Jump to content
scruffy1

how crap is this government ?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Nich... said:

Given some assumptions about Leo's income, eveln, you probably make next to nothing in comparison

No.I'm not making any assumptions. I do recall him saying a number of times his take home wage is likely comparable ... but, he does have a business as collateral. A manual labourer is most likely working from pay to pay, unless as Leonid stated earlier, the person is doing the job because he likes it rather than he has too ...

 

7 hours ago, Nich... said:

Unless you'd be happy to pay a lot more for coffee and food because those employees were getting paid what Leo gets paid.

Perhaps, if the system were not corrupted from the top down I would not have to pay more for my daily 'bread' ... I'm not going all socialist here, in saying everyone should be paid the same. I am saying that when the shit hits the fan the lower income bracket should not be the ones to be made jobless and homeless. And that is what happens, cos the top end of town do not feel they should do without just cos things went a bit belly-up ... it's a mind set that says " those people mean less,so we don't need to pay so much"  is what I object to. And to suggest the system is not corrupt from the top down is foolish given the state of our supposedly regulated building industry for starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, eveln said:

just because it's boring as batshit for you does not make it a less worthwhile job. And as such does not require or entitle you to pay next to nothing for the services of someone doing the task for you

 

By definition, a job that can be done with less skills is do-able by more people and is thus paid less because it is a less worthwhile job.

 

Any person on this forum could walk into a job washing dishes with no education and be good at it in a week.

 

The same cannot be said of walking into a doctor’s practise and being a doctor.

 

*shrug*

 

Some jobs are less worthwhile than others. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, eveln said:

Perhaps, if the system were not corrupted from the top down I would not have to pay more for my daily 'bread' ... I'm not going all socialist here, in saying everyone should be paid the same. I am saying that when the shit hits the fan the lower income bracket should not be the ones to be made jobless and homeless. And that is what happens, cos the top end of town do not feel they should do without just cos things went a bit belly-up ... it's a mind set that says " those people mean less,so we don't need to pay so much"  is what I object to. And to suggest the system is not corrupt from the top down is foolish given the state of our supposedly regulated building industry for starters.

 

OK, for a start I don’t think you could possibly be a socialist. You appear to possess the ability to think critically, a function completely missing in socialists.

 

With respect to some of your statements, there’s a little I can probably tell you, with the understanding that I can only give you the generalities because there are exceptions to every rule.

 

Essentially there are two types of businesses: those that make money while the owners sleep, and those that are transactional.

 

I run an IT Services company where we put clients into managed services contracts. I just slept 10 hours, and I made money every second I snored. The upside of this is that managed services is typically less affected by a recession. It also has excellent benefits in the space of cash flow - I know exactly how much is coming in every month. So I can plan for the worst.

 

This model of business started with accounting and has now come to IT and others. A good friend of mine has even turned Law and HR into a monthly managed service and he’s fucken killing it.

 

The other benefit of this model is that you are judged by your delivery and engagement with the customer. You can’t do shitty work because the customer is always judging you against SLAs, deliverables, performance. And maybe other metrics. Whatever. In any case because you have a contract for services, you must maintain a better-than-contracted engagement or you will lose the business to someone else. Hence another reason for my “no monkeys” model. I don’t want monkeys talking to CFOs or IT Managers.

 

Interesting sidebar, a significant amount of CFOs are women. Female CFOs do not tolerate monkeys. They didn’t get to where they are by being generic - they got there by working their asses off and they have zero tolerance for waffling or people who don’t have commercial heads on their shoulders.

 

The other type of business is transactional. IE building/construction. The work is project based, get in, get out, make some cash.

 

Because it is project-based work with no follow-up, the absolute bare minimum is done to make sure “Standards” are met. Then the company fucks off, maybe dissolves to avoid future responsibility - and starts up as another entity. I’m not saying this is right - I’m saying that this is what it is. So don’t bark at me for stating it.

