Total lack of understanding

Total lack of understanding

Didn't find your answer?

Just in case you haven't noticed, over the years I've had some discussions with various members about Value Pricing (VP).

The members who disagree with me seem to think VP is about ripping clients off. They prefer a "time/cost plus notional profit" approach to pricing, sometimes using timesheets sometime not.

I come at this from the position that time/cost pricing is selfish/self-centred and effectively makes the profession unethical. Continuing with time/cost pricing will make the accounting profession irrelevant. The conclusion is that accountants will just do is more accounts/tax returns as they gradually become more efficient forced by prices falling.

Many existing practitioners may get out before they experience too much pain, but what about the future?

When you understand VP you appreciate it is the only approach to pricing that:

  • Puts the client first
  • Fully aligns the accountant and client
  • Encourage and rewards innovation
  • Drives down costs on low value work
  • Maximises value for everyone (clients, practice owners, employees and society)

Pricing is fundamental to strategy so it seems sensible to me to understand as much as possible about such an important topic. At the end of the day being an accountant in practice requires much more that technical knowledge of accounts/tax. But, there is another reason to fully understand VP.

Business owners expect/need this extra knowledge (especially now) and an accountant who does not understand VP and just prices with cost/plus will probably only be able to talk to their client about things like job costing. 

Over the years I have invested time and energy to build my knowledge of VP through:

  • Reading books
  • Attending seminars and Webinars
  • Accountants (and other professional) who have adopted VP
  • Using VP

I'm interested to know where you have gained your understanding. What have you actually done to build your knowledge of VP?

Bob Harper

Replies (380)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By andy.partridge
09th Nov 2012 09:02

Problem is Bob

You don't listen to anything that doesn't conform rigidly to your own view. Your quote below is a sorry summary of members views and quite misrepresentative.

The members who disagree with me seem to think VP is about ripping clients off. They prefer a "time/cost plus notional profit" approach to pricing, sometimes using timesheets sometime not. 

Thanks (12)
Replying to johngroganjga:
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
12th Nov 2012 16:36

and here endeth the lesson

andy.partridge wrote:

You don't listen to anything that doesn't conform rigidly to your own view. Your quote below is a sorry summary of members views and quite misrepresentative.

The members who disagree with me seem to think VP is about ripping clients off. They prefer a "time/cost plus notional profit" approach to pricing, sometimes using timesheets sometime not. 

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
09th Nov 2012 09:09

It's not what you say, but the way that you say it

How can educated people know so little about something so important?

I come at this from the position that time/cost pricing is selfish/self-centred and effectively makes the profession unethical.

I read this and my first thoughts were ... it is just another opportunity for you to tell other accountants how stupid they are, and how brilliant you are, but yet you are unable to explain clearly your view of Value pricing, otherwise everyone here would understand wouldn't they?

Sorry Bob, but your self-proclaimed fountain of knowledge about our practices, and how we run them, is a fiction of your imagination. You know very little about us in reality, but don't let that stop you telling us how unethical we are!

Thanks (9)
the sea otter
By memyself-eye
09th Nov 2012 09:13

We once worked for a client that

offered Neurolinguistic Programming - a brave noise for something that was basically unfathomable (to me anyway). I thought - and still do- that the whole concept was just a self serving nonsense aimed at inadequates who were daft enough to buy in.

Their literature was as bland and full of platitudes as the opening  text above.

That organisation's management was poor and they no longer exist.

Good job too. 

Thanks (9)
avatar
By BigBadWolf
09th Nov 2012 09:15

At it again!

Bob is back! Groan!

 

 

Thanks (6)
Replying to Duggimon:
Me!
By nigelburge
09th Nov 2012 10:01

Nonsense!

BigBadWolf wrote:

Bob is back! Groan!

 

Bob is back - Hahahaha. He always manges to brighten up my day with his nonsense.

Thanks (2)
avatar
By bernard michael
09th Nov 2012 09:19

Are you advocating we reduce our fee base/income for a possible perceived client need. Most clients are not totally fee driven and want a  range of knowledge/information/experience in return for a reasonable charge.This can be reflected in perhaps charging more  for low value work than VP might value it at.

