Do you offer collect and drop facility?

Do you offer collect and drop facility?

Didn't find your answer?

EDIT

This is a basic question, do not read/respond  if you do not like basic questions. If you do respond please be courteous or move on. Do not waste your time and mine by clogging up this thread.

Apart from one client taken on in my early days, I do not offer to collect client documents and then dropping them once the work is done. It would be too time intensive.

I had a potential client meeting and he said that another accountant offers this. I did explain to him this would add to the cost since more time would be taken up on him.

I informed  the client I would like to think about this and I would let him know on Monday.  It was obvious that this point would be a deal breaker for the client. In terms of time it would take about an hour every quarter to do this.This adds up when this are many clients.

I remember TaxAssist accountants offering this.

How do you get  records from your clients?

NB I am not asking for advice what I should do. I am asking what the practice is

Replies (138)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Eve 2206
11th Sep 2011 18:11

clients!!!

I want some of these :)

Need to sort out my website, leaflets, business cards, networking etc etc etc...... they aren't going to find me otherwise.  I wanted to get my website done by a professional I had lined up but I've spent most of my redundancy money so had to put it on hold.  Might be a false economy though, so might rethink after this week.

But these posts are very useful esp when starting a new practice.

Anyway, forced to take on some consultancy work, so now over to the Excel pages for a crash course in pivot tables :(

Eve

Thanks (1)
PAH Accounting Devizes Wiltshire
By Phil Hendy
12th Sep 2011 08:11

Middle ground is best

I like the Monsoon approach of the middle ground. I have some clients that are right across the country. We keep in touch via Skype, Twitter, Email, phone etc. and both the client and I are perfectly happy.

In fact I gained a new client via Twitter the other day. They are based in Rotherham, I am in Wiltshire. Now I am not going to trek up there every five minutes! I advised that they should speak to some local accountants. They said that they already had but based on a five minute conversation I was the first accountant that listened to their needs! We therefore agreed and initial meeting and then mainly Skype communications following on from that.

I actually put the service level into my fixed fee quote, what a client can expect from me and what I expect from them (different to engagement terms) As long as you and the client are clear about how things work there should be no issues.

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 09:54

Why middle ground?

Phil

What is this middle ground?

Do you mean that if a client is willing to pay for something that you could provide you still wouldn't provide it?

Thanks (0)
PAH Accounting Devizes Wiltshire
By Phil Hendy
12th Sep 2011 10:19

Peter

What I mean is that I can't be everything to all people so I try to give a tailored service as best I can. Some clients will want things I can't provide.

A good example would be where a client might want bookkeeping services. I don't want to do that myself so I would not take it on but would recommend contracting it. Not because I can't do it, regardless of price I don't want to do it!!!

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 10:31

Bookkeeping

Phil

Bookkeeping is a very good example. I do the bookkeeping for two or three clients but their circumstances are special. One is a solicitor and another is a subscription business that needs a very complicated spreadsheet prepared every month for deferred revenue. Another has very varied subscriptions. I've turned down bookkeeping work but the bookkeepers the clients have obtained have been terrible and I've been left with a worse job than if no bookkeeping had been done. I've been wondering how I can get the bookkeeping done properly. Online accounting could be one solution but it really does depend on the client.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
PAH Accounting Devizes Wiltshire
By Phil Hendy
12th Sep 2011 10:37

Online could be but might not

petersaxton wrote:

Phil

Bookkeeping is a very good example. I do the bookkeeping for two or three clients but their circumstances are special. One is a solicitor and another is a subscription business that needs a very complicated spreadsheet prepared every month for deferred revenue. Another has very varied subscriptions. I've turned down bookkeeping work but the bookkeepers the clients have obtained have been terrible and I've been left with a worse job than if no bookkeeping had been done. I've been wondering how I can get the bookkeeping done properly. Online accounting could be one solution but it really does depend on the client.

 

Thanks Peter, one thing that I would stress is that I make sure the client is comfortable. Some clients would not be able to cope with online bookkeeping and maybe a manual cashbook is the right option. I would never 'force' my clients to do what was easiest for me. 

 

I know of one local firm that after partnering with Xero informed all of their clients that they had to switch to that package. When a decent percentage of them refused and started looking elsewhere they realised they had made a monumental error and changed it to optional.

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 10:41

I really don't see the problem with visiting clients.

 

OK, no one in their right mind would drive 200 miles to see a £200 client, but, for example, I do make regular (2 or 3 times a year) 400 mile round trips to see a £14k client. The cost is built into the fee so I see no problem with it. Indeed they are based in a nice part of the country (near the Yorkshire coast) so I often go on a Friday and make a weekend break out of it.

