Re: An ethical conundrum... Opinions welcome!

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Dec 1, 10:48=EF=BF=BDam, Frank Olson
<use_the_email_li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jim wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 4:47 pm, "Doug" <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> "Jim" <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> >>news:c9c11d75-d31b-46c3-bcdb-878d0424a1b7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=
..
> >> On Nov 29, 1:26?am, Frank Olson
>
> >> <use_the_email_li...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> That may all be true but, If the owner has a contract with the old
> >>> alarm company, what's stopping them from accelerating the contract to
> >>> obtain the balance due? Whether they were right or wrong, they can
> >>> still attempt to enforce the contract and the owner will have to
> >>> afford the defense fees, if to obtain only the fact that they were
> >>> negligent (and probably not grossly negligent). Rather than do that,
> >>> ( again, regardless of who is right or wrong) At that point the owner
> >>> can just tell you to forget the monitoring and they'll just continue
> >>> the monitoring contract with the old alarm company or ..... worse, th=
e
> >>> owner signs your contract, for what ever your term is and then he
> >>> finds out the old alarm company wont let him out of their contract.
> >>> Now he's obligated to two contracts both of which are enforceable.
> >>> What do you do? Back down or take him to court if he decides to go
> >>> with the other alarm companys monitoring? Either way you lose.
> >>> Maybe this is something you should bring out into the negotiations
> >>> now, just so there's no surprise. If you're going to potentially miss
> >>> out on the monitoring, you may want to rethink your installation
> >>> costs. ( However, admittedly, I don't know how your price your jobs)
> >> I doubt that any profit from monitoring plays a large part in the pric=
ing of
> >> a major fire alarm system and the inclusion or exclusion of a monitori=
ng
> >> contract is probably not a deal breaker. Even over a five year period =
the
> >> income from monitoring such a system is likely to be an almost
> >> insignificant amount compared to the installation cost.
>
> >> Doug-
>
> > It doesn't have to do entirely with the monitoring.
>
> > I presume that the company that does the monitoring will also do the
> > inspections and maintenance through the years, also. Which (again, I
> > presume) is somewhat more substantial than the monitoring. The old
> > company apparently didn't provide that service so it would benefit the
> > owner to again go with that company rather than Franks, whom I'm sure
> > would have a scheduled maintenance and inspections schedule that the
> > owner would have to pay for.
>
> Monitoring companies are just that (in Canada), monitoring. =EF=BF=BDThey=
 don't
> provide other services besides guard response (and a lot of times that
> can be arranged through another agency too). =EF=BF=BDIn the lower mainla=
nd,
> there are a number of fire service companies that provide the annual
> testing and emergency service of life safety systems. =EF=BF=BDI wouldn't=
 mind
> taking this account over and we stand a better than average chance here
> since we already deal with the property management company on a number
> of other buildings.
>
>
>
> > By the way, although I don't do commercial fire alarms anymore, if I
> > were doing a large installation such as this you could be damn sure
> > that the monitoring wouldn't be just $15.00 a month. Big system, big
> > bucs.
>
> > I'm a strong proponent of pricing things based on the percieved value
> > of the service and the ability of the client to pay, not by my cost.
> > Someone has to be the reason for continuing inflation. It may as well
> > be me.
>
> As for your comment on the monitoring fees. =EF=BF=BDThey're $15.00/month
> regardless of how deep the customer's pockets. =EF=BF=BDI can't see charg=
ing
> more just because the building's bigger, or has a bigger fire alarm
> system. =EF=BF=BDWe're still only processing three primary signals (alarm=
,
> trouble, and supervisory). =EF=BF=BDWhat you're suggesting would be akin =
to a
> salesclerk at Sears sizing up the customer at her counter and charging
> for a pair of Sears branded jeans on the basis of what that customer's
> wearing at the time (or the size of the purse/wallet they keep their
> money in).

No, it would be more akin to a 400 pound person or a seven foot tall
person having to pay more because they're bigger and will require
more .... of whatever .......... which relates to service, attention,
risk, and possible problems like someone fooling around with or
damaging a smoke detector, an electrician disconnecting
something, ..whatever you can possibly think can happen .... just
might, causing multiple signals to be sent. Whether you have to pay
more for it or not, is not the issue. It's the higher risk that comes
with big jobs. Compare those evenualities with this large account to a
3 smoke detector residental installation. Even if you never have a
problem, the risk is there. You should get paid for it.



>
> We assume a lot more liability through the annual testing and
> maintenance of the fire alarm system and that's where the extra charges
> come in, not the monthly monitoring. =EF=BF=BDMind you, this system (as m=
ost
> fire alarm systems) will require a GSM module which will add $10.00 a
> month regardless. =EF=BF=BDWhat burns my butt about the previous company =
is that
> the charged about what we would for the service, yet employed a single
> line dialer with no back-up, and no test signal for $3.00 a month less
> than what we are going to charge for the ULC listed service... =EF=BF=BDG=
o figure!-

So you charge your client just about what it cost you a month for GSM
monitoring?

Not that I agree with the previous alarm companys not providing the
required monitoring and service but it sounds to me as if he was
charging appropriately for the service he WAS providing.

Of course, (I'm just thinking) that my point of view is based on what
occurs in my area, which always seems to be a bit (HA!) more cut
throat than most of what I see being talked about in this group.

For instance, I'm presently getting between $22.00 to 24.00 per month
basic residential (burg/fire)or light commercial (burg only) I don't
do large commercial or commercial fire anymore. If someone wants
redundant radio backup the monthly is $36.00 to $42.00 for both.  Just
radio alone $28.00. My goal is to keep my margin above cost, just
about the same. I'm never without work even with an unlisted number.

By the way, I don't know where we stand in this area in comparison to
other areas but the reason we can get as much as we do is something we
can thank the "Freebee" companys for. Twice I've had it happen that
when I told the prospective client that the monitoring was $22.00 per
month, they've said .... Wow! is that all?  So, since I never get an
objection to the cost of monitoring, I have to presume that I'm in the
ball park with other companys here. However, I've always tended to be
a little higher than what I hear others are charging.

Anyway, it works for me. YMMV.