rockstar.esq

Viking, I wouldn't doubt it. The accountability and transparency you described would probably drive off the people causing most of my problems. Unfortunately, we don't get to control the process. The best we can do is to pursue clients who do a better job but that's still a poor solution.

Viking, I've only read about Agile management, I've never participated or even seen it in practice. I suspect it will be slow to penetrate fields with "routine" tasks. Sure, every building is different, but the bureaucratic processes in management are largely routine. Das, I don't think you're in left field at all. This kind of thing has been common whenever I've done a job that didn't have punitive deadlines. A lot of Project Managers wouldn't want to estimate because the deadlines are very stressful. I see these tasks that just never die as a more consistently annoying stress. It's like a pebble in your shoe. Marc1, I appreciate where you're coming from, but I'm not talking about the overall difficulty. There's an old riddle that pertains to this. In a bacon and egg breakfast, what's the difference between the Chicken and the Pig? The Chicken is involved, but the Pig is committed! I'm contractually committed to the project, but these tasks require the input of people who don't have much stake in it's success. Even if they're professional and motivated, the context affecting the issues gets lost in the bureaucracy. If I tell them I need immediate direction to avoid impacting the schedule, I'll either get a fast reply without direction, or I'll get direction two weeks after we've fallen behind. Jim, I can see the wisdom in your approach. I'm stuck in the middle of say six people, with the outermost two being the source and the resolution of a problem respectively. Neither one is paid nor punished for their performance on the job. A few minutes of direct communication between the two would resolve a month worth of mindless back and forth for me. That's against the rules, because anything off the record isn't contractually enforceable. It's also against the rules of professional conduct to hold anyone responsible for being unprofessional. I have long suspected that the people who write the rules know that human nature will create "unintended consequences" that just so happen to promote more bureaucracy.

I'd say it's a gateway to tool accumulation. I'd also throw out the humbling effect of learning this craft. Other than pottery, I don't know of a craft that works primarily by moving a volume of material without exclusively adding or subtracting. Being proficient with power tools or even learning a skilled trade won't adequately prepare a person to think like a blacksmith. I've been stuck on something that seems impossible, then I'd run across a really old solution that seems so obvious after the fact. Aside from the previously mentioned down-sides, I guess I'd throw out the hidden dangers for rookies using salvaged material like galvanized steel, or sodium filled engine valves. Other than that, I'd throw out a tag-on to the youtube comment. Lots, and lots of blacksmithing videos are heavily edited for time. I'm not talking about cutting out the heats, I'm talking about forging videos that make it appear as though the smith swatted the project together in half an hour. I had specifically tried to follow their example. I was at it hard for four hours and only got halfway when I decided to stop for the day to figure out what I was doing wrong to be so slow. That evening I watched the video again and noticed there were some new comments from the smith who made the video. Turns out, it took the smith 8 hours to forge the project depicted in 45 minutes. Rookie mistake right? I watched the video again and was immediately struck by how much the smith went on about how little rookies can get done in a heat.

I think Irondragon's answer looks like a winner. I wonder if those tongs were used before the eye was punched to pivot like the haberman style? The relatively small points might leave marks on the cheeks but then again, being small, they might forge out during drifting.

I'm in a fortunate position to have won enough bids for profitable work that my daily duties have shifted to project management. After a good month of this, I've had things I'd previously checked off my to-do list finding their way back on. Tasks that just "won't die" are consuming a whole lot of time. Last night my wife was talking about her work when it struck me that she was having the same kind of problem. In an effort to figure out what's causing it, I came up with the following: Lack of planning Poor communication Lack of follow-through Debate based on speculation Bypassing Chain of Command and lastly, Difficult people. Does that cover it? Are there any items I missed? Moving past those causes, any tips on "killing" those tasks that keep coming back? Thanks,

That's a great idea. Thank you!

I apologize if this has been discussed before. I did some searches of IFI looking for it but maybe I didn't use the right terms to find it. I recently acquired a new Benchmade pocket knife. The factory edge on it isn't just sharp, it's toothy. The factory edge will start cutting slick, thin, and unsupported material as though it has teeth grabbing the material. The final bevels aren't polished either. I don't know what grit they took it to but I'm guessing it's coarser than 600. There are visible scratches across the bevel. I haven't messed with sharpening this knife, but I have tried to emulate this edge on other knives without success. I can get a wire edge to form at coarse grits, but I haven't figured out how to remove it without either polishing the edge, or stropping my way to dull spots. I'm using a 2x72 belt grinder, as well as an 8" stationary grinder using the "razor sharp" laminated paper wheels. Using the paper wheels I can reliably get a polished razor edge that pops hair off, but it's a slick edge that won't "grab". Thanks in advance!

