Lost a large removal job to a landscaper... Decided to say something.

RE: Husband and Wife

I think this is possibly the worst industry for that. I constantly find myself trying to mediate their two different opinions. I usually side with the one that wants the most work done. Kidding :)
 
In real estate the saying goes. You sell to the wife and show the husband the garage and basement. She'll be the one to say yes or no, he'll do the financials. Remember the husband creed, "Happy wife, happy life".

This is a good example of multiple decision makers and the importance of knowing who they are and which one is the actual decision maker.What role does the other/s play? That is up to us to find out. They could be the financial (how will we afford it?), the recommender (think of a purchasing mgr. who sources bidders), the conscience (what role do the kids play?) and the one that can bite us when we think it's a done deal, the influencer (the power behind the throne). There are also outside advisors that you may or may not be aware of, i.e., parents or grandparents, siblings, other family, neighbors and friends. Quite possibly they could be the reason you are there in the first place. The wife played the influencer in this case, coming in at the last second to sway the choice toward the landscaper. Why is almost irrelevant except in that there wasn't any understanding of how she might play in the equation of the closing.

Could Tom have won the bid knowing how she might influence the sale and towards whom? Maybe. At the least, his initial approach may have addressed the long term relationship with the landscaper and possibly adjusted the approach to begin by working with the landscaper. We'll only know if we could ask the questions first.

This is why we don't estimate, we sell. By that I mean, we consult with our clients to best understand them, the circumstances of the work, the true scope of the work, what is motivating them to get the work done, who identified the need, to what extent has this been discussed with any and all interested parties and, who else will they are or would be considering. Sounds like a lot of extra work but if you could increase your conversion rate by say 10-20% would it be worth it?

Residential or commercial, it's a great approach to selling.
 
Tom,

I appreciate you posting this. It has brought a lot of good food for thought to the table.

My gut says that you did a fine job with your outreach.

Some days all you can do is shine the light--and some days you will be the only one--to shine it, or even see it.
 
I selectively choose our clients. We get enough call volume we can weed out the price shoppers , and any other people we'd rather not work for. All jobs are not good jobs. It may sound snobbish, but as a small business, I need to make sure the work is a perfect match for us.

We farm out some larger jobs to a few large firms. Take half or other fair % on something you're not doing, while freeing up extra time!
 
"]Guy, I do not charge for consultations, although someday I hope to. Maybe it's time I started charging."

What's the holdup? Your time is worth it, and getting paid gets respect.

"It was difficult to see just how bad the trees were from their property. You had to go onto a small laneway over a stone wall and look from behind to see the true condition of the trees. There is a lot of other vegetation in front of them which made it difficult to see the overall canopy condition. My business is not at all based upon removals, in fact it's quite the opposite. 90% of our work is tree preservation. These are large dying oaks over a yard and a laneway. Are you suggesting I leave them for habitat?"

I'm suggesting you do an adequate job of assessing risk. Do it right or not at all. Reducing them and leaving habitat etc. would be one mitigation option. There were doubtless others. I'd hoped to hear what the "80-90%" referred to, and how your decision was reached. At any rate it was reached in some degree of haste because you were not paid for your time.

The links were weak because they were not focused on the problem at hand. Consider looking from their perspective; sending links to general info sources is not educating, it's confusing. TRAQ was designed to fix the hasty-condemnation problem. By using better procedures and criteria you and the trees will maintain more respect, and you'll be less likely to lose work. Would the client have sought a bid from the landscapers for a reduction?

re husband-wife tagteaming, happens all the time. I'm almost inclined to agree with Riggs here.
 
I was being nice . How about a little real ? Ready . Wait , sit down , sip your tea . Not knowing anyone involved , except the poster ( not child ) So the home owner gets the letter , ( yawn ) it's all about money , right ? If I'm the landscaper . I'd be like , listen up . " Lady he has more Mexicans than I do ! " Than he say ," my Mexicans are legal ! " and so on and so on and so on . Write the letters , seal the envelopes , close the borders , still gonna make the same money we made twenty years ago . Is what it is ! WAH ! Where is Paul Revere , like we didn't see this coming ?
 
popcorn.gif
 
Guy, most clients that call tree services in my market are looking for a free estimate. I was not 100% clear, I actually do charge for consultations if getting the work is not the end game, or if the time on property goes over an acceptable limit (30 minutes or so). I do 30-40 sales calls per week, so this is reasonable. Anyway, I don't really want to argue the point of whether I was or should have been charging for this particular visit. The decision to remove seriously declining oaks over a shared lane way and a viable garden was not made in haste. Perhaps your post was. These trees WILL be completely dead in 1-2 years after probably 8-10 years of winter moth defoliation and oak anthracnose. Treatment/reduction/maintenance would be a waste of money and was not at all in the interest of the client. In short, removing these trees would add value to the property, plain and simple. But again, this is an argument for another thread.

