Two Prices for the Same Job: Which Was Right?

You quoted a job. A few weeks later a similar job came in and a different number came out of your mouth. Both look like the same job.

That is where the question comes from. And the answer is often surprising: both were right, because the two were not the same job.

This article is about why the price moves and what belongs in writing on a quote.

The price is not moving, the scope is

Two jobs described by the same sentence can sit far apart in content. "Set up stock tracking" means three product groups in a shop and four hundred items in a warehouse.

What sets the price is not the name of the job but what sits inside it. And if the job has not been described yet, the number you say out loud is not a price, it is a guess.

It causes trouble not because the guess is wrong but because the other side files it as a price. You say "roughly", the customer hears a quote.

Six items that move the price

What sends the same job to two different numbers is usually one of these six headings.

1. Where the data comes from. Reading it from an existing system keeps the job small. Entering it by hand means an entry screen gets built too. Pulling it from third-party software needs that vendor's permission, and that is a wait outside your control.

2. How many people will use it. A single-person record and a system where ten people enter data at once are not the same job. Permissions, conflicts and an audit trail become mandatory in the second.

3. Whether old data moves across. Starting from scratch and migrating a three-year Excel archive differ sharply. If the old data is messy, the cleanup can run longer than the job itself.

4. How many reports, how often. One screen and four separate daily, weekly, monthly and yearly reports are not the same effort. Report count goes unspoken in most quotes and grows later.

5. Whether training and handover are included. Building the system is one job, getting it used is another. If user training was not discussed, weeks of phone traffic follow delivery.

6. Who maintains it afterwards. If there is monthly support, its scope belongs in writing. Otherwise "just tweak this one thing" requests pile up as unpaid work. The same theme runs through why automation projects fail.

Three lines that belong on a quote

No elaborate template is needed. Three lines settle most arguments before they start.

Scope. What will be done, with numbers. Not "stock tracking" but "three product groups, one user, one screen, two reports".

Out of scope. What will not be done. This line looks odd but it is the one that earns its keep. Left out, every new request counts as included.

When the clock starts. Which day the calendar begins running. If it depends on a wait outside your control, that gets written plainly. Timing is measured in how long automation takes and when it starts to pay off.

Why "around this much for now" costs more later

Saying a number early drops an anchor on the other side. When the scope grows afterwards, moving up reads like withdrawing a discount and it shakes trust.

Going down is easy, going up is hard. So any number said before the scope is written is really a ceiling being set.

The right sentence is this: let us work out the scope together, then I will put the price in writing. That reads less like a seller and more like someone who knows the work.

If the customer asks for a discount

When a discount request arrives there are two roads, and they lead somewhere very different.

Cutting the number. Agreeing to do the same job for less. This leaves the impression that the first number was padded, and a discount gets expected on the next job too.

Cutting the scope. Lowering the price while removing an item. Saying "with this budget we do one report instead of two, the second gets added later". The ratio between price and work is kept.

The second rescues today and tomorrow at once. And it teaches the customer something: price is not arbitrary, it follows scope.

No price comes out without knowing your own cost

This is the unseen side of the price conversation. If you do not know how many hours the job costs you, you cannot tell whether the number you gave is profit or loss.

No elaborate bookkeeping is needed for this. Roughly writing down the hours as you work gives you a real baseline by the third job. Where record-keeping stops being enough is covered in when Excel stops being enough for customer tracking.

And this distinction matters: a low price wins customers, a wrong price loses them. Taking a job at a loss means either the quality drops or the work drags. Either one costs you the reference.

Four questions before deciding

1. Have I done this job before? If you have, you have a real duration. If not, the number you gave is a guess, and that is worth admitting to yourself as well.

2. Have I put the scope in writing? If not, the price has not formed yet. A number that came up in conversation does not stand in for a written quote.

3. Is there a wait outside my control? A third party's permission, the customer's paperwork, a piece of hardware arriving. If so, the clock starts from there.

4. Can I finish the job at this price? Accepting a price you cannot deliver on is not winning work, it is buying a problem. Where scope can stretch and shrink comes up in custom software or an off-the-shelf package as well.

Summary

Two prices for the same job is not an inconsistency, it is usually a missing measurement. The two jobs carried the same name but not the same scope.

What needs doing is not defending the number but writing the scope. Once the scope is written the price follows, and the discussion moves from price to scope. That is easier ground for both sides.

For a neighbouring decision, see should I hire someone or set up automation.