 

These types of companies make hideous amounts of money when the economy is good. When it’s not and people aren’t buying, these companies are the first to collapse and because these types of companies are most likely to use manual workers with monkey-level skills and wages, these suffer first and worst.

 

Consider a restaurant. A restaurant can make good moolah in a good economy. But it’s not a money-while-you-sleep business. It’s highly transactional.

 

Location, economy, etc make a big difference.

 

If something goes wrong externally, the restaurant doesn’t make money. The first people turfed are the least needed and least skilled - the dish washers. And their jobs are done by others during times of lower visitation by customers. Because again - washing dishes is monkey work.

 

You can’t keep the dish washers and get rid of the chefs. People don’t give you money for the work your dish washers do.

 

 

Edited by Leonid
Spellink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.

 

I had wondered if it was managed services you had moved completely into.

 

Makes sense, not sure I would get into it again, it does carry a high level of accountability as you say.

 

The other thing to note, not trying to worry you because I rather think you are pretty immune but the in-source/outsource model tends to swing a bit like a pendulum.

 

The emergence of cloud may well make a difference to that, only time will tell.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do managed services largely in my own private cloud across three DCs on the East Coast.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Leonid said:

 

OK, for a start I don’t think you could possibly be a socialist. You appear to possess the ability to think critically, a function completely missing in socialists.

 

With respect to some of your statements, there’s a little I can probably tell you, with the understanding that I can only give you the generalities because there are exceptions to every rule.

 

Essentially there are two types of businesses: those that make money while the owners sleep, and those that are transactional.

 

I run an IT Services company where we put clients into managed services contracts. I just slept 10 hours, and I made money every second I snored. The upside of this is that managed services is typically less affected by a recession. It also has excellent benefits in the space of cash flow - I know exactly how much is coming in every month. So I can plan for the worst.

 

This model of business started with accounting and has now come to IT and others. A good friend of mine has even turned Law and HR into a monthly managed service and he’s fucken killing it.

 

The other benefit of this model is that you are judged by your delivery and engagement with the customer. You can’t do shitty work because the customer is always judging you against SLAs, deliverables, performance. And maybe other metrics. Whatever. In any case because you have a contract for services, you must maintain a better-than-contracted engagement or you will lose the business to someone else. Hence another reason for my “no monkeys” model. I don’t want monkeys talking to CFOs or IT Managers.

 

Interesting sidebar, a significant amount of CFOs are women. Female CFOs do not tolerate monkeys. They didn’t get to where they are by being generic - they got there by working their asses off and they have zero tolerance for waffling or people who don’t have commercial heads on their shoulders.

 

The other type of business is transactional. IE building/construction. The work is project based, get in, get out, make some cash.

 

Because it is project-based work with no follow-up, the absolute bare minimum is done to make sure “Standards” are met. Then the company fucks off, maybe dissolves to avoid future responsibility - and starts up as another entity. I’m not saying this is right - I’m saying that this is what it is. So don’t bark at me for stating it.

 

These types of companies make hideous amounts of money when the economy is good. When it’s not and people aren’t buying, these companies are the first to collapse and because these types of companies are most likely to use manual workers with monkey-level skills and wages, these suffer first and worst.

 

Consider a restaurant. A restaurant can make good moolah in a good economy. But it’s not a money-while-you-sleep business. It’s highly transactional.

 

Location, economy, etc make a big difference.

 

If something goes wrong externally, the restaurant doesn’t make money. The first people turfed are the least needed and least skilled - the dish washers. And their jobs are done by others during times of lower visitation by customers. Because again - washing dishes is monkey work.

 

You can’t keep the dish washers and get rid of the chefs. People don’t give you money for the work your dish washers do.

 

 

I think it's very healthy for all of us that you are into IT stuffs and not restaurants 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Yeah, private cloud is the least likely to be on the pendulum.

 

So long as you meet your end of the bargain the client really never knows, nor cares, that the servers are not on their premises. But it sure reflects, nicely, in their IT budgets.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eveln said:

I think it's very healthy for all of us that you are into IT stuffs and not restaurants 🙂

 

Same rule applies.

 

Helpdesk monkeys are let go of first in an economic downturn because of the “8 hires to jump 1m each, or one hire to jump 8m” consideration.

 

You cannot compromise your delivery capability because that’s your only way to recover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eveln said:

No.I'm not making any assumptions. I do recall him saying a number of times his take home wage is likely comparable ... but, he does have a business as collateral. A manual labourer is most likely working from pay to pay, unless as Leonid stated earlier, the person is doing the job because he likes it rather than he has too ...

 

Perhaps, if the system were not corrupted from the top down I would not have to pay more for my daily 'bread' ... I'm not going all socialist here, in saying everyone should be paid the same. I am saying that when the shit hits the fan the lower income bracket should not be the ones to be made jobless and homeless. And that is what happens, cos the top end of town do not feel they should do without just cos things went a bit belly-up ... it's a mind set that says " those people mean less,so we don't need to pay so much"  is what I object to. And to suggest the system is not corrupt from the top down is foolish given the state of our supposedly regulated building industry for starters.

When money is tight, how often do you cut back on your shopping expenses, vs still buying the same old same old to help keep low paid workers employed? 
Say it's only the top end of town, and not most of us.

Who is going to want to work for a small or family business, when they can just work for big business and have a guaranteed job when the economy is going down the gurgler?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

You what !!??!!

 

Big biz lets people go with impunity when the noose tightens, small business usually has far more respect for its employees.

 

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why, back in my day, SMF would never have let this gross injustice happen.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Big biz lets people go with impunity when the noose tightens, small business usually has far more respect for its employees.

 

Small Business Lobby groups have been lobbying all governments successfully for decades for exemptions to corporate dismissal laws.

 

Small business gets rid of employees far far more frequently than corporate in a downturn. It's just not the same numbers so it doesn't get the media attention.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Nich... said:

When money is tight, how often do you cut back on your shopping expenses, vs still buying the same old same old to help keep low paid workers employed? 
Say it's only the top end of town, and not most of us.

Who is going to want to work for a small or family business, when they can just work for big business and have a guaranteed job when the economy is going down the gurgler?

Budgeting is how we roll, always.

Well I've always worked for small businesses, and have been in the same employ now for almost two decades ...I know I'm lucky to work for people who obviously understand the need to run their business on a pretty strict  budget too ... So am not sure I can answer the last part of your post ...

Edit: ooops ! ... Me , is a fair answer 😉 

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Leonid said:

 

Same rule applies.

 

Helpdesk monkeys are let go of first in an economic downturn because of the “8 hires to jump 1m each, or one hire to jump 8m” consideration.

 

You cannot compromise your delivery capability because that’s your only way to recover.

Not quite so. A restaurant needs to satisfy health and safety regulations. No way I'd eat in a place where the chef/cook is also the scullery person ... imo, both task  would be found wanting

And a direct result would be compromised delivery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been literally the only person in the kitchen a few times, doing everything from dishes to food to the floors.  Sometimes there've been two or three chefs and each time one of us is quiet we jump onthe dishes to get them done so they're not piling up for 8 hrs until the dishwasher is rostered on.

 

Purely depends on how busy things are, how bad the rostering is, and how poorly recruitment is going to fill gaps in the roster.

 

Paying for someone's friend to come and do dishes, or waitstaff, always looks cheaper on paper, but they (generally) don't know shit about a kitchen and just work slower.

In a kitchen tho', they're not usually let go first if there's a downturn because they're cheap on paper and the people that run hospitality businesses are generally shit at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I’ve run a cafe Nich. My second business.

It was for a friend. Needed my help so I helped for free for some shares.

Which I still have but no longer play an active part due to my work being complete.