I apologize if my reference to those videos as "semi-obscene" didn't adequately convey that.

JLP, Thank you, I genuinely wish you well.

There's a semi-obscene youtuber who does "Bored Of Lame Tool Reviews" BOLTR's for short. He buys a new power tool and does a video disassembling it while calling out the pertinent (and irreverent) details as he sees them. Seems to know his stuff, for example, that oil induced rubber decomposition issue Billy's writing about is due to a specific compound they're using. It's neat to see the innards of power tools I'd be too chicken to disassemble solely for curiosity's sake. He does reviews of all sorts of stuff ranging widely in price, quality, and industry. Mod Alert: Language alert for all Bored Of Lame Tool Reviews videos that I watched.

I remember seeing an animated documentary program in my youth where there was a coyote who would do complex calculations involving laws of science in his pursuit of a roadrunner. Sometimes the coyote would be running so hard that he'd go off a cliff and keep going until he looked down whereupon gravity (a law of science) would suddenly apply. He always got banged up really badly. Sometimes he'd see his demise coming and would hold up a little sign with "Help!" written on it. He never caught the roadrunner no matter how hard he tried. I figured it applies here because anvils often played a vital role. No matter how convoluted the coyote's reasoning, the laws of science brought about his demise. Today's kids probably don't get a chance to see it because it portrays suicidal patterns of behavior.

JLP, If I had to guess I'd suggest that you misunderstand the economic law of supply and demand. That's not "modern" business thinking, nor is it blacksmith specific. Just like gravity, it applies to you whether you understand it or not. The advice I recommended is to actually find a viable opportunity to sell to clients where your work/product/skill is in demand before you start a business. I'm repeating an ancient business approach that reduces risk, increases profitability, reduces work, and yields faster return on investment. This is commonly referred to as "a business plan". Launching a business just hoping that there might, eventually be someone buying what you offer is a gamble. Just like gambling, that approach has ruined a lot of lives. If you want to add yours to the list, so be it. Please for goodness sake don't take others down with you. An "ideal" rate that's suitable for all situations is a compromise. As in, you will severely compromise your ability to survive if you overprice little stuff and underbid big stuff. Worst of all, you can't tell how far you're off so there's no opportunity to improve. JLP, you asked me to help you to understand what I'm getting at. Maybe a different context would help. Imagine this whole thing as a shop safety issue. A novice wanders into a shop full of power tools. They've got stickers, guards, and safety equipment all over them. It seems sorta obvious where the dangerous bits are. Does that provide the novice with enough information to avoid hurting themselves? Can you see how a lifetime of narrowly avoiding injury could instill bad habits? Would you want someone that dangerous in your shop? Actually understanding what the machine does, how it works, what it needs, and what you need to operate it safely is all necessary to give that novice a reasonable chance of success. You are advocating unnecessary and unsafe shortcuts that jeopardize your business. "Shop rate" comparisons are like asking what species of wood you should use to pin the guard back on a circular saw. Sure, there are three fingered "pro's" who will answer you. That doesn't make it a good idea. Tossing yourself into a machine you don't understand isn't smart.

I think that would be difficult to prove unless you're talking about the 95% failure rate for new businesses. This is pretty incoherent but I think you're mostly frustrated by my contention that thinking things through is superior to just winging it. That's not even true from the confines of your argument. "People really do try to avoid this very simple question "Of what is your shop rate".. Why is that?" Because it's the business equivalent of asking what size shoe you should wear to be an NBA all-star. The answer doesn't stand on it's own. That question reveals a fundamental ignorance of business. I respectfully answered that on my very first reply to this thread where I also answered your shop rate question in detail. JLP, you're obviously hard working and skilled. You've put a lot into your craft and it shows. It seems like you've come across a whole lot of bad business advice that you're repeating. I never said it was impossible to be a professional blacksmith. I tried to point out ways to see if a business was viable or not. In today's economy, very few new businesses are viable. Maybe you see that as someone telling you what to do. You could choose to see it as an opportunity awaiting it's time. You could also choose to see it as an opportunity to network with potential colleagues and clients. I see a lot of frustration in your posts as it pertains to business. I don't think reciting my credentials can add anything to the value of the truth. I've laid out the why's and wherefores for everything I've recommended. I've patiently identified how the bad advice you've presented pans out. I suspect that you're not where you want to be, and I believe that's partially due to being out of your depth when it comes to business. With that, I believe I've reached my stop on this particular crazy-train so I'll wish you well.

