[AccessD] Retainers (was: Converting . . .)

1) What is, "... the expiration date on the unused retainer,..."

"The retainer billing rate begins upon our receipt of a check for the
number of hours quoted and ends upon consumption
of the hours purchased or 90 days after date of receipt
of your check, whichever is first."

...I've never had to use the expiry date but its there so that clients don't 
get lazy
...its just part of the deal to get the discount rates

2) If you've arranged for a retainer of 30 hours, how do you handle if they
want you to do 50 hours?  Or only 10 hours?

...I offer them a block of hours in 30/60/90/120 hour increments ...its 
their choice, not mine.
...but I also offer a further discount from normal billing with each larger 
increment
...not much but the psychology is there and in their face
...I monitor their hour consumption and always give them a new bill
before their hours have expired ...less than 30 hours just isn't worth it 
for me

...note: You might want to reread the old dba newsletter ...I did a business 
column in the first edition
that covered pricing strategies, most of which still applies even though its 
years old now ...now that I
think about it I really should delete it ...I was inundated by questions at 
the time and never made the
mistake of listening to Susan's entreaties to write another.

...its not that I mind questions, just that I hate answering the same thing 
over and over :)

William

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 4:57 PM
To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'" 
<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Retainers (was: Converting . . .)

> Hi William - now I'm really hooked!
>
> Couple questions:
>
> 1) What is, "... the expiration date on the unused retainer,..."
>
> 2) If you've arranged for a retainer of 30 hours, how do you handle if 
> they
> want you to do 50 hours?  Or only 10 hours?
>
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of William Hindman
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 2:20 PM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Converting Customers to VB.Net (was: Pollon
> Access2007)
>
> Dan
>
> ...you never know until you ask, eh ...if I do work for a client on a 
> pretty
>
> regular basis, I now suggest the retainer basis to him ...I give him a
> substantial hourly discount and bill him for 30/60/90/120 hours "upfront"
> ...bill is due when submitted ...if he doesn't pay promptly, all hours
> worked are at regular rates.
>
> ...it levels my income flow considerably, I never have to dun an otherwise
> good customer, and ...think about it ...the client is more inclined to
> actually use you if he's already paid for your time ...and if you put an
> expiration date on the unused retainer, what used to be the most difficult
> part of the sell now becomes much easier.
>
> ...not every client is a prospect ...but since I almost never do any fixed
> fee work ...it works for more than you'd think.
>
> ...a client put me onto it ...just flat out asked if I'd ever considered
> working on a retainer basis ...didn't have a clue what he meant but we
> discussed it and I worked out some numbers and there its been ever since.
>
> William
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 10:20 AM
> To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'"
> <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Converting Customers to VB.Net (was:
> PollonAccess2007)> Hi William,
>>
>> A Retainer . . .  Excellent!  I could only wish.
>>
>> The argument of upgrade to VB.Net vs. upgrade to next version of Access 
>> is
>
>> a
>> good one.  I'm also finding that some of my customers who didn't
>> originally
>> plan to expand beyond their LAN, now want other company branches to use
>> the
>> system on their WAN.  So do we use Access on Citrix or Access/ADP or
>> VB.Net?
>> My suggestion will be VB.Net to avoid future Access upgrade cost and also
>> uncertainty of the Access changes that MS will be making.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of William 
>> Hindman
>> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 3:23 AM
>> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Converting Customers to VB.Net (was: Poll on
>> Access2007)
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> ...everyone is different ...look at the monster machines jc's clients pay
>> him to play with :)
>>
>> ...my road to VS was through the web ...a major client wanted to convert
>> his
>>
>> website from static html to a data driven one using the data in his 
>> Access
>> app ...I wanted no part of web work being perfectly happy working with
>> Access, so I recruited another AccessD'r I knew did web work to do it
>> ...but
>>