Thanks (1)
By pushtheriver
09th Nov 2012 09:31

What have you actually done to build your knowledge of VP?

 

Nothing

 

Thanks (3)
Img
By MissAccounting
09th Nov 2012 09:32

People dont want to understand it because you come across as a rip-off merchant!

Thanks (9)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 09:32

Specifc

@Andy - I was not refering to AWeb members generally - I was very specific "The members who disagree with me".

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Jekyll and Hyde
09th Nov 2012 09:37

Two or more typs of people

The are clearly more than two types of accountant and more than 2 types of client. So one system does not and will not fit all. If an accountant has picked up risk adverse clients, who appreciates paying for a service then this accountant will always argue your approach as it will never fit with their client profile.

If however the client profiles are the Jimmy Carr's and MP's of this world, or indeed good busineses that sell their products based on value pricing then clearly the accountant would have a client profile that fitted your theory.

About 5 - 6 years ago I watched a programme (very similar to rouge traders on BBC), can't remember if it was this or not. Anyway there was a locksmith being investigated and as I have a locksmith friend I was bored silly about this actual programme. The locksmith would be called out to an emergency and solve that problem by allowing the occupants to enter their building. This investigation has the National Locksmith Association president as an expert witness and they set up secret filming. Anyway, the locksmith would always drill the lock and then charge for a replacement lock (plus profit margin) and also at least an hours time. I believe form memory the average cost was about £150. The expert witness said  that any genuine locksmith would be able to do a non destuctive opening (ie. Pick the lock) and it should only take 10 - 15 minutes at cost of about £30 -£50. At the end of the programme the locksmith in question said that he was offering a serivce of letting people back into their homes and that was what they were paying him for, not his time or expertise. Rouge traders and the expert witness disagreed as they both said he was offering a service.

So back to accountancy, for me this is no different, both view are right, it is just how the client perceives what they are paying for. Or to put it another way, I as an accountant, simply want to charge based on my time and service and there are plenty of clients out there that are still willing to pay me this way. If there is radical change in the next decade, then market forces will ultimately change my views. The same can be said for every other type of business and product.

Thanks (3)
By ShirleyM
09th Nov 2012 09:40

Has anyone actually agreed with you, Bob?

I may have missed something, but even those accountants that use value pricing seem to disagree with your view of it.

Maybe this all comes back to you not explaining things clearly?

Thanks (7)
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
09th Nov 2012 10:06

Economics 101

Accountants are in business primarily for selfish reasons.  It is not an indictment of accountants, and it is no different from most other individuals in gainful employment or self employment.  Apart from those lucky few with substantial capital, generally inherited, who can afford to gallivant around engaging in charitable or altruistic philanthropy, the workforce, whether an accountant or a lavatory attendant on Brighton Pier, is motivated to work by the prospect of the filthy lucre, to fund his mortgage, car, food, pension, holidays and his family's and children's welfare, education, health and quality of life.  That an accountant chooses accountancy rather than lavatory attendant in order to achieve that end may be the result of a variety of factors such as education, intellect, aptitude and perhaps some enthusiasm and an element of job satisfaction.

But at the end of the day, for a given transaction, there will normally be a discrepancy between the price that the customer is prepared to pay and the price that the accountant is prepared to accept.   Hopefully the former exceeds the latter, else the transaction will not proceed.  How much of that discrepancy falls into the hands of the accountant, at the expense of the customer, or vice versa, is what concerns Bob Harper and this thread.

In a monopolistic market, that difference will fall substantially into the hands of the seller, ie the accountant.  By which I mean that the negotiated price will be at the upper end of the discrepancy.  In a competitive market, that difference will fall substantially into the hands of the purchaser, ie the negotiated price will be at the lower end.

For transactions which the customer perceives as being particularly valuable, clearly his top limit of what he would be prepared to pay is inflated.  So we have to ask:  Is the market more akin to a monopoly, in which case the accountant can charge that higher amount regardless of whatever lower amount he might have been prepared to accept, or is  it more akin to perfect competition, in which case an astute accountant should appreciate that were he to charge the upper limit then the customer will seek the equivalent service from a competitor who can generally be expected to value the lower limit along similar principles to those of his current accountant?

