20

I work for a web agency.
Over the last 18 months a company asked us about 5 different quotes for rather minimal changes to their website.
While being minimal changes, estimating costs for them still requires several hours of work for research, meetings, correspondance and writing the damn things. They never even gave us a response (neither positive nor negative), except once where they told us that they wouldn't pay for project management because their instructions are so clear that PM isn't necessary.

As a response to the last one, after several months, they send us a 10 pages long pdf with requirements for a new website (or a "restyle" like they call it, even if it has absolutely nothing in common with the current one).
We inform them that we can't permit ourselves to continue studying new solutions for free and therefore tell them that a detailed offer would cost them something like 300$, and that amount would then be discounted from the eventually accepted job. We also roughly estimate a price range of about 15k - 20k for the new website.

We get an email back, from the CEO (until now it was a secretary), with essentially 3 arguments written in condescending form:
1. he brags about his revenue being over 9 billion $$$ a year, and that being a part of a global holding for which "communication is essential" (sic.) means that they need to coordinate and "can't simply accept an offer" [even if it's 400$, for specific change exactly requested by them, I guess...]

2. 15k is too much [... for the website representing this 9 billion dollar holding on the internet, for which the requirements are written in the 10 pages long pdf]

3. He asks for a meeting

We accept the meeting, we go to their office.

When we arrive there, the secretary informs us that the CEO will not participate. So we talk the her and the head of the "Communication Dept" in videoconference.
I explain them that if the sum, which we thought would be appropriate (~15 - 20k), is too high, the Pareto principle would allow us to, theoretically, achieve about 80% of the features and quality for about 20% of the cost. Their genuine response is:
"So your estimate was wrong! You can do it for much less!".
I try to explain them that the most money in a project goes into "attention to detail".
The "Communication Dept." person, who is "doing this job since too much time" (sic.), refuses to believe and insists that "details" don't exist on the web.
I tell her: "In any kind of work, the more effort you put into something, the better it tends to get, with diminishing returns".
She insists: "I don't understand this".

So now I'm here, doing the 6th offer, free of charge, for a 5k website, for a company that generates 9kkk revenue each year, trying to define a "Definition of Done" that works out.

FML I guess.

Sorry for the long post.

Comments
  • 4
    If you manage to get enough business to get by without them, stand firm in requiring a project cost and let them pester some one else for freebees.
  • 2
    @Voxera For now the DoD is "U see content? It done!". I guess this will pretty much have the same end result.
  • 4
    hmmmmm.
    print out a 10 page contract with details on how much will it cost per hour of work, per change request, and per change request clarification. Add payment deadlines, and milestones delivery schdules. Also - no client response in X time, means full acceptance of delivery. Make sure a modified spec with 80% of what they wanted is included in the contract.

    Make them sign it, or walk away, and don't bother talking to them, unless you get a signed contract, and first payment.
    they will will be gone like a fart in the wind after this.

    They will leech as much as possible of you, and get you to do work for free.
    Fuck them.
  • 5
    You shouldn't concede on your original estimate. You know there are going to be errors which they will demand fixes for; will you just not do them without an increase in price? You should be firm with these kinds of assholes. Now they think you don't know the value of your own work, and they think their own wrong opinions about how dev work is correct. I'd get as far away from them as possible...
  • 3
    I would somehow document what sort of detail cannot be done in that shrinked scope, so in case [something breaks | they get exployted | whatever] due to those missing details, they can‘t sue your arse on top of paying less.
  • 4
    @rasteiner
    If we had such project, I'd believe we're talking about the same company.
    Except I'd be an employee.
    My sincere condolences, mate
  • 2
    I'd argue to drop them as a potential client.
Add Comment