JLP I can see the distinction you're making in terms of a staged launch. I can also appreciate the reasoning behind it in terms of limiting the risk by starting small. The problem with this experiment is that the methods affect the outcome. Being small, part-time, and low capital, the business is limited to whatever falls at the doorstep. Internet advertising is much more time-consuming than it's made out to be. Any marketing with potential to actually work, will cost dearly including/especially google. Time sunk grinding out anything other than whatever actually sells is opportunity lost. Competition abounds when there's no barrier to entry. It's a race to the bottom of the market. Being successful here often costs a business a shot at better opportunities. "Proving" that there's a part-time market, doesn't automatically prove that there's a sustainable market to pursue full time. Time is all we have, wasting it is a cost we can never recover. Now if all the same scale, time, and capital were applied to a plan based on verified markets, the outcome would be tremendously different. Knowing the buyers, or how to access the buyers of work that only your business can provide dramatically increases the potential for success. Since these buyers are the actual desired endpoint of the whole venture, why not sink the time into finding them?

Oscillating drum sanders are an option for the concave interior of the gouges. I have a little porter-cable variable speed profile sander that came with a bunch of rubber blocks to shape the abrasive to a specific profile/ radius. It wouldn't be too difficult to make a specific profile out of wood that fit the device and your needs. It's mostly a replacement for hand sanding. Neither one of these suggestions will hog off a lot of material. Grinding out heavy dents and such would take a really long time even with coarse abrasives because there's no torque. Thinking in a completely different direction, you could look into an old machinist shaper. It's the precision power-tool version of a chisel, or a plane.

JLP, I appreciate the desire to help people. I've watched your youtube videos and it's obvious that you really put a lot of effort into sharing what you know. That being said, this advice is making a lot of common assumptions that are very rarely correct. 95% of businesses fail in part because they take the "built it and they will come" approach that you're advocating. There's a better approach than simply jumping in and holding your breath until you surface. Especially in the context of "figuring out" what to charge. A person following your advice takes it on faith that the universe will provide within your 2-3 year timeline. Businesses abound that are at year 3 with everything mortgaged to the hilt hoping that their ship will finally come in. The hard reality is that we don't know what happens to those 95% of business failures because nobody tracks it. I've known people who died working because their retirement savings were consumed by the lenders. I've known people who imperiled their families future to such an extent that the entrepreneur ended up divorced, bankrupt, and alone. The "build it and they will come" approach is very bad advice that is ruining lives. In my last post, I laid out a cogent approach to assessing business viability. I also laid out the whys and wherefores to explain why an hourly rate is an incredibly poor methodology for the purpose of your discussion. Putting a blunter point on it. It's extremely unlikely that a shop rate plus material pricing technique will ever be capable of attributing the necessary overhead and profit without being either too expensive to find steady work or too cheap to actually support the business. The only time it will work is if the work just so happens to hit your economy of scale perfectly. For smiths banging out bottle openers, that's probably not too hard to do. For smiths pricing everything from bottle openers to castle gates, it's going to cost you dearly. It's very frustrating to me that individuals eschewing electrical welding because it's a quality short-cut are promoting ruinous business short-cuts like shop rates. Especially in the context of a specialty business that has virtually no viability in most markets due to basic economics. For goodness sake, most American's haven't seen a pay raise in a decade. Sure, there are wealthy folks out there but there are no signs that we're in the midst of a renaissance of commissioned iron-work. What we're really in is a renaissance of people making stuff, and making do for themselves. Because they're broke. You could pay just a little bit of attention to what people are actually spending their money on to see if there was the slightest hope of business viability. Admittedly, following my advice is likely to dash a lot of blacksmiths dreams. Then again, there are a lot of great reasons that you don't see blacksmith shops on every corner. Beaudry, I'm not sure what you mean by this. Electricians in Denver aren't making enough to pay the rent. I'm bidding on work that is won and lost by under 5% on average. If we paid substantially more, we'd never hurt for electricians, if we paid substantially less, we'd have no electricians. I can't bid at a higher rate and win. I can't expect higher productivity because they're already doing their best. The hard-bid wages haven't been raised in a decade. The work is spotty and seasonal because of enormous (but profitless) government projects consume all available manpower every summer, then dry up every fall. Banks aren't loaning to small and mid-sized businesses at all. Our great salvation was to seek quieter private markets catering to high-end clients. We've chosen to lose money by avoiding layoffs despite the severe seasonal shortages of construction work. That loyalty helps us to staff work for higher-end clients. The Denver media claims everything is always booming, yet there are record numbers of homeless people. The articles report that many homeless people are actually working, so the reality is that they can't earn enough to pay the unbelievably high rent. They're building hamster houses for hipsters as fast as they can slap those ugly things up. Rent went up 125% the same year that Denver was celebrating the single largest crop of new apartment units in 15 years. I suspect that twenty years from now these hideous things will be referred to as "Depression-era" housing that was as hastily built as a refugee camp. Michael Cochran. I think the consumables aspect of your question is best answered by setting out to define the tasks on a running unit basis. For example welding would make the most sense as a linear foot cost, riveting would be an individual unit cost. Although you could take this to the extent of figuring out what your electrical utility cost is per foot of weld, I think that's probably better as an overhead item. Overhead is the cost of doing business that is not job-billable. Overhead is accrued over time, even time where you don't have work going on. That means that the individual jobs have to pay their share of the overhead to keep the business afloat. The more work you've got going, the less that share applies to each job. Simple stuff like the timing of when you're getting paid can affect whether you're making a profit, or paying down overhead. I wrote an entire article explaining it, and why it should be taken seriously. I very strongly believe that this is the single most influential component of long-term success for a small business. I suspect that overpricing little work and underpricing big work probably accounts for the majority of new businesses failure. This discussion thread has already advocated this fatal mistake several times. Combine that mistake with "build it and they will come" and you've got a recipe for failure.

