Quote:
Originally Posted by Jel
you're still mixing up 2 different things (imo anyway, I should clarify - I'm not the authority on that of course).
the question isn't whether you are simply 'paying double', it's whether you are getting value, and in turn making a profit on top. A more apt question would be: if a cleaner's average wage was $2 an hour, would you pay someone $4 an hour for that same job, who you could trust, to enable you to free up your $100 an hour time. There is no $100 an hour or $200 an hour in the equation here, it's irrelevant to this specific issue 
You are doing the classic 'optical illusion' thing of maths (like that famous pick from 3 doors, take one away, do you stick or swap that I can never remember the name of offhand) and letting what you perceive as logical reasoning interfere with the numbers. By taking an actual case scenario, and saying 'what if a cleaner etc etc', you bring imagination and emotion into a numbers-only decision.
If the numbers *were* $100 vs $200, then you go only on *that* case scenario to come to a decision (which quite obviously would be a different one, 99% of the time). So what I'm saying is basically, is deal/contract A viable for you, do you get value. Make your decision based on that alone, and not on what a cleaner in new york might earn, what the guy's next door neighbour earns, or anything else that isn't specifically the issue at hand.
Do that with the next decision, and all the ones after that.
That's not to say you might not want to see if you can get someone cheaper, I'm saying that just keep an eye on your reasoning for wanting to do so - it comes from a 'fear' of missing out/feeling conned/etc, which are emotion-led, rather than purely 'is this good business for me' which is numbers-led and of course free from emotion. That's not a good long term strategy, whether it be on the hardass-fuck-them or the moral-crusader-pay-way-too-much side of things.
Of course even then most people (including myself) don't stick to that 100% of the time, and like most everything, it's more of a guideline for decision-making... there will always be variables where humans and their emotions are involved  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jel
I might be talking complete horseshit of course, or at the very least not make sense lol, but I love these types of discussions, they get me thinking about mindsets, and I have a fuck of a lot to learn in that area!
Another nice thread from one of your OPs  |
No worries mate, I get where you are coming from.
From a pure numbers perspective, or ROI, a $3 an hour worker (or $120 per week) gets me about double that in revenue, sometimes more. In terms of time saved it's absolutely worth it to me.
But when I use contrast I am doing so not emotionally but rather to judge a market. These are essentially "unskilled" laborers. Meaning, there is next to ZERO 'skills' involved in the job. To me, this means literally anyone with some basic intelligence could do the job. I could swap out Haji A for Haji B and see absolutely zero difference. The only metric would be: are the videos getting uploaded correctly? A simple check either confirms or denies this.
So if
anyone could do a job there's no incentive to find "the perfect person" because none exists. Your Grandma or a homeless person could do this work. LOL
So when I am asked to pay MORE for something literally a trained monkey could do I balk. Now if this were a designer, an editor, someone who did something either creative or technical, that would be a completely different story. I DO pay (much) more for that kind of skilled person.
It's called "grunt work" for a reason.