Because I submit that faced with the stark choice of charging the lower amount which he is prepared to accept on the one hand, or on the other hand losing the client to a competitor and in the process receiving no income whatsoever from the transaction, he will opt for the former strategy.

The reality is that the market falls somewhere between a monopoly and perfect competition.  Having secured a client there is some inertia to change, and a modest uplift in price for particularly valuable services may pass under the radar.  My own experience is that on the spectrum as a whole, accountancy services fall closer to the "competitive" end than the "monopolistic" end.

In some respects "value pricing" and "cost plus" pricing merge anyway.  The particularly valuable services tend to require accountants with higher degree of skill, experience and qualifications, with commensurate salaries.  Work of that nature would be assigned to the more senior staff and the customer will find himself paying more than average anyway.

Harper criticises the "cost plus" camp on ethical grounds.  It seems to me that a pricing policy which fundamentally relies on exploiting the anti-competitive influences in the market is the less ethical policy.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (5)
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
09th Nov 2012 09:45

@Bob

Cost benefit analysis, return on capital, IRR, NPV

Those are several of the types of analysis I apply to my own business and that of my clients where appropriate.

I'd be interested to know what measure you use to gauge how successful:

1. All the time and money you spent increasing your knowledge of VP has been.

2. Your attempts to convert AWeb members to VP have been.

Personally you are putting me off VP because of your refusal to accept anything anyone says which disagrees with your sermons.

I'm going to an AVN seminar in a few weeks, I've been before, and one of the sessions will be on VP. The way in which they approach the subject is far more professional, engaging and of value to me, I've even thought about implementing some of the practices they advocate.

Not you though Bob,all I see you doing and I know it will happen with this thread, is alienate yourself from a potential customer market.

Why would you want to do that?

Is your Ego really that big?

 

 

Thanks (3)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:04

AVN

@Kent - my measurements are based on what matters to clients.

If there are no accountants in the market who want to work with me I am happy with that. But, I believe there are. You've not be trained and mentored by me - it is very different to AVN.

I've implemented Times Up (fixed pricing software) and do not agree with AVN in using a calculator or pricing. I also disagree with AVN on tax strategies but respect them.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
09th Nov 2012 10:09

Eh?

Bob Harper wrote:

If there are no accountants in the market who want to work with me I am happy with that. But, I believe there are. 

Hmmm, so you didn't answer my questions funny that eh?

Mind you from your comment above sounds like your success to date has been ahem, 'modest'.

Thanks (2)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:09

Rip-off

@MissAccounting - have you actually spoken to anyone who I have worked for or with? Have you ever read anything, anywhere negative from anyone who has ever paid me any money?

You keep your impression, you're welcome to it.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:12

Question

@Kent - what question?

Modest compared to what?

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to petersaxton:
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
09th Nov 2012 10:19

Reading the question does help :)

Bob Harper wrote:

@Kent - what question?

Modest compared to what?

Bob Harper

Take your pick:

 

"I'd be interested to know what measure you use to gauge how successful:

1. All the time and money you spent increasing your knowledge of VP has been.

2. Your attempts to convert AWeb members to VP have been.

 

all I see you doing and I know it will happen with this thread, is alienate yourself from a potential customer market.

Why would you want to do that?

Is your Ego really that big?"

Thanks (1)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:13

Communist

@Clint - are you a communist? That is where cost plus pricing comes from.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to Melody:
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
09th Nov 2012 10:43

Er, don't think so, no.

Bob Harper wrote:

@Clint - are you a communist? That is where cost plus pricing comes from.

Bob Harper

Heh, I have never considered myself to be a communist.  You are the first to suggest that I am, and you are presumably saying that all other accountants who charge by the timesheet are communists.  Beginning to lose remaining shreds of credibility, methinks.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (2)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:14

Missed the point

@Shirley - yes, you have missed something. The accountants who disagree with me are NOT using VP, they are at best value guessing.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
avatar
By bernard michael
09th Nov 2012 10:19

Would anyone who's used Bob services /methods care to comment on their efficacy

Thanks (2)
By ShirleyM
09th Nov 2012 10:21

There we go again!