 

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 10:47

Subject to price

As long as a client is profitable I will do all I can for a client while still suggesting more profitable/cost effective options. Some people think online bookkeeping is a solution for all clients yet as Phil as explained it can be a massive mistake. Online bookkeeping options are changing all the time which makes it very difficult to know when to jump in and which clients it should be suggested to.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Ken Howard
12th Sep 2011 13:53

I don't think online accounting is suitable for everyone, probably never will be.  My position is that I'm working towards 100% online, only taking on new online clients, and gradually converting existing clients to online systems.  If a new client came along who wasn't suitable for online accounting or just refused to do online accounting, then we'd shake hands and I'd wish him well.  With existing clients, there are very few (less than a handful now) who aren't online and in each and every case, there's a valid reason.  It took a while, but all "suitable" clients have been moved over after I showed them the benefits.  Only one suitable client refused (who ironically had a maths degree and an online business!) and they were politely asked to find another accountant (there were other reasons as well!).  My website makes it clear I'm an online accountant.  Just like any other specialism, I am content to turn away clients who don't meet my criteria.  That means I can concentrate my efforts on standardisation and giving my clients the best possible service at a very reasonable cost.  That's was specialisms are all about.  There's more than enough work to go round.  I'm showing year on year increases in turnover and profit, so I'm happy.  

I don't see the problem with picking and choosing our clients and enforcing a way of working.  Everyone else does it.  Last week, a roofer came to give a quote - took one look at our roof, said the job was far too big and complicated for him (a one man band) and gave us a name and number of another firm that he was happy to recommend.  A while ago, I had some home improvements and used a few tradesmen who weren't VAT registered and wanted me to directly buy the materials - each gave a very specific list and like an idiot, I bought some cheaper hinges and door handles instead of the standard the joiner wanted.  As soon as he saw them, he refused to fit them, saying they'd not last and he didn't want to be blamed for them failing.  Far enough, I took them back and bought the right ones.  I don't see a difference.  As a service provider, firstly, I have an indisputable right to pick and choose my clients, and secondly, I have a right to specify what "tools and equipment" are used, i.e. software.  

As long as you're upfront, don't change the goalposts and are open and honest about things, I can't see any problems with having a very tightly drawn client base.

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 14:06

Discrimination

Ken Howard

" I don't see the problem with picking and choosing our clients and enforcing a way of working. Everyone else does it. "

 

 

No they don't, and it's a good job they don't.

Imagine a system where barristers could pick and choose, those without money would be easy meat for bent police as they would be unrepresented, those accused of being paedophiles would get no representation,  indeed why bother with trials at all ?

The same applies to the medical profession, or would you allow doctors to discriminate - perhaps refusing to treat smokers, the obsese, maybe the elderly ?

In fact accountants are one of the few professionals who can discriminate, and if that means leaving someone facing HMRC without representation, then that is wrong.

 

 

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 14:20

It may be possible but is it sensible?

 

“A while ago, I had some home improvements and used a few tradesmen who weren't VAT registered and wanted me to directly buy the materials - each gave a very specific list and like an idiot, I bought some cheaper hinges and door handles instead of the standard the joiner wanted.  As soon as he saw them, he refused to fit them, saying they'd not last and he didn't want to be blamed for them failing.  Far enough, I took them back and bought the right ones.  I don't see a difference.  As a service provider, firstly, I have an indisputable right to pick and choose my clients, and secondly, I have a right to specify what "tools and equipment" are used, i.e. software. “

You don’t see a difference?

The first difference is that the joiner didn’t want you to use something that wasn’t up to the job.  It’s not the same as an accountant simply saying I can’t be bothered to look at vouchers.

Your insistence on using certain software is similar to a builder saying to you that they wanted you to build the walls before they put on the roof.

You may have enough clients to pick and choose. People, like the OP, who are trying to get their practice off the ground may be more successful if they didn’t limit their potential client pool.

Of course you have an indisputable right to pick and choose your clients but it is also reasonable for people to disagree with the logic of your decision. Is it sensible to reject a client on the basis of the colour of their tie? Is it sensible to reject a client who is willing to pay for your extra work involved because they can’t use spreadsheets?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Ken Howard
12th Sep 2011 16:09

Usual suspects getting abusive again!!!

As usual, the usual suspects are starting the abusive, aggressive and downright arrogant posting against anyone who they disagree with.  Please note that unlike others, I've never even suggested that other accounts are wrong not to embrace online accounting, or wrong to open their doors to all kinds of clients.  I'm just saying my position, my opinion, and what works for me.  I'm also saying it in a non aggressive, non abusive and non combative manner.  We all have our opinions, but most sane people can accept that other people's opinions are just as valid as their own.  Unfortunately, some people just can't accept other people's opinions and resort to abuse and aggression.  Shame really.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By rhewitt296
12th Sep 2011 16:29

Face time.

