn't go very far. But without learning and experience on the customer's side, how are they able to bound the projec…

I should maybe have indicated that the clients we're talking to usually have between $20,000 and $70,000 to spend. They employ people who're expected to be experienced.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#23

Post by rhizome »

dasil003 wrote: post #21
raganwald wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Learn to use off-the-shelf software to build lots of functionality quickly in a predictable fashion (WordPress, Drupal, Expression Engine) Bravo. This is the way I look at it: if it has been done before, somebody, somewhere has productized it. If it isn't a full-blown CMS, it's a bundle of Rails plugins and all I'm doing is writing glue code. If it hasn't been done before, because it's really specific to a client's d…

Interesting tangent to this, after doing PHP from 2000 to 2005, I hopped on the Rails bandwagon full-bore and was using it even for small clients. 6 years later I feel that it was a bit self-serving because those old Rails sites are creaky and painful to upgrade—or even to find someone else to work on—compared to my PHP sites from the same era. Now that I have ample outlet for my creativity I can be a bit more object…

What do you consider to be a good "build-it-and-forget-it" platform?

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#24

Post by dasil003 »

rhizome wrote: post #23
dasil003 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting tangent to this, after doing PHP from 2000 to 2005, I hopped on the Rails bandwagon full-bore and was using it even for small clients. 6 years later I feel that it was a bit self-serving because those old Rails sites are creaky and painful to upgrade—or even to find someone else to work on—compared to my PHP sites from the same era. Now that I have ample outlet for my creativity I can be a bit more object…

What do you consider to be a good "build-it-and-forget-it" platform?

PHP, Java, Cobol? It's all relative I suppose.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#25

Post by bena »

kingofspain wrote: post #15
bena wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An estimate should always be a range. And it should always cover the "cone of uncertainty". If you don't know, reflect it in your estimate. Get the client prepared for falling within the range. And comfortable with the cost on the far end. Because while you hope it doesn't happen, it very well could.

In my experience a range of, say, £5000-7000 usually means £5000 to the client and it can take hours/days/weeks to budge that perception no matter how initially prepared they seem. I've also found people who, while comfortable with the upper estimate if it goes there, will then expect freebies on top as recompense for making them pay 'extra'.

Contracts and making sure you have fully prepared the client go a long way here.

If they consistently believe/say/whatever the low end, you have not done your job in preparing them. Every single time they mention the low number, you mention the high number.

If they expect freebies or feel as if they are paying 'extra', you have failed in setting expectations.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#26

Post by endtime »

dasil003 wrote: post #24
rhizome wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you consider to be a good "build-it-and-forget-it" platform?

PHP, Java, Cobol? It's all relative I suppose.

You're recommending COBOL as more maintainable than Rails? I don't know Rails, but I find this very hard to believe.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#27

Post by raganwald »

endtime wrote: post #26
dasil003 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PHP, Java, Cobol? It's all relative I suppose.

You're recommending COBOL as more maintainable than Rails? I don't know Rails, but I find this very hard to believe.

The times, they are a-changing. COBOL has its own agile framework:

http://www.coboloncogs.org/INDEX.HTM

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#28

Post by dasil003 »

endtime wrote: post #26
dasil003 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PHP, Java, Cobol? It's all relative I suppose.

You're recommending COBOL as more maintainable than Rails? I don't know Rails, but I find this very hard to believe.

Where did I say maintainable? This is about stability over time.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#29

Post by jtbigwoo »

The flat fee game the OP describes is pretty much standard operating procedure even for big consulting companies like IBM and Accenture. First they agree to a flat fee (sometimes after a bit of requirements exploration) that cuts their margin for error fairly close. Then, after the work has gone down the road a bit, they bury the client under a blizzard of change requests for every last detail that wasn't documented in the initial requirements. The change requests are where the real money is made for consulting companies, especially if they're getting their employees to work unpaid overtime to fulfill the extra requirements.

Re: Myth of the Flat Fee

#30

Post by matwood »

dasil003 wrote: post #14

Of course this is a good message to send to big clients with big projects who merely "don't get it". On the other hand, there are a lot of small businesses and other clients with very limited means who have maybe $1000-$10000 for a project. Web development is new territory for them, and they have no other way to approach the problem other than to put a fixed-budget stake in the ground, and of course their requirement…

It's not unethical (as suggested by another commenter) because this is how you are able to afford a flat fee.

I agree and want to expand a bit. Even if a change or addition only takes me 10 minutes of my time now, it's important to remember the months and often years of experience that I'm drawing upon to make that change so quickly. Explain to the client that they are not only paying you for your exact time, but also for your skill set and ability to do a job quickly AND correctly. All of those qualities cost money and clients who don't want to recognize that fact are toxic and should be dumped (as suggested by the poster I'm responding to).

Post reply on HN