Hi Barbara, and all!
I have resisted the urge to reply before now, as I wanted to see where the thread was actually going!
The opinions expressed within this post are entirely my own, and are not intended to offend anyone
Barbara, in you first post, you stated that you have been asked to quote for a job that is 2 hrs per night, 5 nights per week.
My first thought would have been, how has this prospect reached the conclusion that 2 hrs per night is sufficient to obtain the required standard of cleaning?
Is the prospective client actually happy with the level of service being obtained at the present time?
Is the client looking to save money?
Are all the cleaning tasks that they expect to be carried out, actually being carried out?
The number of employee's, visitors, density of the premises, layout, floors, access etc all have to be considered before arriving at an estimated cleaning time.
It is a certainty, that your prospect has no real idea of how long his/her building will take to clean, thats why they have contracted the job out! Most client's during the survey will confirm this when they tell you, " it's just a quick hoover and dust in here" or something very similair!
It really does pay to be a good listener!
No disrespect to Dave intended "
Once again you will win it on Price and what you are offering. You need to be the lowest priced and have the better specification."
But this is quite simply wrong! The more tasks that any cleaner undertakes, the longer the overall time the whole job will take to complete, so the more detailed specification will have to be more expensive to allow for the extra labour required.
The only time this principle does not hold true, is when the buildings size, layout or material types (floors etc) lend themselves to mechanical cleaning aids, such as scrubbers etc. Serious labour savings can be acheived, but then you have the cost of machinery, purchase, lease and maintenance etc.
I am sure what Dave actually meant to say was " You need to be very competitive on price, adding extra value and offer an acceptable specification"
I am not entirely sure what the spreadsheet is that NIck has been sending out, but from what I have read it's purpose seems to be to take into account all of the expenses incurred on a particular account (sorry Nick if this is wrong!). This is no bad thing, seeing the figures in black and white can help clarify the situation enormously, and Dave quite rightly again points out some further financials that should not be forgotten when submitting the final quotation.
Dave also, very helpfully points out that if you are doing the work yourself you can issue a really attractive price to your potential customers, however, if you actually want to run a business, with employee's etc, again your pricing would need adjusting!
If, after your survey, you feel that you can clean the building to the client's requirements in the stated 2 hours, and you actually want to run a proper business with bona fide employee's and comply with the current legislation I would suggest a charge of £560 per month or if you really need the work I would suggest a lowest price of £520 per month.
However, if you plan to take on the work yourself I would suggest a monthly price of £400 to £450.
You will, no doubt, have noticed all 4 of the given prices exceed those proposed by Dave, by a considerable margin, this is because I have taken into account all the expenses that will be incurred during the contract, whilst maintaining an acceptable profit.
I would also advise on buying only good quality commercial equipment, not henry hoovers or indeed the valet, good equipment properly maintained, clean filters, regular bag changes etc will reap didvidends long term, same goes for chemicals, quality counts.
Daves observation that some contracts run at break even or a loss is again correct, but in my opinion every contract must be run at a profit, plimsoll estimate that 12 of the major cleaning companies in this country are in serious trouble, profit, not turnover is all that matters in the world of commerce, cleaning included!
Regards,
Rob