>> then the client's ISP got real picky about some dlls that he wanted to 
>> use
>> and the client got antsy about turning his data over to a third party
>> ...so
>> I wound up doing it myself ...never again.
>>
>> ...I bought a 3rd party tool that was supposed to be the end all in Asp
>> development ...big mistake ...I got the site running but just barely 
>> ...so
>> in desperation I turned to the new VS5 Express tool that MS had just
>> released ...it was free after all ...and I've never looked back ...the VS
>> Web Developer Express Edition was a joy to use and .net turned out not to
>> be
>>
>> all that hard to learn even for an old codger like me ...and the client
>> was
>> happy.
>>
>> ...as for Access app conversion to VS, you have to understand that I'm on
>> retainer with most of my clients and pretty free to experiment ...so when
>> a
>> client's office manager choked on the Office 2007 upgrade changes I
>> started
>> moving his apps ...still on A2k3 with a lot of his stuff but the new 
>> stuff
>> in VS has him smiling (and his office manager) ...then another client
>> wanted
>>
>> a major upgrade and I sold him on VS8 vs A2K7 and so far so good ...the
>> majority of my work is still in A2k3 but now I can demo apps in both and
>> the
>>
>> sell on VS8 vs A2k7 is pretty easy
>>
>> ...I focus on the roi in VS and SQL Server Express vs the costs of
>> upgrading
>>
>> to 2007 ...a ten employee office upgrading to O2007 is looking at a lot 
>> of
>> money invested in training and conversion costs (jc isn't exaggerating 
>> the
>> screen real estate problems and training issues at all) ...and in my 
>> case,
>> it doesn't cost them a great deal more to go the VS route and they end up
>> with a lot more flexibility ...things they just could not do with Access
>> and
>>
>> Office are now just a matter of how badly do they want it.
>>
>> ...I'm a long way from being proficient in VS8 Pro or SQL Server but its
>> like back in the days with Access 2 ...you look, you ask, you try and
>> eventually something works ...and every so often the light bulb gets a 
>> dim
>> glow :)
>>
>> ...hth
>>
>> William
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Dan Waters" <dwaters at usinternet.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 8:05 PM
>> To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'"
>> <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
>> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Converting Customers to VB.Net (was: Poll on
>> Access2007)
>>
>>> William,
>>>
>>> I've just gotten started learning VB.Net - and VS 2008 is a pretty nice
>>> tool.  So is VB intellisense.  I think that MS is trying hard to make VS
>>> 2008 a tool that developers will like.
>>>
>>> But how did you get your customers to convert?  Did you convince them to
>>> pay
>>> you?  I have three customers I would eventually like to convert - could
>>> sure
>>> use some pointers!
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>>> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of William
>>> Hindman
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 6:32 PM
>>> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>>> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Poll on Access 2007
>>>
>>> ...lol ...did it hurt that much? :)
>>>
>>> ...the thing that really blew me away is when they announced that the
>>> Access
>>>
>>> Development Team had been moved out from under the SQL Server group 
>>> which
>>> was slowly killing it and into the Office products group ...I track most
>>> of
>>> the relevant MS blogs and they certainly gave us promises that 
>>> everything
>>> would now change for the better ...especially for developers ...that 
>>> they
>>> could now deliver all those things that we'd asked for over the years 
>>> but
>>> never got ...like an updated DAO ...fixes to longstanding problems
>>> ...transaction fall back ...a reliable JET engine that didn't corrupt
>>> every
>>> time a user nic flickered ...yada, yada, yada ...and reading back 
>>> through
>>> those early blogs I'm certain that was their intent.
>>>
>>> ...then the Office products management got involved ...and all the
>>> developer
>>>
>>> promises went out the window one more time ...Access was an OFFICE
>>> product
>>> by god and it WOULD by god conform with OFFICE ...so instead of a new 
>>> dao
>>> engine we got a ribbon ...and OFFICE users needed more focus on macros
>>> ...REAL OFFICE PROGRAMMING don't you know ...so we got more macros for
>>> users
>>>
>>> ...now THERE is something I use every freakin' day ...macros ...bloody
>>> cretins and I'm being nice, I am :(
>>>
>>> ...jc mentioned the tabs ...too confusing for OFFICE users eh, get rid 
>>> of
>>> such silly stuff, eh
>>>