Are you not interested in what your clients are like as people rather than just their numbers you have to work with?

Never know one of them could be good looking and you would be missing out on not meeting them.

But to get records to and from clients recorded mail or couriers are always useful.

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 16:35

Ken

You don't think you are getting carried away?

Was my post abusive, aggressive or arrogant?

"most sane people can accept that other people's opinions are just as valid as their own."

I don't think it's logical that everybody's opinions have precisely the same validity. It would be a very strange world if that was the case. Does a fan of Plymouth Argyle who spends 30 hours a week driving a bus have as valid an opinion of the usefulness of Peter Crouch as Harry Redknapp? I would suggest there are very few people other than Harry Redknapp who would have as valid an opinion.

I don't agree with your analogy of a tradesman asking you to buy materials being similar to an accountant asking a client to do their own bookkeeping on software they choose. You don't come up with an answer to my point.

I would be very surprised if anybody disagreed with my argument that an accountant starting his own practice would limit his possible client base if he only accepted a client with a certain skill set.

Just because somebody doesn't agree with you and provides valid counter arguments it doesn't justify calling them abusive, aggressive or arrogant.

I would suggest that people should be allowed to disagree with each other without anybody getting upset.

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
12th Sep 2011 16:45

Faces or numbers

I'm more interested in their numbers. If they're attractive they can send me a photo to look at!

I agree with some of Ken's recent comments. Why shouldn't we pick and choose? It is a free country isn't it? We're not in the legal or medical profession so we're free to carry on our businesses as we choose. I hardly think that if I turn down a client because they insist on meeting face to face and I prefer email that they'll end up without representation - rumour has it I'm not the only accountant in the UK! Besides I think you'll find that it's not actually the entire legal and medical professions that can't turn you down. Or can I pop along to a solicitor to get my will done, say 'I want you to act for me but I'm not prepared to pay, but you can't turn me down so ner' and they have to do what I want? Fab.

Some people may want to take on all and sundry, particularly at the start and that's fine. But we don't all have to do that. We can pick and choose to our heart's content. I can only take on clients with size 6 feet who wear green socks and bowler hats and eat nothing but carrots if I want. Sure it may not be sensible and I might lack clients but it is still my choice.

As Ken said -

As long as you're upfront, don't change the goalposts and are open and honest about things, I can't see any problems with having a very tightly drawn client base.

Says it all really.

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 16:59

Who's agreeing with who?

 

Flash

I think we are in agreement: I said that accountants can pick and choose but it may not be sensible. What’s wrong with that? Isn't that what you are saying?

I don’t agree that Ken’s idea of a joiner recommending a certain quality of hinges is the same as an accountant recommending certain online software. There is obviously a lot more client input in the software and to insist on the client doing all that work is nothing like Ken buying one type of hinges rather than another type.

Maybe Ken is sticking by his analogy but I am not going to accept it just to avoid Ken getting upset.

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 18:37

?

What I consider totally wrong with Ken's posting was his statement that " I don't see the problem with picking and choosing our clients and enforcing a way of working. Everyone else does it. "

 

"Everyone" can't do it as I pointed out. Nor would it be desirable for everyone to do so.

 

I don't see anything "abusive, aggressive and downright arrogant" in my post. Perhaps if Ken considers it was perhaps he could enlighten us all as to how & why ?

 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
12th Sep 2011 18:40

Everyone can do it ..... if they want to ... and they should

As Flash said, we are accountants, not doctors or lawyers.

Whether it is wise for us to be selective, and what criteria we use, is for each of us to decide for ourselves.

I doubt there is an accountant in the UK who hasn't turned somebody away at some time. It isn't just a case of selecting who you want, or don't want, it is also a case of only accepting clients/trades that you know you have enough experience and knowledge to deal with.

 

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 18:50

No

I've never turned a client away. (I've dumped those who dont pay their bill, but that's a different matter.).

I've yet to encounter any client we lack the knowledge to deal with, and, I've yet to encounter a client I'm not willing to represent.

 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
12th Sep 2011 19:19

Unique

I think that makes you fairly unique. We know where to come when we need specialist accounting/tax advice then ;)

I would still guess you are in a minority and I'm not quite sure that letting a client go for non-payment lets you completely off the hook considering your earlier words.

I've turned clients away, or sacked them, for many reasons, some because they were aggressive, some were dishonest, some wouldn't agree with our terms, and some I didn't have enough experience. I like to be able to refuse certain clients and consider myself very fortunate that I am able to do so.