JLP, in the construction industry there is a reference book written by a company called R.S. Means which compiles annual data from the Western states to generate average material, labor, and equipment costs for every aspect of construction. I have the 2006 Building Construction Cost Data book open to Construction Specification Institute (CSI) section 5720 Ornamental Handrails and Railings, Hand-forged wrought iron. The linear foot cost for material is $86.00, Labor is $25.50- $38.50/ hour and the book has zero equipment costs on this item. The total before overhead and profit is $111.50 to $121 per linear foot. The total with overhead and profit runs $138 to $156 per linear foot. According to the book the productivity is between 8' and 12' per 8 hour day which is also represented as .67' (8 inches) to 1' per hour. These manuals also provide city cost indexes for the Western United states which modify the average data presented. For example Anchorage, Alaska in the Metals division shows 126.3 Material, 114.1 for Installation, and 122.8 for total. This means that Anchorage costs 22.8% more per linear foot than the average for the above handrails. In contrast, Prescott Arizona has a total modifier of 86.1. That suggests that prices in Anchorage are 36.8% higher than what they get in Prescott. Having shared all of that I feel it's important to caution anyone against taking these figures seriously. I own this book because it was a required college text book . I haven't bought current versions because it's not relevant to my work for several reasons. The first and most significant reason is that prices are more complex than the sum of averages. Even with the fancy modifiers, the nature of averages is to reduce complex but accurate information into simple but misleading information. A few significant outliers can skew the average to where it doesn't represent the majority of data points. JHCC is asking $225 per hour, PVF is asking $45, Charles is asking $60. The average of those three is $110 which is $125 less than the highest rate, yet it's only $65 more than the lowest rate. Average wages are only meaningful when the data is so consistent that you don't really need to average them. The second reason is that contractor pricing is influenced by scale, capacity, and efficiency. If the year's income depends on a few weeks of work, that work can't be cheap. Conversely, if competition leads to steady work, the rates will decline. If buyers only exist at low price-points, efficiency of scale is necessary to be profitable. For example, cheap cars come from huge (and expensive) factories. The third reason is that market pricing is influenced by factors that aren't so easily defined. Available labor pools, access to equipment, distribution systems, seasonality, weather, politics, competition, relationships, traditions, regulations and education to name a few. All off that is perfectly invisible when looking at labor and material rates. If you want a (legal) profit as a business you have to; work faster, work smarter, sell higher, buy cheaper, or restrict competitors on the market. My point is that there are a lot of ingredients involved in the special sauce. I think working from an hourly rate to making a living is backwards. What does your product sell for in your market? How consistent are those sales? We can't create buyers out of thin air. We have to offer a better value from the buyers perspective. Provided there's a reasonable revenue in the offing, figure out what it takes to make that revenue profitable. Consistent profit margin is more important to success than the individual composite figures used to get there. The hourly-rate comparison is somewhat akin to a competitor asking what color tape they're using on their packages. Sure, it's part of what makes the operation tick, it's just not particularly useful without a lot of context. Paying a specific wage doesn't tell you whether they're a global empire worth billions, or a desperate operation headed for bankruptcy. If you wanted a comparable measure of business viability, annual net profit margin is about as good as it gets. It's my considered opinion that very few entrepreneurs actively monitor their net profit margins. Just for comparison's sake I've heard the national average net profit margin for general contractors reported at 1.4%. If you can consistently make $1.41 free and clear on a sale of $100, you'd be beating the average net profit margins of an industry producing roughly 6.5% of the US gross domestic product.