>>> ...bug fixes? ...hey, lets ADD a few ...nobody really uses this for real
>>> databases so we won't waste any quality time fixing or testing it, eh
>>> ...just make it pretty and look like the rest of OFFICE ...ta da!!!!
>>> ...look
>>>
>>> everyone ...ACCESS 2007! ...and it has a ribbon just like a REAL Office
>>> product, it does.
>>>
>>> ...I lived through the fiasco that was Access 95 ...stayed with Access 
>>> 97
>>> until Access 2003 finally got it right ...and my intent was to stay with
>>> Access 2003 until they released A14 with fixes for all the crazy sh*t
>>> they
>>> did with Access 2007
>>>
>>> ...but no, that's not to be ...the blogs say its here to stay ...A14 
>>> will
>>> give us a "better" ribbon, "better" macro tools, etc, etc ...and
>>> apparently
>>> no one is looking at updating dao anymore ...and of course, they promise
>>> to
>>> fix the bugs ...just like they promised for every previous version
>>> ...yeah,
>>> right :(
>>>
>>> ...in the meantime, a client pushed me off the high board into the .net
>>> pool
>>>
>>> ...damn near drowned but I got paid well for learning it and hey!
>>> ...Visual
>>> Studio 8 is the developer tool that Access could have been but never 
>>> will
>>> be
>>>
>>> ...I'm moving all my work there client by client ...some have to be
>>> dragged
>>> away from Access kicking and screaming but I'm a pretty big boy ...so
>>> like
>>
>>> I
>>>
>>> said, A2003 is it for me ...the guys at VS are Microsofties who actually
>>> like developers.
>>>
>>> ...they don't insult me ...and I'm into that :)
>>>
>>> William
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Jim Lawrence" <accessd at shaw.ca>
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 6:10 PM
>>> To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'"
>>> <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Poll on Access 2007
>>>
>>>> I do not believe it.... I am agreeing with John and William; AND AT THE
>>>> SAME
>>>> TIME. It seems that all developers, who really make their living by
>>>> doing
>>>> development work, have the same song book.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>>>> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 9:51 AM
>>>> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>>>> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Poll on Access 2007
>>>>
>>>> Steve,
>>>>
>>>> Give it a fair go?  Hmm... I have work to do.  Do you mean spend the
>>>> weeks
>>>> required to figure out
>>>> how to do what I can do without even thinking (it's called muscle
>>>> memory)
>>>> with the previous version?
>>>>
>>>> Well, like I said, I have real work to do.  I am a sole proprietor, I
>>>> earn
>>>> all of the money for my
>>>> house, if I don't do real work my kids don't eat.  I do not want to
>>>> spend
>>>> the time to completely
>>>> relearn Access because some twit decided that I just need to do that 
>>>> and
>>>> too
>>>> bad for me.
>>>>
>>>> What would you tell GM if they tried to sell you a Camaro with the
>>>> accelerator as as a joystick in
>>>> the center console, the brake a pushbutton on the console, the lights 
>>>> as
>>>> a
>>>> knee switch, the
>>>> windshield wipers as ... well you get the picture (I HOPE!  Hmmm...
>>>> maybe
>>>> not?)  THAT is precisely
>>>> what Access has done to the PROGRAMMER INTERFACE with Access 2007.
>>>>
>>>> The POINT is that for 15 years Microsoft has given us Access, with all
>>>> of
>>>> the hot keys, all of the
>>>> menu items, all of the database tabs.  We learned that, we memorized
>>>> that,
>>>> we programmed it to
>>>> muscle memory.  Suddenly, for no reason other than some nebulous
>>>> "sharepoint
>>>> server will make it all
>>>> better" crapola, it changes.
>>>>
>>>> WHY?  You steadfastly refuse to answer that Steve.  WHY?  What is the
>>>> POINT
>>>> of moving everything
>>>> around?  I want YOUR ANSWER STEVE, WHY MOVE THE WORLD AROUND and refuse
>>>> to
>>>> allow the programmer to
>>>> get his environment back?  And don't EVEN try to feed me some nebulous
>>>> "sharepoint will make it all
>>>> better" crap!
>>>>
>>>> The POINT is that they are doing the same thing to the interfaces of 
>>>> all
>>>> the
>>>> other Office
>>>> applications, which are by and large USER APPLICATIONS in their own
>>>> right.
>>>> It makes sense for those
>>>> apps, IF this new ribbon stuff actually improves productivity (and I
>>>> will
>>>> take a pass on commenting
>>>> on that).  The POINT is that they want Access to look pretty like Word
>>>> and
>>>> Excel.  Well whoopty
>>>> frickin doo!  So now we have a pretty Access.  Which I promptly have to
>>>> turn
>>>> off to get the ACTUAL
>>>> APPLICATION to fit on the screen again.  HMMMMMMM!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>> But Access is decidedly NOT an office USER APPLICATION.  Ask a "USER"