 

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 19:27

experts

ShirleyM

I think that makes you fairly unique. We know where to come when we need specialist accounting/tax advice then ;)

 

 

Why would you turn away a client just because they needed some specialist advice as part of the overall package?  Don't you have a mutual arragement with specialists in various fields as and when required?

We make a point of having access to as many experts in as many fields as possible. Surely this is better than simply turning away a client who may then find himself with someone claiming to be able to assist, but who actually lacks the ability.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
12th Sep 2011 19:37

Yes, and no

Yes, if it is a current client that needs one off specialist help.

No, if it is a potential client that I know will always need specialist help. I wouldn't take clients on the basis that I'm honest about my abilities and other accountants may lie about their abilities and therefore I am the best option for them. I think they will get better service from someone who is already knowledgeable and experienced in that area.

If it was something that I thought was worthwhile learning, then I would seriously consider it, but I do tend to play safe. 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
12th Sep 2011 21:02

I agree with Shirley to a degree ...

... I won't take on solicitors for instance.

Not because I couldn't deal with them, I just don't want to.

I also wouldn't deal with clients that don't sit with my personal morals, however legitimate the trade.

But, if you never take on a client because of inexperience you will never grow and improve. Part of why I like accounting is learning how different businesses work and their differing obstacles and opportunities, but I wouldn't if I had no interest in their specialism.

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 21:05

reasons for not taking on a client

I think it's fair enough to not taking on a client if they are very specialist. If a very specialised business came to me I would seriously consider not taking them on but in my accounting life I haven't come across any business coming to me that I have felt is beyond my knowledge. The OP asked about collecting and dropping off data. I don't see why it is a problem if you are getting paid for it and you know there won't be any problem at the other end. I call before leaving to check somebody will be there and if I turn up and have to wait for any extended time I would not do it again. If somebody will only accept a new client who is willing to use a certain online accounting package then I accept their right to limit their business in such a way but I wouldn't advise anybody to go down that route unless they had more than enough clients already.

If I wanted a new house built I would think it would be reasonable for a builder to advise on the hinges needed but I would think there was something wrong with him if he asked for me to build the foundations before he started! He might explain the advantage of doing so by saying I would find his bill cheaper but if I said I'd prefer he did the whole job and he refused I would gladly find another builder and think he was the one being weird.

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
12th Sep 2011 21:15

Ignorance and knowledge

 

“... I won't take on solicitors for instance.

Not because I couldn't deal with them, I just don't want to.”

I have two solicitor clients – one is a great guy and as good as gold but the other is a nightmare.

Regarding personal morals I would reject any business that was detrimental to animals at the very least.

I have just been approached by an LLP and I knew very little about LLPs but I have read up on it and I don’t see a problem.

Maybe I would be more worried about a doctor’s surgery if they approached me.

I remember when I started out in accounting, so much was a mystery but I have learned so much on the way. You still have to be aware of what you don’t know but you should also be aware of what you can learn.

Thanks (0)
By Owain_Glyndwr
12th Sep 2011 22:29

-

ShirleyM

"No, if it is a potential client that I know will always need specialist help. I wouldn't take clients on the basis that I'm honest about my abilities and other accountants may lie about their abilities and therefore I am the best option for them. I think they will get better service from someone who is already knowledgeable and experienced in that area."

 

 

So long as they know you will be sub-contracting part of the work to an expert then surely it is their choice whether they want to deal with you rather than the expert direct.Assuming there is a decent fee in it (and if they will always need specialist help then thats pretty much a given), then I cant think of any area where a reasonable level of knowledge cant be obtained in a short time. Simply look on it as a challenge.  I cant imagine how dull it would be always staying within one's comfort zone.  

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 08:04

Each to our own

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

So long as they know you will be sub-contracting part of the work to an expert then surely it is their choice whether they want to deal with you rather than the expert direct.Assuming there is a decent fee in it (and if they will always need specialist help then thats pretty much a given), then I cant think of any area where a reasonable level of knowledge cant be obtained in a short time. Simply look on it as a challenge.  I cant imagine how dull it would be always staying within one's comfort zone.  

