Here I take again the beginning of debate on another thread of discussion that that of the triple glazing.
Christophe wrote: Well there are some works: when you do it yourself in the end it will cost you more ... don't forget the 15% difference in VAT: it may be the cost of labor.
We just had 3 roller shutter boxes assembled and we were billed for 10% of the total bill... so if I had set up myself with VAT it would have cost me more. So I would have had NO interest in doing it myself ... except having trouble!
Must stop taking all sellers, independent or artisants for thieves who grease ...
Alors
Yes Christophe I know that it can be financially interesting to call on a craftsman and you give a very good example.
Et
non Christophe, I never said that all the sellers, ... artisans were all thieves who grease themselves.
But you and I will always find examples and counter-examples to illustrate each one's own argument. Besides, have you not repeatedly rebelled on this forum against the qq little salty invoices of some PAC installers, taking advantage of the subsidy effect, among others, thus criticizing the practices of certain craftsmen?
Didn't you say, particularly with regard to car manufacturers, that their margins were very comfortable and that you did not know according to what prices were fixed, but in any case and in other economic fields, probably according to the prices charged by the competition and not according to the cost price?
To clarify the situation, I think that we must consider the main activity (AP) of the craftsman or the trader.
That of the trader is obviously trade, it is therefore normal that he can live on margins on the products sold, he renders a service which he charges in this way.
On the other hand, the craftsman's AP is generally his manual work and incidentally a little trade, so it seems normal to me that he can live largely thanks to his know-how, thanks to his manual work and incidentally thanks in its commercial activity, the latter should constitute, AMHA, only a financial contribution of comfort and not an income necessary for its survival; because in this case, what would the plumber come to change only one joint?
But if, as Christophe and Bucheron say, the commercial margin on the products placed is essential to the survival of the craftsman, that means for me that there is a problem, that manual work is no longer recognized, that the craftsman becomes more and more commercial, that the charges are undoubtedly too heavy, for the benefit of whom (?). Besides, let's not forget that craftsmen are considered by the State as tax collectors (VAT).
This drift towards an "always more" in the image of our society / system irritates me deeply. Indeed if I take into consideration this commercial argument essential to the survival of the craftsman, that means that nothing is repaired any more, thus privileging the waste (it is moreover often more expensive to repair), that we install what brings the most profit, without giving a damn about the quality and / or the durability of the product.
It is certain that economically this policy generates more turnover and therefore more tax revenue, therefore artisans and traders to adapt and pass on the tax pressure to the end customer, therefore customers to bear all the charges , except, as we can see right now, when the client is desired.
Rather than "always more" which cannot be infinite, it might be time to ask if the money collected is always used well, for example.