The accountants who disagree with me are NOT using VP, they are at best value guessing.

So ... you know more about their methods than they do. Really?????

You know nothing about them!

Your way of conversing with (and judging) people leaves me gob-smacked?

Thanks (2)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:25

Gob-smacked

@Shirley - I can only go on what they say.

At the end of the day I am bound to argue with people who disagree with me.

What have you do to educate yourself on VP?

@Bernard - not sure too many people here will work with me!

Call me and I'll give you a name and number to call.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to Jola:
By ShirleyM
09th Nov 2012 10:36

education

Bob Harper wrote:

@Shirley - I can only go on what they say.

At the end of the day I am bound to argue with people who disagree with me.

What have you do to educate yourself on VP?

I have yet to see anyone agree with you. Why are you bound to argue with people who disagree with you. Why can't you be pleasant and accept that people have their own opinions and accept that the majority of people here disagree with you?

My VP education: I read your postulations, but correctly, or incorrectly, you still give me the impression that you just look for a sucker who will pay you big bucks for something they neither want or need but can be persuaded into. I am sure you are competent at selling to people (clients or accountant) who like their ego's boosting by being told how much money they 'will' make (or tax they 'will' save). If they fail, I am sure it will be something they did, or didn't do, as per your instructions.

There is a type of person who likes to brag about how much they have paid for a 'professional' and maybe they would fit your client type perfectly but I am not sure how prolific they are in these economic uncertainties, and I am certain there will be very few on AWeb.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By andy.partridge
09th Nov 2012 10:28

I know where this is going

I can only think Peter is biding his time

Thanks (2)
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
09th Nov 2012 10:29

Michael Howard

Answer the questions Bob.

Yours

JP

Thanks (2)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2012 11:07

I think ...

... Bob's OP is well written and reasonably interesting.

He has listened and done what was asked, started his own thread. I don't think then ripping the minutae to shreds is helpful, i would be more interested in a sensible discussion on the matter.

The big concern to me, as I intimated on another thread, is that you do you big Ta-dah moment, get big take savings, efficiencies for the client, whatever, all well and good, get a large fee for good advice, but, then what, you expect them to keep paying that every year, or do you need a relentless string of new clients, because as I see it, once you have made the big change, the rest is just tinkering and fine tuning, and after a few years maximum the client will tire of paying large sums for a marginal benefit. that is if someone else hasn't come along and said, I can do all that plus some for half the price.

Unless you want to be a niche practice, to my mind VP is just another arrow in the quiver to be fired at selected targets, others will be best served by alternative pricing structures. To re-use another analogy, you don't sell peanuts to someone with a nut allergy.

The one point I would differ strongly on is that no pricing structure of any commercial enterprise, however you delude yourself, puts the customer/client first. 

EDIT: on reflection though, the title could be more sympathetic

Thanks (4)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:31

Questions

@Kent - the Crunchers measurement system is part of our IP, I will not share it here.

The time/energy increasing my knowledge is highly valuable. Apart from real assets like land, there are only two other assets worth building; knowledge and relationships (with the right people).

I am not attempting to convert members to VP. I only do that when people pay me.

I am happy to alienate large segment of the market because it makes me more compelling to the other segment. I want to work with accountants who don't like what traditional accountancy mean.

It's not my ego but my strategy.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Me!
By nigelburge
09th Nov 2012 10:37

Would anyone like to bet on how long........

............. it takes for Henry to pull this thread?!

I reckon another two hours and it will be gone. Then the "curse of Bob" will have struck again.

Thanks (1)
Man of Kent
By Kent accountant
09th Nov 2012 10:40

Thanks Bob

That told me nothing (and everything) about how successful you've been. 

I'll let others pick a fight and watch the thread descend into personal attacks (two way), just waiting for a couple of other forum members to appear. Then the thread will be removed - familar reoccuring theme.

