"I’m talking pricing your services now in proportion to the rewards the client may enjoy later.” - @vgr
Definitely something hard to achieve in freelancing - but does seem to be incredibly valuable for companies who can use freelancers wisely
-
-
Replying to @p_millerd @vgr
I couldn’t make sense of this line. What’s your interpretation?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @deadly_onion @p_millerd
Think of it as the equivalent of a risk premium. Like soldiers being paid an imminent danger or hostile fire pay.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @deadly_onion
I would accept the authors interpretation though haha
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @p_millerd @deadly_onion
They are not inconsistent
You operate in a new, leveled up way if you raise with risk, even if task is the same. Being on patrol in peacetime and in a war zone involve same basic behaviors, but latter requires heightened level. It’s a way to capture the meaning of the project1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @p_millerd
I get the risk if you go from an hourly to outcome based engagement model, but what’s the risk in an hourly engagement model? What makes one client a $400/hr risk versus a $1000/hr?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @deadly_onion @p_millerd
Ah, I see. That big a range has not come up for me personally since I tend to operate in a fairly tight risk range across clients. But a higher risk project is more likely to fail and just end the consultant’s gig if not the employee’s career.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Though the subjective logic is more to get in the right headspace, you could also argue the case for pricing with risk in terms of NPV/DCF. A patrol job in peacetime can be expected to go on forever. A patrol job in a high conflict zone can be expected to kill you at some point.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @p_millerd
Got it, got it. Feels like you’re hitting two types of risk in an hourly engagement. First, volatility. For example, war time patrol that might abruptly end is much more volatile than a peace patrol and deserves higher price. Second, credibility. Not enough room to elaborate.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Heh people who agree to work for Trump should charge more. They’re working under threat of prosecution, being unable to find work again due to reputations damage, and simply being thrown under the bus by the boss.
-
-
-
Replying to @deadly_onion @p_millerd
I almost used this example, but a Trump reference is a guaranteed mood-killer when you’re going for a light tone
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.