Marc1, In my work as an estimator I am surrounded by incomplete information that's rigidly enforced for a limited amount of time. Uncertainty is the reason it's called an estimate rather than a quote. I think human nature is why clients can only "quote" the lowest number they heard. When they quote a number from an estimate, it's often presented like a fixed amount that's independent of any conditions or context. I suppose that all of the above is why very few people choose to do this job. I think that the notion that any property of human nature is inherently negative is debatable. I use the uncertainty created by incomplete information to my advantage all the time. That goes way beyond "gotcha" change -orders. Often I can present options that save money for the client, and increase the quality for the designer while making a profit for my company. In that way I'm responsive and respectful of everyone's convictions without accepting one-sided dealing. Problems in whatever form they take, are also opportunities. That's admittedly little consolation when I'm starving for work and my convictions prevent me from cheating like my competitors do. For what it's worth, we're currently busy with jobs I wouldn't have been invited to if we'd pursued corruption.

Marc1, thanks for the expanation, I genuinely appreciate you as well. Das, and Frosty, Your comments remind me of experiences I had as an apprentice. There was a journeyman who was very religious on a job site. He used his authority over apprentices to force a one-sided debate on the merits of his faith. He got a lot of practice because apprentices didn't stay assigned to him for very long. It's a difficult position for an apprentice because they're reprimanded for any kind of disobedience or disrespect. Losing your temper with a Journeyman can get you cut from the program. Well on my first day with him, he started off asking for my religious views. I came to see that there really wasn't a "correct answer" because he was angling for opportunities to display his perceived superiority. It wasn't disrespectful so much as it was exhausting. As I was packing up for the day he told me that "the first step to knowledge is to trust in God". I responded "See I always figured the first step to knowledge was to seek it." His face lit up with laughter and he conceded the point. We got along famously for the remainder of that project. He knew a lot about a variety of topics, I'm glad I got to see that side of him. In contrast, I worked with a journeyman who was a hopeless contrarian. He argued about everything, including the directions he had just provided. It was so bad that I started to have nightmares that consisted of nothing more than an average conversation with him! I never really found a solution with him. I found the most successful approach was to reply to his contradictions as though a third-party journeyman had told me to do it. I'm not sure I can properly convey how difficult it is to have a person like this up on a lift calling out pipe bending measurements for the apprentice to make. He adamantly refused to answer any questions about his methodology or expectations. The infuriating part is that he wasn't giving bogus information, he was constantly changing his mind on how things would be done without telling me. While I wouldn't wish that Journeyman on my enemy, I can see parallels between that Journeyman and troubleshooting. A lot of troubleshooting information comes without context, or references that would allow certainty. Checking what you really know is as important as checking what was measured. I've had situations where a stack up of errors summed up to a plausible answer. I've also had situations where a failure in one system created spurious readings in another. It can be a struggle to understand how "unrelated" systems can be affected when they're not connected.

JHCC is writing some Jedi master level comedy here! Paraphrasing from Wikipedia page on Dunning-Kruger effect; A cognitive bias wherein people of low ability mistakenly believe their cognitive ability as greater than it is. Conversely, people of high ability erroneously assume that tasks they find easy to perform are easy for everyone else or that other people have a similar understanding of subjects that they themselves are well-versed in. The short version: Incompetents tend to be confident and experts tend to be insecure. Both parties score themselves as average. All of which is why I think JHCC is an expert comic! Marc1, I'm not sure I follow your point. Wouldn't Dunning-Kruger be an observation of human nature? More to the point in this thread, the D-K test found that "poor performers do not learn from feedback suggesting a need to improve" (I'm quoting wiki). That generally supports your advice to avoid confrontation. If they're inclined to improve their performance, they'll have to learn from feedback. That might happen without them giving Das the thanks he deserves, but D-K offers a plausible explanation for this ridiculous pattern of behavior.