No - I believe I have a choice too (see 2). Also I didn't say I would send them direct to a specialist, I said someone with more experience and knowledge. A specialist may not be so interested in the compliance work.I am now the only accountant in my practice. I am at an age where I have chosen to slow down, but I don't want to stop just yet. I don't want to spend hours studying (other than CPD) or have sleepless nights wondering if I have overlooked something. You have had your own practice well over 40 years so you must be of similar age to myself (or older), but you have 40 accountants/tax specialists so it is easier to spread the expertise (and the load) rather than one person being an expert on everything. Our individual circumstances are very different, and what makes you happy may not do the same for me. It's a similar situation with the fees, in that I think it unlikely that a sole general practitioner could get the same level of fees as a 40 accountant practice, and I would have to engage an outside specialist but you could well have one in-house. Finally, I don't get a buzz from the challenge any more, and you may think it dull, but for me, it is better than being overworked, stressed out, incompetent, or overconfident.

EDIT: I enjoy my practice much more now that I have given up the race for growth and 'success'. Success for me (now) is enjoying what I do while earning enough money to make it worthwhile. A few years ago I was very different, and I thought I would never lose my ambition or energy, but I have changed and am much happier for it.

Thanks (1)
PAH Accounting Devizes Wiltshire
By Phil Hendy
13th Sep 2011 08:18

Great words Shirley

Shirley, I have to agree with you totally - success is an individual aspiration and can be different for many people.

When I set up my ambition was to gain enough clients to work for myself and keep me and my family living comfortably. Now things have changed slightly and I am looking to expand (a little!) and maybe take on a trainee in the near future. My goals and ambitions have changed.

You are also correct that not every practice is the same, there is no way to compare a Sole practitioner with a 40+ staff member practice. They both have totally different goals and aims as well as business risk!

The same goes for our clients - I have a few that are ambitious and want to be the next big thing, I am helping them on their journey. I also have others which are 'lifestyle' businesses that just want to earn enough money to keep themselves happy.

Thanks (1)
By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 10:17

Ambition

". A few years ago I was very different, and I thought I would never lose my ambition or energy, but I have changed and am much happier for it. "

 

Is it ambition, or is it personal make up.

I've faced challenges all my life, and never walked away from a fight. Even now, if somene says they are having problems getting a refund from a shop, or having problems with the taxman, or being accused of something they didnt do, or indeed anything else, I see it as a challenge, and take the fight on for them.

I actually enjoy the challenge, I get a buzz out of it, and I think the day I cease fighting will probably be the day I die.

Whether it's sport, business, or anything else, I simply love a challenge and thrive on them.

I don't think this is something that you can make a concious decision about, I think it's something in your DNA, or maybe in your early experiences.

As regards my practice - my ambition for that is to ensure that it is still here and still prospering and still providing a good living for employees in 100 years time.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 11:03

More to life than fighting

Sometimes a different approach works better. You sound as if you have to have a fight about everything - that's a lot of anger and aggression. Far better to take a more laid back approach to life, win people over with smiles and achieve more without ruining someone else's day. I'd rather enjoy life - you only get one go at it.

Thanks (1)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 11:28

@OG

Why are ambition and personal makeup exclusive of each other?

I have been there (with the ambition), done that, got the T-shirt, in both my career (in employment), my sports, my hobbies, and my personal life. Is there some unwritten rule that once I get on the roundabout, I am no longer allowed to get off?

I was far too competitive, and this alienates friends and other people. Just look at 'The Apprentice' for an example. If people are very ambitious, they are probably quite ruthless, too. We all know someone who has to be the best, has to have more than anyone else, and has to win at all costs. If they trample over everyone else to achieve this (like in the apprentice) then I personally would not admire them or want to be like them. Do they have real friends, or just people who think they are 'worth' knowing? I don't see everything as a 'fight', I don't have to win at any cost and I even allow others to 'win' occasionally because some things are just not worth arguing over.

People do change, and may even make a conscious decision to change, as I did. Many people I know changed their priorities overnight on the birth of their first child. There are so many factors that affect our priorities, and priorities change our ambitions, either heightening them, or reducing them.

"I actually enjoy the challenge, I get a buzz out of it, and I think the day I cease fighting will probably be the day I die." 

@OG - Your choice entirely, but the thought of being like that myself horrifies me.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 11:34

Illumination

Some of the words on this thread are extremely revealing

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 12:31

Ambition

I never would describe myself as ambitious in the sense of rising to the top - usually because of the compromises I would have to make. My ambitions consisted of the following: I wanted to work in a large practice, medium practice and small practice. I wanted to work in industry and work as an academic. I've achieved all of these except being an academic. I was asked to do a PhD but there was never the right time.

I preferred to avoid financial pressure by working long hours with full time jobs and part time jobs.

I didn't want the pressure of ensuring an employee was fully occupied so I decided to do everything myself. This limited how much my practice could achieve but ensured I maximised my own happiness. I have always been busy so I didn't need to make marketing a priority. If I had 40 accountants mouths to feed I would give marketing a greater priority.