I feel that I am highly qualified in assessing risk, as well as targeting the particular clients' needs and values. Again, you are derailing the thread with this line of questioning. Please start another thread if you want to debate the finer points of sales and risk assessment.

As far as the links being weak, I just checked them again, and they pretty much fully support what I was trying to say. I honestly don't know how you draw the conclusion that they are weak. Read the email, then click on the links. It's frigging seamless.

Riggs, I appreciate the humor. Ironically this thread kind of mirrors what you were talking about in your post re the 70's.

If you guys think it's whining, you are entitled to your opinion. I was trying to educate the client. Yes, I was pissed. Yes, I crossed a line here. That's why I came looking for your opinions. I appreciate all of the feedback even if I don't understand it all. :)

-Tom
 
tomthetreeman said:
I actually do charge for consultations if getting the work is not the end game, or if the time on property goes over an acceptable limit (30 minutes or so). I do 30-40 sales calls per week, so this is reasonable.
Click to expand...
Well I agree with that part. And with the part about crossing the line.

As far as your estimates like "80-90% dead" (which you fail to support) or predictions that "in 1 or 2 years it will be dead" ot (which not even God can make), pardon me, I highly respect your abilities, but I am calling BS until you put substance where those claims are. You've done nothing to substantiate these claims, and after 48 years of hearing the like, ad nauseam, I take no one's words, not even yours, for broad judgments like that.

Don't expect credibility for your condemnations without showing wtf you are talking about.

"Homeowners searching for qualified tree care companies should start by asking for A Written Work Proposal. " This from your 'seamless' link--Did you offer this, or just expect the owner to believe your claim, like you are asking us to? If you're condemning a tree, did you follow anything close to TRAQ protocol? It seems that you did not. You want sympathy for losing a $3k job to a lowballer who might have workers who do not wear hard hats, or chaps while cutting brush? To quote my honored colleague Mr. Riggs,

WHAA!

Suck it up. You, like the rest of us, are not too cool for school.
 
Guy, I don't need TRAQ qualifications to condemn a tree with 10-20% foliage that browned on the twigs in August from anthracnose. I just don't. While I support the Qualification (We ran four workshops recently through NECISA), I don't feel that it is needed generally in the homeowner/arborist relationship to make decisions with regard to risk. I also feel that this is a subject for another thread.

I gave them a written work proposal. It did not contain scientific evidence supporting my claim, as the HO and I looked at the trees together and agreed that they were in poor condition and the best course of action (to reduce risk and increase property value) was removal. This was not a case where evidence would be needed to support the fact that the trees were quickly becoming a liability. Again, a subject for another thread IMO.

I do not want sympathy. Please don't put words in my mouth. I asked for opinions about what I wrote and how it could have been handled better/differently. If you'd like to continue the conversation, please focus on that and not these other tangential subjects. I've already gotten your opinion that you think it's whining, so thanks for that. Anything else?

-Tom
 
Last edited:
Guy,

Regardless of the feasibility of preserving a tree the decision lies with the client. Often it is a cost benefit analysis of the cost of long term preservation versus the cost of removal and replanting. Im not going to turn down work because the client chose not to go the preservation route. I think your assessment of Tom to be unwarranted. It is your business model to focus primarily on preservation as a last resort but in my background as a manager of large forest stands it is sometimes best practice to selectively remove problematic trees for the greater good. Keeping dying trees around for ecological benefit has its time and place but when public safety is of concern this is not one of those.
 
guymayor said:
Well I agree with that part. And with the part about crossing the line.

As far as your estimates like "80-90% dead" (which you fail to support) or predictions that "in 1 or 2 years it will be dead" ot (which not even God can make), pardon me, I highly respect your abilities, but I am calling BS until you put substance where those claims are. You've done nothing to substantiate these claims, and after 48 years of hearing the like, ad nauseam, I take no one's words, not even yours, for broad judgments like that.

Don't expect credibility for your condemnations without showing wtf you are talking about.

"Homeowners searching for qualified tree care companies should start by asking for A Written Work Proposal. " This from your 'seamless' link--Did you offer this, or just expect the owner to believe your claim, like you are asking us to? If you're condemning a tree, did you follow anything close to TRAQ protocol? It seems that you did not. You want sympathy for losing a $3k job to a lowballer who might have workers who do not wear hard hats, or chaps while cutting brush? To quote my honored colleague Mr. Riggs,

WHAA!

Suck it up. You, like the rest of us, are not too cool for school.
Click to expand...
Guy- the majority of your posts that I read are off topic, you have a knack for turning a discussion, any discussion, into one about tree preservation. Sometimes trees need to be cut down, and this thread is about one of those times, this seems to be hard for you to accept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom