GU, customer service and communication extremely frustrating

Because architects can do everything except calculate. And if the budget is already tight, you will miscalculate with the architect.

I have already responded to this extensively and explained why this calendar wisdom only applies to types of architects who can claim the distinction of being "on the blacklist of " ;-)

Architect houses overrun estimates like Kulenkampff with airtime, the culprits being the sweet-toothed building owners:
That architects significantly overrun cost estimates occurs primarily - but also almost only - in two cases: namely, when the architect has been practically "out of the game" for many years in university service and/or when he is circulated among the nouveau riche as a star architect. So one should preferably not take a professor/private lecturer or an architect responsible for the fat-cat hangouts of the provincial chic crowd. Good, budget-loyal architects are completely unknown to the yellow press. And of course it costs extra if even the toilet bowl in the guest WC has a gold rim – but then it is just as costly when built by a general contractor.

Maybe yes, maybe no, with your own architect it is usually minimally cheaper or equally expensive, so that he can effectively be seen as cost-neutral. But there is indeed a "trend" toward the safe way of building more expensively with your own architect – and it is so simple that sadly one must say, "Debededehakape is a bestseller": namely, by only affording your own architect up to the approval stamp (thus already skipping the important service phase 5 needed to prevent drywall bumps) and then of course (because without phase 5 there is no phase 6, etc.) fumbling around with homemade requests for bids instead of a proper tender. Naturally, you then pay more just because you rack up shiploads of hourly rates on this path. But that is what makes the sorcerer's apprentice.
[...] However, there is also a "innocent" method from the builder's side to build an expensive architect house: namely, out of desperation taking an architect who is actually not really active on the market (retired, fled the practical construction in public authorities or university service, or the like). These candidates are notorious for their unrealistic cost estimates.

and further commentary can be found here:

I believe the saying “architect houses are more expensive” is a correlation, but not causation. Because: Of course, someone with a 2 million budget would rather build with an architect than a general contractor who works with type houses. That usually means that the more expensive properties come from the architect. However, that is a correlation – the causal link between “architect” and “expensive” would only exist if he could generally only build expensively.
Many of you have pointed out that the architect builds what he is commissioned to do. And if it is “only” a nice, cozy, rectangular house with 160 sqm and an individual floor plan for 400k euros, then hopefully he sticks to that.

I haven't read it completely.

But I do it so that my father-in-law and I regularly go to the construction site and talk to the skilled workers there. When a new trade arrives, I bring coffee and rolls over... I will do that with every trade... the foreman of the bricklayers then immediately said, "Oh, we haven't had that for a long time..." well...

And that's how I find out how things are progressing, whether they are idiots... they know that I'm not someone who only looks at his house for the first time when moving in...
Of course, you have to have a certain rapport with them. If Mr. Doctor pulls up in the Merc, immediately takes pictures, and struts arrogantly on his field... I talk to them as if they were colleagues.

Because believe me. I work in field service and have a lot of customer contact, ultimately I spend more than half the year there programming their systems.
Nothing, really nothing in this world annoys me more than constantly having to create detailed schedules of when I do what, preferably in hourly increments. And in second place is having to constantly assure the customer that I know my craft and that the system will be operational in the end... even if it currently, on day 2 of 100, doesn't look like it.

We have also learned a lot about our general contractor through the trades and individual craftsmen – both good and bad. For example, who ultimately pays for the construction container, namely all trades proportionally.

We have also learned a lot about our general contractor through the trades and individual craftsmen – both good and bad. For example, who ultimately pays for the construction container, namely all trades proportionally.

That was not quite the truth. In the end, everything, really everything, is paid for by the client. Because the subcontractors only work with the general contractor as long as they can survive from it. There may be times when the general contractor helps retain employees through the turnover. But a subcontractor who basically has to bear so much themselves that no profit can be taken... How is that supposed to work....

That was not entirely the truth.

Now you’re being difficult, Mr. Teacher!

Now you're being difficult, Mr. Teacher!

Sorry!

The general contractor or his subcontractors surely provided you with the container at their own expense!

I too can hardly contain my joy when my boss wants to cut hours from my business trip because the client demands a discount. That greatly boosts my motivation to do good work that requires time...

No judgment at all... in which industries do you all work? Good work costs money?