 

i helped him get rid of a few monkeys. And gave him a managed service too.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done it too. Virtually done the kitchen ( cafe )with a wait person out the front ... Perhaps my skills are not comparable, but there's no way the food was always as good as it should have been had there been the time, and staff on duty, that there should've been.

 

1 hour ago, Nich... said:

In a kitchen tho', they're not usually let go first if there's a downturn because they're cheap on paper and the people that run hospitality businesses are generally shit at it.

Wait staff are often the ones first to go ...the customer can wait ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I did the reverse. Wait staff and baristas are why people come back.

Average food can be overcome by interesting employees and good service.

 

What I did with my friend was simples. I approached three other cafes on his street of office buildings. One cafe had a massive kitchen but not much customer space. I organised the four cafes to invest in more equipment for that kitchen and each bought more plates and utensils, etc.

 

Most of the dish washers were fired. A back lane was used to transport the dishes to the common location. The owner of that kitchen got a managed service out of it.

 

I found some report that showed that employees who had had breakfast were a few points above 10% more productive. A second report showed that most employees didn’t have breakfast. I went to the top floors of my mate’s cafe building. The top floors are usually held by cashed up companies as top floors command a rent premium.

 

I got the C-levels of 3 out of 5 companies to agree to a monthly payment to my mate in return for every employee being entitled to a coffee or tea and a small breakfast for free. Boom - managed service, predictable income. And everyone’s happier.

 

Over the years I’ve been in business and in my own personal failures such as my first marriage I’ve learned that I don’t know what to do. All I know is (cumulatively) what not to do.

 

One of the things I’ve learned is that people will buy for their reasons, not for yours. And more importantly that there is no such thing as a hospitality business or an iT business.

 

There is only a sales business. Everything else is a failure waiting to happen. Hospitality or IT is merely what you sell. Your business though, is sales. 

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rad.  How did you balance making the offer seem reasonable vs making sure if too many upstairs staff showed up you'd make a loss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Must be my problem, hate sales, love pre-sales - you find them I'll convert them   🙂

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nich... said:

Rad.  How did you balance making the offer seem reasonable vs making sure if too many upstairs staff showed up you'd make a loss?

 

Metrics. I talked to the execs at those companies first and got their staff numbers.

 

Me and my mate put together a couple of simple breakfast deals and using existing data worked out what percentage of consumption each would play.

 

From there it was easy. Approached suppliers asking what price they’d do for guaranteed x sales. Got their prices and negotiated further. Split the discount offered in thirds and took two thirds as a dollar value off the retail price. Still ended up making more in profit percentage terms because original markup was in place and we’d just negotiated.

 

My mate sorted some sort of FOB system. Each company’s employee got one. We set the per-user price the companies would pay. Each employee would tap their FOB and show their building pass.

 

At the end of every month, he’d bill the companies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Leonid said:

There is only a sales business. Everything else is a failure waiting to happen.

Yes, agreed.

... but at seven, eight o'clock in the morning if I'm approached by a cheery face and an average coffee I'm not coming back tomorrow ... just sayin"

I get that average food might be passable for a cafe when it's customer base possibly has time and logistic constraints

Edited by eveln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not time and logistics constraints mostly.

I’m not saying my mate’s coffee is average. I’m just saying I’ve had better - there’s probably better on his street.

 

BUT

 

His barista while I was there was pretty awesome. She was a Colombian-Lebanese girl. Sexy as hell and very warm.

Worked quick and always with a smile. Everyone loved her, she remembered everyone’s names and drinks and even asked about their kids.

 

Not sure if she’s still there. But what she didn’t have in amazing coffee she had in everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha... Of course even in this automated age, sex still sells and always will ... 

Being a hetero femme, life is still toooo short for average coffee 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2019 at 3:04 PM, TheManFromPOST said:

What are those who have low IQs supposed to contribute to society?

 

Apparently they run it. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×