Experiences with building an architect at a fixed price?

I do not doubt that it exists. I myself was once offered a similar construct by a civil engineer. However, that was also a floor plan specified individually by us. Since we discontinued the topic with the civil engineer after two conversations, I still cannot really imagine how the back-and-forth calculations work. The only possibility is that the fixed price is so high that there is enough buffer included.

If additional costs are then charged without a general contractor surcharge, the higher base price can certainly pay off for the builder with many additional requests.

You would therefore have to doubt that this exists: architect offers at a fixed price. but that is exactly the topic here. - I do believe that such a thing exists.

But this technically doesn’t work here because it is not a catalog design. And then a tender makes no sense – especially not with the client as principal. A general contractor can make a fixed price, but then he bears the risk that there is still profit after his purchasing prices. And then no tender is needed on behalf of the client. A craftsman who builds this design for the first time will not rely on the architect’s quantity survey. Rather, he will only participate in the tender if the quantity prices of the items are also included. And if the bathroom in the tender has “approx. 28 sqm wall tiles” but in reality 33 sqm wall tiles, then he also wants 33/28 of the offered price. Exactly this “sliding fixed price” the client would not have with a general contractor. That is why I advise having a specialist lawyer assess what kind of hybrid chameleon this actually is. In my view, a tender with the client as principal is not just a spark of doubt.

Architect offers a fixed price.

Yep, but the customer signs contracts with the companies, not with the architect. That’s the point where I would drop out. Either the architect delivers a house to me at a fixed price, then he is my contracting party (and thus the developer) or he fulfills his architectural duties and I build a classic architect house with individual trade contracts (but without a fixed price guarantee). I’ve seen too much crap to go along with the OP’s model...

ok, I understood the trap. It would only be a fixed price if the A. took the risk. K.

ok, I understood the trap. It would only be a fixed price if the A. took the risk.

Which A. do you mean?

The client of the architect "builder" understands a fixed price to mean that the price is absolutely fixed. In other words, that he does not have the risk of the only relatively fixed price (for the unfortunately billed meters, square meters, cubic meters or pieces).

Whether the contractor "craftsman" has a risk is easy for him to recognize thanks to experience: if he is supposed to give an absolute fixed price, he will only participate if he can assess the congruence between "determined" and actual quantities / volumes, etc. For the "Klarabella 0815" (or a clone of it except for pushed interior walls) he can do that, but not for a unique piece.

Only if the architect bears the risk of the effects of his possible miscalculations on the final price of the trade is he a true general contractor here.

Only if the A(rchitect) bears the risk of the impact of his possible miscalculations on the final price of the trade is he a true general contractor here.

That's what I meant above.