I'm off to work with real clients who pay real money for a real service.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By bernard michael
09th Nov 2012 10:42

When I was in industry I was asked to broaden my knowledge by taking a management diploma  in a non accounting field. Because of a very pretty lady in the Marketing Dept I chose marketing. I had a very enjoyable 2 years being the bane of the lecturers by arguing about their b******t. I only passed by quoting the c**p back at them.

Nothing changes in life

Thanks (2)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:42

Henry

@Nigel - I'd suggest Nigel pull the comments that are not in keeping the AWeb rules, starting with yours.

I'd like the thread kept so I can link to it. If not I'll do a more detailed blog post on my Website.

@Shirley - I'd suggest you read Ron Bakers books and my comments will then make more sense. It's like talking about tax planning without understanding that drawings don't reduce profits.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to Hew105:
By ShirleyM
09th Nov 2012 10:50

Why?

Bob Harper wrote:

@Shirley - I'd suggest you read Ron Bakers books and my comments will then make more sense. It's like talking about tax planning without understanding that drawings don't reduce profits.

Bob Harper

Are you unable to explain it in an understandable way to us accountants? Maybe you will have a bit more luck with clients. Do you ask them to read Ron Bakers book, or would that put them off?

Thanks (0)
Replying to Hew105:
Me!
By nigelburge
09th Nov 2012 11:03

Why?

Bob Harper wrote:

I'd like the thread kept so I can link to it

Bob,

Why do you want this thread kept? No, quite seriously why?? I, seemingly like most of the other contributors here, simply do not understand why you continue to ram your views down everyone's throats and then aggressively attack those who have the temerity to disagree with you.

I, personally, find it all highly amusing but I really don't see what you get out of it. I should be fascinated to hear you explain.

I am not having a go at you and this is not a personal attack - I am just totally bemused by your continued postings.

 

Thanks (4)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:51

Background

@Clint - I asked because I get the impression you don't like  pricing policy designed to maximise profit.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
09th Nov 2012 11:07

Just recognising reality, I thought

Bob Harper wrote:

@Clint - I asked because I get the impression you don't like  pricing policy designed to maximise profit.

Bob Harper

I simply recognise the reality, however unpalatable, that I am not going to get any profit, maximised or otherwise, from business that I do not retain.

I hope to be able to undercut competitors and still be profitable, by operating a more efficient business than my competitors, and perhaps not being afraid to turn away certain customers.  But certainly I would want to charge the maximum that I could which would not result in loss of client.  Therein lies the art.  But fundamentally, that maximum is not dependent on client perception of value of particular transactions but is on how I and my competitors vary in our respective business practices.

I am not a historian, but I thought that communism frowned on free market competition.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (3)
Replying to Annon2013:
Red Leader
By Red Leader
09th Nov 2012 11:35

Communism

Marx predicted - incorrectly as it turned out - that the more advanced societies would be the ones most likely to adopt communism. Communism was postulated as the happy end state, preceded by socialism which in turn succeeded capitalism. Just thought I'd clarify that. This is Politics 1.01, isn't it? Have I got the right thread?

Thanks (2)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 10:53

Luck

@Shirley - there is no need for luck, if a client want to work with me they should read the books unless they can afford private tuition.

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
avatar
By nogammonsinanundoubledgame
09th Nov 2012 11:01

Fixed pricing

Incidentally, I am favourably disposed to the concept of charging the customer an agreed up front amount for core services for which the consumption of resources can be reasonably accurately predicted in advance.  It saves on arguments and admin costs at billing time, and clients are often prepared to pay a modest premium for certainty.  That reduction in overheads improves the bottom line and the anticipation of that reduction can be built into the quote at the outset if say required to win the business.  It comes back to bite you on the [***] in the occasional case and it is never really "fixed" because you have to build in some safety net for clients who would otherwise be unmotivated to keep clear records and respond efficiently.

But the question of fixed/menu/quoted pricing is a separate question from determining the mechanism of how you calculate that quote, which in a competitive market is done by reference to the consumption of resources with scant regard for the perceived value in the eyes of the purchaser.

With kind regards

Clint Westwood

Thanks (2)
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2012 11:47

It must be Friday

Now all we need is a thread from  .........   :)

Thanks (2)
Replying to tom123:
Me!
By nigelburge
09th Nov 2012 11:51

That would be fun!!!!