I can see the wisdom in this approach, even if I can't always bring myself to follow that example. Mark Twain excelled at revealing the ridiculous beliefs we share. Coming up in the skilled trades I learned that a sense of humor was a critical survival tool. A lot of conflict was avoided by making fun of our shared situation. I didn't need to convince another tradesman to have my priorities, I just needed their cooperation so we could both get our work done. Kowtowing to nonsense creates a tyranny of fools. Playing along makes stupidity seem legitimate. When you see other people play along with something stupid it makes you wonder if you're the only one who's bothered by it. Meanwhile, the stupid is getting fed to where it's too difficult to painlessly remove. The worst part of it is that frivolous differences are made into big distractions so those who could fix problems, are paralyzed by fear of conflict. This isn't a random accident, it's the natural order of things. The truth is a bit like daylight, we used to think it was good for us.

Marc1, You've made really good comments all around. There's a book I'm looking to read entitled "The Death of Expertise" that addresses your wife's situation. The reviews I've read made the book sound compelling. Another one that's on my list is by the Dilbert comic author, Scott Adams and it's titled "Win Bigly: Persuasion In A World Where Facts Don't Matter". Adams correctly predicted the US Presidential election before most of the candidates announced they would run. His predictions have been consistently accurate since then as well. His blog is mainly focused on analyzing social issues in terms of psychology, sales, and negotiations. While I can't speak to the long-term utility of his approach, he does seem to be well-tuned to our current state of affairs. Daswulf, The part of your post that Marc1 quoted reminded me of something. I could pick just about any popular movie/play/story where the underdog eventually wins over their love interest. Looking back, I can recall people (sometimes myself) who followed the arc of that story as courting advice. It never worked, which is probably obvious to anyone fortunate enough to earn their way into a happy, stable relationship. Basic stuff like successfully pursuing our hearts desire truthfully requires a lot less magic and lot more substance. Embracing difficulty to correct personal short-comings doesn't sound very appealing. Selecting on the basis of character, integrity, and dedication requires judgement that is hard to come by without experience. Maybe the stories promote the failing arc because it's fantasy for new and old alike. The young want to believe it will be easy, the old want to believe things might have gone differently. There's a quote attributed to Mark Twain that seems relevant here. "When I was 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But by the time I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much he'd learned in seven years."

Maybe so. Keep in mind that there's an audience beyond the person asking. I've learned lots from exchanges that probably fit your description.

Daswulf, You got me thinking about something in my own life that may apply here. I've been working as a construction estimator for over ten years now. A few years back, my neighbor across the street was working on a landscaping project. We were talking about it when she made an offhand comment about how she needed to figure out how much topsoil she needed to order. I noticed that all the dimensions were fairly obvious (uncut lengths of standard lumber) so it wasn't too difficult to calculate. I told her she needed two cubic yards of topsoil. She looked at me as though I'd pulled the answer from thin air before telling me she'd have to consult with someone at the home center. I've known this lady for fifteen years or so and she often asks about my work as an estimator. In contrast, I wrote a blog article several years ago about how to write a winning bid proposal and I'm still getting comments from people thanking me for the tips. My point is that I think people tend to see whatever they're looking for. Maybe my neighbor wasn't looking for an answer, so she felt entitled to disregard my professional opinion. Perhaps people struggling to win their bids went searching the net for answers and found their way to my article. They don't know who I am, or how I came to know this stuff, they just recognize the answer(s) they were looking for. It's really weird, I can beat everyone on the market to win a job yet the client will argue with my ability to estimate. Yet I can be having a quiet talk with a colleague at a job walk and the whole room of competitors will listen in.

This is an interesting thread. I haven't encountered this particular scam myself however it's resonating with me in a different way. I've seen lots of reports claiming that things are booming in the "gig" or "sharing" economy. The reality for most people is that wages aren't going up, new jobs are hard to come by, and employers don't have to try very hard. Uber and AirBNB exist because people are strapped for cash. People are "sharing" their resources because they need money to pay their bills. Very few people would rent out their guest room to a stranger otherwise. I've come to see the whole thing as a smug re-branding of depressed-market necessity. Even pawn shops are getting a face-lift courtesy of reality TV shows. Maybe the worst part of this is that hard-working people are duped into thinking they're the only ones who can't make ends meet. Meanwhile, there's this nonsense about how the "sharing" economy is more virtuous than established businesses. Somehow it's "greedy" for a company to charge everyone the going rate for something, but it's "sharing" when a one-time client haggles a better deal from an individual. This thread supports my hunch that average people are seeing things differently.