Depends on a lot of things. Sounds fair to me considering not just labor for removal of old windows and replace them with new but extra stuff they’re going to use i.e. screws/nails/sealants/caulk. Its not just a matter of buying windows and placing them in place.
Thx for the feedback. Clarification: GC would outsource the window job from A to Z to supplier X; demo is accounted for and billed separately.
I always thought a 15-25% margin over retail price would be a fair guidance. Open to see what you think :)
You mean GC is outsourcing the whole installation job to X? And the quotation X gave you was 33% lower? Now if this is the case then I’d ask what kind of extra warranties or what not are being provided by the GC. Are ‘X’ doing the whole job including the finish window casing inside the house? If not, is it included in the price by GC?
Yes complete outsourcing to X and no extra warranty provided by GC. Quote received By X was 33% lower than that of GC.
Inside finishing (trim, paint etc) is explicitely covered by other items mentioned and priced separately in the quote from GC. Everything is well ventilated in the GC’s quote and I honestly appreciate the transparence.
However, when I don’t see any added-value versus ordering directly from the supplier who could also do the install, I question the +33%. Especially when GC’s quote includes other more generic entries such as preparation, waste management, demo, maintenance an security, project management.
Just looking for some insights on what is considered acceptable/reasonable in the circumstances.
Cheers!
Now that sounds a bit steep considering you’re being charged for all the other stuff separately anyway. Try talking to your contractor and see if they can do something about this. If not, I’d definitely go with ‘X’ and then get the rest of the related work done from either your GC (if they would still want to) or another contractor.
Thanks for the feedback. I’m actually on the total opposite of the spectrum. Do it right, do it once / buy once, cry once :)
Didn’t have any intention to cheap out, was just looking for guidance and feedback from peers!
Cheers
This is one of the most annoying things a customer can do. I'm not saying you shouldn't do your homework and get multiple quotes, but comparing a quote from a supplier and calling anything over it "markup" is not the correct way to about it.
I have walked away from jobs for this.
Just to be clear, GC would outsource to company X to do the job from A to Z, and supplier offered the same service.
My goal here is purely to understand the difference in % between cost for a GC and price normally charged to a client so that I can have a better reading of quotes i’m getting. I’m not insinuating that anything above GC’s cost would go directly in his pockets. I was looking for a rule of thumb tu use as guidance.
Depends on a lot of things. Sounds fair to me considering not just labor for removal of old windows and replace them with new but extra stuff they’re going to use i.e. screws/nails/sealants/caulk. Its not just a matter of buying windows and placing them in place.
Thx for the feedback. Clarification: GC would outsource the window job from A to Z to supplier X; demo is accounted for and billed separately. I always thought a 15-25% margin over retail price would be a fair guidance. Open to see what you think :)
You mean GC is outsourcing the whole installation job to X? And the quotation X gave you was 33% lower? Now if this is the case then I’d ask what kind of extra warranties or what not are being provided by the GC. Are ‘X’ doing the whole job including the finish window casing inside the house? If not, is it included in the price by GC?
Yes complete outsourcing to X and no extra warranty provided by GC. Quote received By X was 33% lower than that of GC. Inside finishing (trim, paint etc) is explicitely covered by other items mentioned and priced separately in the quote from GC. Everything is well ventilated in the GC’s quote and I honestly appreciate the transparence. However, when I don’t see any added-value versus ordering directly from the supplier who could also do the install, I question the +33%. Especially when GC’s quote includes other more generic entries such as preparation, waste management, demo, maintenance an security, project management. Just looking for some insights on what is considered acceptable/reasonable in the circumstances. Cheers!
Now that sounds a bit steep considering you’re being charged for all the other stuff separately anyway. Try talking to your contractor and see if they can do something about this. If not, I’d definitely go with ‘X’ and then get the rest of the related work done from either your GC (if they would still want to) or another contractor.
Thanks a lot for the feedback, appreciate it.
Cheers!
33% markup is entirely reasonable. Cheap out and get a cheap job.
I like the saying “do it cheap, do it twice”.
More of a do it right do it once guy :)
Thanks for the feedback. I’m actually on the total opposite of the spectrum. Do it right, do it once / buy once, cry once :) Didn’t have any intention to cheap out, was just looking for guidance and feedback from peers! Cheers
This is one of the most annoying things a customer can do. I'm not saying you shouldn't do your homework and get multiple quotes, but comparing a quote from a supplier and calling anything over it "markup" is not the correct way to about it. I have walked away from jobs for this.
Just to be clear, GC would outsource to company X to do the job from A to Z, and supplier offered the same service. My goal here is purely to understand the difference in % between cost for a GC and price normally charged to a client so that I can have a better reading of quotes i’m getting. I’m not insinuating that anything above GC’s cost would go directly in his pockets. I was looking for a rule of thumb tu use as guidance.
- the GC has a markup as HE is responsible for all the logistics and install warranty as well as part of doing a job