Most of the people on AccountingWeb seem to have got where they realistically want to go. This means that they can pick and choose what work they want to do. They can even decide on what they expect their clients to do for them if they want. Some people are still trying to build their business. If they are busy then it makes sense to consider only taking on a certain type of work. If they want to get even more clients it is less certain whether it is wise to reject clients because of collection/drop off issues or how much bookkeeping the client wants to do or is able to do. If a potential client meets with an accountant who expects the client to provide accounts to trial balance they most likely won't look for a bookkeeper they will look for an accountant to either do the bookkeeping or provide the bookkeeper as part of the service. Of course bigger clients may have their own bookkeeper or accountant.

There's a great variety of people on AccountingWeb - most will have a successful practice but some may be in the early stages of building a practice. Some will be working alone and others will have "staff" - either one or 40! When discussing matters it makes more sense to me to consider the variety of situations rather than only our own. That way our comments may be useful to all readers rather than those who's circumstances precisely match our own.

Thanks (1)
By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 14:30

its HOW you compete that matters

ShirleyM

"I actually enjoy the challenge, I get a buzz out of it, and I think the day I cease fighting will probably be the day I die."

@OG - Your choice entirely, but the thought of being like that myself horrifies me. 

 

 

 

Why?

Being competative does not mean you HAVE to trample over others. But, let me put it like this - what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win?  What's the point of going onto a football pitch intending to lose? Whats the point in going to court if you dont intend to win? And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

Being competative and going out to win does not mean you have to trample over others. It's all about HOW you fight that matters.

From a business point of view - by being successful in business I could afford to pursue my other passions in life. Cameras, cars, boats etc are expensive, as indeed is simply taking time off.  By building a business I have been able to take "me-time" in the knowledge that the business is running, the clients are being looked after, and that I will have money at the end of the month whether i do any work myself or not.

Now I can choose whether I want to work or not, I can choose what I want to work on, and I can simply clear off for the day whenever i want to without any effect on my bank balance.

As I said, being competative is a good thing, its HOW you compete that matters.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 14:49

The needs of the one ....

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

  And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

 The answer to that probably depends on whether one is a capitalist or a socialist. Being on one side of the fence is no more right than it is to be wrong on the other side.
Thanks (0)
Replying to chatman:
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 14:55

Politics

BKD wrote:

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

  And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

 The answer to that probably depends on whether one is a capitalist or a socialist. Being on one side of the fence is no more right than it is to be wrong on the other side.

I don't see what is has to do with politics.

Thanks (0)
Replying to RTwo_DTwo:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 15:23

Did I mention politics?

petersaxton wrote:

BKD wrote:

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

  And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

 The answer to that probably depends on whether one is a capitalist or a socialist. Being on one side of the fence is no more right than it is to be wrong on the other side.

I don't see what is has to do with politics.

I was referring to the views of the individual businessperson. Whether one feels the need to continually expand one's own business or can be comfortable with what one has, has a great deal to do with having a captialist or socialist outlook. But that is just one person's (mine) opinion. OVMV

Thanks (0)
Replying to John Stokdyk:
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 15:51

political views

BKD wrote:

petersaxton wrote:

BKD wrote:

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

  And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

 The answer to that probably depends on whether one is a capitalist or a socialist. Being on one side of the fence is no more right than it is to be wrong on the other side.

I don't see what is has to do with politics.

I was referring to the views of the individual businessperson. Whether one feels the need to continually expand one's own business or can be comfortable with what one has, has a great deal to do with having a captialist or socialist outlook. But that is just one person's (mine) opinion. OVMV

I think you'll find that people's reasons for living a certain lifestyle is much more complex than their political outlook.

People would say I have a capitalist outlook yet I like to run my business around what I enjoy and the ability to spend time with my family. Despite this I think my income is much greater than if I had remained in employment. This doesn't mean that I don't want to earn more money it simply means that I am only willing to do so depending on many other factors. I would hate the idea of socialism having any hold in this country. That doesn't mean I don't think the government should use resources to help disabled people, etc.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 16:48

Bollotics

petersaxton wrote:

I think you'll find that people's reasons for living a certain lifestyle is much more complex than their political outlook.

I think you're absolutely correct. I was being simplistic - perhaps too much so - but couldn't be bothered to expand into a treatise that would have gone on for 8 pages. The point I was making (as have others, including yourself) is that different people have different expectations/ambitions/intentions regarding their business (and other life choices). I do think that political persuasion does have a part to play in that, the size of that part also varying from person to person. If everyone were to accept that their approach is no more "correct" than that of someone else (yes, I know, wishful thinking) we'd all get along just fine. But if the behaviour of certain ex-members of this forum is anything to go by that just ain't going to happen.