BKD wrote:

Now all we need is a thread from  .........   :)

Thanks (0)
Replying to tom123:
avatar
By User deleted
09th Nov 2012 13:10

You blinked then and missed the PE yesterday,,,

BKD wrote:

Now all we need is a thread from  .........   :)

... (thats premature elucidation) on the armistice

That's the trouble when you cross the date line, you forget it is still Thursday in dear old Blighty.

Either that or premature diarisation and he put next year's calendar up too soon!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cparker87
09th Nov 2012 11:51

Hilarious

Most hilarious statement of the day:

"@Clint - are you a communist? That is where cost plus pricing comes from."

That really tickled me.

 

Back to the root of the question though, how can anything which has been agreed between seller and purchaser in writing (via an engagement letter) be unethical? Unless Accountants find a way to bully a signature out of their client I can't see it.

 

Thanks (2)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
09th Nov 2012 12:01

.

I love a good Bob thread, it makes me smile.

 

Thanks (1)
Replying to lionofludesch:
Red Leader
By Red Leader
09th Nov 2012 12:35

Trotsky

One can't leave the subject of communism without some mention of Trotsky.

In the early years of the Soviet Union, a dichotomy arose within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between those who believed in cementing the revolution at home and those who advocated instigating world revolution. The former camp was championed by Stalin while the latter camp was led by Trotsky. In the eventual power struggle, Trotsky was exiled, hunted down and assassinated but his philosophy lived on, not least in the Workers Revolutionary Party.

By the way, I really don't understand why people are talking about "VP" or whatever it's called on a thread about communism. Please will people pay more attention to the subject of this thread and stay on-topic. Thank you.

Thanks (4)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By cparker87
09th Nov 2012 12:48

.

Red Leader wrote:

One can't leave the subject of communism without some mention of Trotsky.

In the early years of the Soviet Union, a dichotomy arose within the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between those who believed in cementing the revolution at home and those who advocated instigating world revolution. The former camp was championed by Stalin while the latter camp was led by Trotsky. In the eventual power struggle, Trotsky was exiled, hunted down and assassinated but his philosophy lived on, not least in the Workers Revolutionary Party.

By the way, I really don't understand why people are talking about "VP" or whatever it's called on a thread about communism. Please will people pay more attention to the subject of this thread and stay on-topic. Thank you.

 

So you're saying Stalin is the cause of time based "cost plus" pricing?

Thanks (1)
By Bob Harper
09th Nov 2012 12:43

Unethical

@CParker87 - time based billing (including fixed fees based on time/cost estimates) mean that clients pay more than they need to for things they don't value and don't get the advice on the things they do value.

I'd say that is unethical, especially for a profession that positions itself as the trusted advisor brand. Trusted to do what specifically?

@Nigel - there are more people reading than posting,

If one person even starts to slightly question the traditional ways of working then I'm OK with that. 

Bob Harper

Thanks (0)
Replying to soundadvice:
avatar
By cparker87
09th Nov 2012 12:58

Trusted...

Bob Harper wrote:

@CParker87 - time based billing (including fixed fees based on time/cost estimates) mean that clients pay more than they need to for things they don't value and don't get the advice on the things they do value.

I'd say that is unethical, especially for a profession that positions itself as the trusted advisor brand. Trusted to do what specifically?

@Nigel - there are more people reading than posting,

If one person even starts to slightly question the traditional ways of working then I'm OK with that. 

Bob Harper

Trusted to do many things, firms specialise in a wide variety of areas, but predominantly for ensuring compliance with the relevant legislation and regulation as it applies to an individual's business. You can't escape complying unless you cut significant corners. Are you suggesting that I provide a less technically accurate service so that I can have a nice chat about their sales streams?

My sales stream is keeping clients compliant and reducing tax exposure. I'll worry about that and let them worry about where to peddle their wares. We are here to do what they can't and by virtue of them already being in business proves they are capable of identifying and acting upon opportunities.

If client's didn't value the work done for them then they'd [***] off elsewhere. Maybe I should give you my client contact list and you can question their satisfaction with my service?

 

Thanks (0)

Pages