>>>> what
>>>> 3rd normal form is and
>>>> enjoy the deer in the headlights look you get back.  Ask the "USER" 
>>>> what
>>>> a
>>>> PK is, a FK is, an ADO
>>>> recordset is, a DAO object model is, what a recordset, querydef, hmm...
>>>> I
>>>> could go on and on.
>>>> Access, from the beginning was about storing DATA in a logical,
>>>> CONSISTENT
>>>> manner, and the USER
>>>> hasn't a clue.
>>>>
>>>> Oh yea, we now get sharepoint server, which is all about lists, I
>>>> remember.
>>>> Everything is a list
>>>> and nobody needs real tables anymore.  Tell that to the SQL Server 
>>>> guys,
>>>> the
>>>> ORACLE guys.  Tell that
>>>> to your BANK, your auto manufacturer, or for that matter to GOOGLE.
>>>>
>>>> For that matter tell that to my client in Bloomfield, Ct where we start
>>>> with
>>>> Policy holder, policy,
>>>> claimant, claim, benefits, benefit details (Parent through great great
>>>> great
>>>> grandchild) and that is
>>>> just the beginning of a DATABASE APPLICATION (let me repeat that)  A
>>>> DATABASE APPLICATION, that
>>>> completely runs a disability insurance claims center.  It contains 150
>>>> TABLES, ALL OF THEM
>>>> RELATED...  Primary keys, foreign keys, all of that stuff that will
>>>> magically not be needed I assume
>>>> with sharepoint server?
>>>>
>>>> Tell my client BTW exactly what of all the magical glitz and glitter
>>>> makes
>>>> 2007 soooooooo worthwhile
>>>> that they need to upgrade, especially when the same old bugs that I 
>>>> have
>>>> been telling MS about are
>>>> still there. TEN YEARS LATER the same bugs are still there but we have 
>>>> a
>>>> ton
>>>> of magical glitz and
>>>> glitter.
>>>>
>>>> Do you get the idea that I am irritated?  Do you get the idea from the
>>>> general response to this
>>>> thread that I am not alone?
>>>>
>>>> C'mon Steve.  The move to 2007 is a PITA to the guy that does Access 
>>>> for
>>>> a
>>>> living.  And now... I
>>>> have to keep the old because most of my clients already have that (and
>>>> are
>>>> refusing to move in
>>>> DROVES I might add) and learn the new just because some TWIT thinks it
>>>> is
>>>> "better".
>>>>
>>>> My ASS!
>>>>
>>>> Ahhhooooommmmmmm.... thisiswhatIdoforaliving....
>>>>
>>>> Ahhhooooommmmmmm.... thisiswhatIdoforaliving....
>>>>
>>>> Ahhhooooommmmmmm.... thisiswhatIdoforaliving....
>>>>
>>>> OK, I am calm now...
>>>>
>>>> Sharepoint?
>>>>
>>>> Ahhhooooommmmmmm.... thisiswhatIdoforaliving....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John W. Colby
>>>> www.ColbyConsulting.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve Schapel wrote:
>>>>> John,
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "jwcolby" <jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com>
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 1:31 AM
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... Microsoft imposes it on us and is absolutely silent (officially)
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> how to turn it off.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are concerned about screen real estate, it is very easy, as I
>>>>> think
>>>>
>>>>> you know, to minimise the ribbon until needed.  Equally, from the 
>>>>> point
>>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>> view of the finished deploted application, it is very easy to "turn it
>>>> off",
>>>>> if by that you mean not have a ribbon.  So I really can't relate to
>>>>> what
>>>>> you're on about here.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is certainly the case that there has been no easy way to produce
>>>>> customised ribbons within your applications, without a fairly steep
>>>> learning
>>>>> curve.  I have seen Microsoft people acknowledge this, and one would 
>>>>> be
>>>>> justifiably disappointed if this is not corrected in the near future.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry to just pick one aspect of your post to respond to, but that
>>>>> was
>>>>
>>>>> the part that had me wondering whether you had given it a fair go.
>>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> AccessD mailing list
>>>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> AccessD mailing list
>>>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> AccessD mailing list
>>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> AccessD mailing list
>>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> AccessD mailing list
>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
>> -- 
>> AccessD mailing list
>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>
>
> -- 
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> -- 
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>