Thanks (1)
Replying to John Stokdyk:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 17:21

BKD

BKD wrote:

[But that is just one person's (mine) opinion. OVMV

Eh! I'm normally good on these but you lost me this time :o)

For me, the idyll is neutral growth, i.e. a steady trickle of new clients to replace the steady trickle of those dying/retiring/chucking it in etc, think I'm getting close.

Personally, I don't relish a fight, and will try as many alternatives as possible before entering a fray, and as Flash says, you can generally avoid one. I prefer to think that if something doesn't work, the shop will refund the cost, a tradesman will remedy  something not done right etc. and generally a soft approach will achieve that as often as a fight. Don't get me wrong though, I will "fight" if I have to, although I think explain and negotiate are better terms when dealing with HMRC. 

I used to play rugby for the craic, if we won or lost didn't matter a jot, doesn't mean I didn't do my best but the only thing that would wind me up was cheating. As for running a race, the sooner 2013 is here the better, I can't see why it matters if someone can run faster than someone else or throw things further - but if it makes them happy!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
avatar
By Ken Howard
13th Sep 2011 16:25

Expansion isn't the only reason for being in business

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

Plenty of people are happy in business without the necessity to expand.

For a start, what's wrong with keeping the business the same size, but improving it to get bigger profits out of what you've got, i.e. concentrate on improving systems and repositioning yourself to make more profit from similar numbers of customers, i.e.raise the revenue or lower the costs, but keep the customer base the same?

Then what's wrong with working on maximising eventual selling price, i.e. working on a capital return rather than trading profits, i.e. making your customers loyal to your firm, systemisation and efficiency of working practices, etc., which may not bring in immediate profits, but would almost certainly guarantee a better multiple of profits when the time comes to sell the firm.

And as others have said, a "lifestyle" business is equally as valid for someone who doesn't want to live life in the fast lane, with all the stress and risk that goes with it.

There seems to be every increasing numbers of businesses that are working hard to get more out of what they have got, especially in recession, than going headlong into mindless growth for growth's sake.  It's a matter of working smarter rather than working harder.  Expansion almost certainly means higher risk.

I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with expansion, in fact, probably most businesses will do it, and will prosper, but you also have to accept that there are alternative equally valid views about how a business can be successful without expansion.  It's a question of how you measure the success, whether it's profits, capital gains, proprietor's happiness, etc.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Flying Scotsman:
PAH Accounting Devizes Wiltshire
By Phil Hendy
13th Sep 2011 17:21

Competitive vs Success

Owain_Glyndwr wrote:

Being competative does not mean you HAVE to trample over others. But, let me put it like this - what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win?  What's the point of going onto a football pitch intending to lose? Whats the point in going to court if you dont intend to win? And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?

 

As stated above London Marathon etc. are good examples.

Football, no one necessarily intends to lose but it doesn't mean it is more or less likely. I play for a team in Division 5 of the Cheltenham league, we always finish in the lower echelons of the division, because we don't have the best players, but we all carry on regardless.

Business - not everyone wants the next multi billion pound corporation - I met a client yesterday who literally wants to earn enough to pay her rent and basic living expenses, that is all. She is not well and so that is her choice. Actually to my mind the business has massive potential but she just doesn't want to explore that option.

As Shirely said earlier, success can be measured in many different ways by different people.

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 14:54

Because ....

 

“what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win?”

You wouldn’t get many people entering the London Marathon if only those intending to win it entered.

I don’t think the majority entering races intend to win them. How will you get experience if you only enter races you intend to win?

“what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?”

Because you may not have the resources to significantly expand it and you may prefer to work with the resources you have.

Why not continue to earn £100k a year even if you don’t want to expand. Should you have to close or sell the business?

Thanks (0)
Replying to chatman:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 15:25

Competitive?

petersaxton wrote:

 

“what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win?”

You wouldn’t get many people entering the London Marathon if only those intending to win it entered.

That's true, but then again for the large majority, the London Marathon is not a race, it's a fund-raising "fun" (I use the term loosely) run.

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
13th Sep 2011 15:42

I think it is called choice

"Being competative does not mean you HAVE to trample over others."

I did say  "If they trample ...." - I agree that some people are successful without being ruthless.

"But, let me put it like this - what is the point of entering a race if you don't intend to win? " 

Do you not bother entering if you are unlikely to win? You cannot go from non-starter to winner in one fell swoop. How do you learn?

"And, what is the point in having a business if you dont intend to expand it?" 

I've been trying to explain that but it seems not very clearly.

We each make our own choices. I'm happy being who I am. I don't expect you to change, anymore than you should expect me to change. I choose what makes me happy, not what makes you happy.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 16:51

Entering a race...

