I respectfully disagree somewhat because I’ve done large storm damage jobs.
I appreciate your zeal in wanting to do any job with less equipment. I agree. I have been in your corner arguing the same points you are. You can certainly make money doing it the way you are. Hats off. My point was, you cannot perform emergency work like a large company that can field and execute many jobs in a short time, and do it in the middle of a time where you are scheduled out for months. That is what emergency work is.
If it is an actual emergency, before you even get to an estimate for storm work, the homeowner is going to have called many companies, and is likely to hire the first one that can physically do the work.
Though you, or I, "can" perform the job, doesn't mean we are best capable to, or best marketed for. I have taken trees off of houses with no equipment many times. Every time I downplayed the fact that I wasn't using a crane, even though I would have preferred using one, because the client was skeptical of me doing the job, reasonably. Thus, a fully outfitted company that shows up with a crane etc looks, to the client, better. Looking better is a legitimate means of bringing in revenue and selling jobs.
I'm not saying you can't do it. I can do most anything, and did to a degree to prove that I could. To who, who knows.
Barring the line about emergency capabilities, I completely agree with most of what you are saying. No one is trying to attack or disprove you or doubt that there is more than one way to go about making money in the tree industry..
Rock on.