Ask HN: What tool for negotiating/discussing scope items for fixed quote? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: What tool for negotiating/discussing scope items for fixed quote?

10 pointsstevage12 comments

I'm a solo freelance web developer. One pain point I haven't really been able to solve looks like this:

Client wants a fixed quote for some features. Typically this is a "phase 2" after we have already done a fixed quote with delivery, and trust has been built.

They sent an email with a paragraph on each feature/change they want. I send some follow up questions. They send some answers and add a couple more features. Their tech person chimes in with a few more comments. I send a quote itemising the features. They ask how much if we change one of the features in a certain way. They say not to worry about the first feature we talked about. They start adding screenshots to the email threads to describe specific features.

This is perhaps the only part of the business that I find tiresome in terms of admin. It's quite hard work getting all the email threads together, keeping track of the comments, making sure I have enough details to quote, etc.

What's a better way?

Obviously the idea of Github Issues occurs, but it would be a tough sell getting a client to write a separate issue for every possible scope item, and having "business" discussions in the Github Issues feels icky somehow. (I don't think my client contacts nor I would particularly like my fees to be visible to other developers who might be involved.)

I have tried using a spreadsheet, where each row is a feature, and each column is a round of discussion on the feature. Which sort of works, but lacks formatting, and it's hard to incorporate screencaps.

These quotes are generally in the $5-15k range. Usually it's a codebase I built from scratch but will be handing over to their team to manage/maintain.

Would love to hear any tools/techniques that have worked for you.

A support desk/ticketing or sales pipeline service feels like the way to go here. Zendesk is a good low cost ticketing/support and Hubspot is marketing/sales. You could set it up so emails go through the service so you have the full history of the conversation in a single easy to read thread.

You could then attach an SOW contract to the ticket and update the contract as the client’s needs evolve.

It's enough money it's worth making a short document summarizing the current ask from them as you understand it, and sending that back as the basis for agreeing what they want, pasting stuff from emails and changing the quote as it evolves.

Never give fixed prices for hourly development time, as the history of estimates should have already shown your teams competence quoting.

The simple reason is many larger firms simply will not pay their scheduled final installment for a fixed price contract, lawsuits are tax deductible for large firms, and so you should adjust your initial service pricing to offset this phenomena.

Note many mid-sized companies will simply never allow customer specific development time, as it exposes more risk the longer it persists.

Seriously, whatever deal you think you signed is often wishful BS once the incentive to pay is gone.

This advice feels very US-specific. I've delivered 7-8 fixed projects for giant corps in Germany/Belgium/NL/UK, ranging between 70k and 350k (eur) in project value, and never ever felt that this was a risk.

I think you missed the point, and that was taking on unknown risks to subsidize a large firm is often foolish for a small company.

Sorry, I had to read your comment a couple of times.

If you're saying it's just a case of risk vs reward then I agree. But that's what you're meant to do when you negotiate a deal: keep actual risks low and make perceived risks high. That's how you maximise your reward.

The better way? Time & materials..

Fixed quotes work for well defined scope and mitigated unknowns. When things aren't static, when there are too many unknowns, risk (in giving a fixed price) increase, often significantly. I've seen plenty of solo-ists and agencies give the client the price they wanted and then go well into to red trying to deliver.

An alternative is to be heavy-handed in your estimate. Eye it up and 2x it, or 3x it.

Seconding this, the only reasonable way to do this business is either fixed money or fixed output, you can't have both at the same time. You can give estimates, yes, but be very clear that this is an estimate, not a binding offer. If you're selling fixed money and fixed output at the same time you're always bidding against yourself.

I disagree on T&M. Billing by the hour penalizes those that have developed the patterns and skills to go faster. Fixed price is the only way to be better than the other firm and have that lead to an advantage on your bottom line.

Seconded. T&M leads to unproductive discussions, like when you had to try out different libraries to get the job done. The client can easily ask why you didn't know library X was the best candidate before you spent time they pay for to investigate.

Well, if it were fixed price you'd eat that discovery, correct? T&M doesn't stop you from not billing for something.

Again, the question was: There are too many unknowns. The answer is T&M. Btw, they can be combined. Fixed price on the knowns, and T&M on the unknowns.

Put it this way, I've seen 5x more fixed price projects go sideways than T&M. That's how bespoke work works best.

Not really. If you're worth more you charge more. There's a reason a trans-Atlantic ticket on the Concord cost more. Hint: It wasn't because the food was better.

To get in a price battle with another bottom feeder for a project with too many unknowns (and likely a client with higher-than-budget expectations) is a classic fool's errand.

We all know the rule:

Fast. Cheap. Right. Pick two.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com