How about just to compete, for the experience, for fun or to do your best even if you come last? Why is beating everyone so important?

It just smacks of a big ego trip to me - I beat you so I'm better than you. No, you beat me because you're a faster runner, or can jump higher or just because I decided to jog and enjoy the wind in my face....

 

 

Thanks (1)
Replying to mattb67:
avatar
By User deleted
13th Sep 2011 17:04

Provided .....

Flash Gordon wrote:

or just because I decided to jog and enjoy the wind in my face....

 

 .... the runner in front is not a curry eater

Thanks (1)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 17:17

Reasons

I think there are nearly as many reasons for the level of expansion of a small accounting firm as there are small accounting firms but if you wanted to analyse it I would find that there is much more correlation with family situation than political views.

Before I met my wife my life revolved around "wine, women and song" plus football, chess and tennis but then I realised that I wanted more than just funding my present lifestyle. My wife's attitude was "duty before pleasure" and when she made sacrifices for my wellbeing I realised I had to change.

Once I started taking accounting more seriously I realised the advantages and that I could appreciate the advantages more than the sacrifices. Now I can decide when I want to work. Obviously I have to do a certain amount of work given I do it all myself. If I wanted my firm to be twice as big I could be but I would have to make an effort in that direction.

I will run a race if I enjoy running it and I won't refuse to run because I don't think I can win.

Thanks (1)
By Owain_Glyndwr
13th Sep 2011 17:52

Success is not a dirty word

I didn't say you shouldn't enter a race you can't win - but the aim has to be to finish as high as possible, and, more importantly, to improve your skill, speed etcetera so that after a few races you ARE challenging for the win.  

As BKD says it isnt always necessary to fight shops/HMRC etc, BUT, when it does become necessary then surely the aim is to win. Anything else isnt a fight, its a surrender.

As for business, "winning" is achieving what you want, and generally business succes is measure in profits. Just making enough to live on is not success, it's merely managing to survive just as you would if you were an employee of some large company. Success in business is when you make substantially more than you could as an employee, and, when you do it with less effort.

As I said earlier being able to take whatever time off I want, indeed not having to work at all if I dont want to, and knowing that the money is still going into my bank is success. Being able to buy the things i want, not just the things i need, is success. Being able to afford to help others without worrying about whether I can afford it, is success.

We have a client who appeared on the "Secret Millionairre" programme, and his eyes were opened by his experience. As he said, he didn't realise just how much good he could do with just a modest part of his income. Now the lesson from that of course is that if he, and others, didn't make the money, they would not be able to support charities etc and much of the work of these charities would cease. So success, is a good thing, it's simply how you use the fruits of that success that matters.

 

 

Thanks (0)
By petersaxton
13th Sep 2011 18:10

"I can't see why it matters

"I can't see why it matters if someone can run faster than someone else or throw things further - but if it makes them happy!"

I've never got too excited about athletics. I prefer a team game such as football. I like the camaraderie and the different ways to be successful.

Having said that it may be surprising that my other favourite "sports" are chess and tennis.

I played chess against the future joint winner of the US Open. She was gentle and polite but when playing chess she was incredibly aggressive. Maybe she just didn't want to waste more time than necessary! The nice thing about chess tournaments is that you usually get drawn against people of similar ability. ‘Chess is a sea in which a gnat may drink and an elephant may bathe’ - it's derived from a quote which mentioned the elephant drowning which takes things too far. People still enjoy themselves even though they have no chance of finishing ahead of the grandmasters.

I used to play tennis with a few friends of roughly equal ability and we would play for six hours at a time. If other people heard that I liked to play tennis they would ask to play but I never thought it was worth getting changed for anything less than three hours play. I usually did agree to play for less but I'd try to see how long we could keep going for. I started entering tennis leagues but I'd get placed too high and I'd end up playing a woman who'd dealt with my hardest serve with a topspin just short of the baseline nearly every time. I'd have to endure that for two sets but it could be worth it because they would invite me for drinks afterwards and they'd be a lot less ruthless than on court.

I tried playing the guitar and sometimes was with a friend who, when he played, other friends thought I was playing a Jimi Hendrix record. Should I have immediately given up or should I have got pleasure out of every slight improvement?

To me, the above proves that you can get a lot of pleasure even if you don't intend to win everytime. Is it sensible to only play football, tennis and chess if I intended to win each time? I can just imagine what my teammates would say if I refused to take part in a match because I didn't expect to win - I'm not even too sure what "intend" means in it's use above.

Let the individual choose to be a gnat or an elephant!

Thanks (0)

Pages