Hello €uro,
No question, but how do you want to convey that to the uninformed, naive?
I once thought like you too – but the vast majority of builders who fall for such a salesperson are definitely not as "naive" as you seem to believe! They find in this salesperson exactly the lid that fits their pot, because you cannot convince them with even the best-intended recommendation, as that always costs money anyway, and in their internet-trained eyes, that is a "no go" :rolleyes:
There is a nice saying here: Hit dogs holler! I hope you do not belong to them!
No, definitely not – but I also reserve the right not to build with the aforementioned builders. This not only spares my stomach but also maintains the enthusiasm of our architect, site manager, and other important suppliers and craftsmen to build a sustainable future.
What prevents a general contractor/contractor from offering the customer: This is our standard offer, the heating will certainly warm, but we can only guarantee economy and efficiency if an exact planning/dimensioning is carried out according to your specific framework conditions. That costs x € more. What's the problem here? The naive bargain hunter will choose the initially cheap option and pay the initial "success" in the long run with higher consumption costs; the clever and thoughtful one will come to terms with the initially somewhat more expensive variant and "golden" his decision with low consumption costs permanently.
Our small team works like that ;)
What you forget is that the majority of potential builders – why is the internet full of criticisms precisely of providers working this way? – just do not want to invest this reasonably spent money. Cheap operators & Co. have full order books and thus the survival of this forum is also guaranteed.
The path you describe is taken by the quiet and therefore smart users of this forum; you will hardly find a question they ask here touching on your specialty. They also know that a sensibly constructed house must cost "x," have solid equity, and do not argue about construction time and gladly involve external construction supervision. This characterizes, for example, our builders; which does not mean that nothing occasionally goes wrong for us. However, you will find no negative statements from our builders on the net because all involved pull together in the worst case. But you can be sure that our builders clarify in their diaries how we all together resolved these problems to their satisfaction. If it were otherwise, we would certainly receive no recommendations.
Surely the cheap trick is the quick business, but it is unlikely to be sustainable in the long run. Here, nationwide providers differ from location-based traditional companies. The latter unfortunately lose out due to the "stinginess is cool" mentality, but only because they do not understand how to appropriately present the economic effect of quality to the purchaser. This is not, as in the past, just the building shell alone, but the complex interaction of building shell, user behavior, climate location, and system technology. Whoever as a "regional" does not recognize or understand this is likely to perish in the long run. In my opinion, it is not a successful model for location-based traditional companies to imitate the 'cheap trick' of nationwide providers; the demise is practically pre-programmed.
I partly agree with you – partly, because a rethink is taking place among economically minded builders; it must take place if they want to survive. However, the majority of "traditionalists" join the larger, nationwide license holders, and thus the situation remains as it is in the long run. I also know of two nationwide providers who have adapted to the changed requirements, and this not without success. They employ well-trained energy consultants and produce solid building plans that are not overtaken by reality; however, these two are also not license holders but stand behind their good name.
But back to the topic. The small local builder is rarely well trained regarding sales. It is thus pre-programmed that he cannot competently inform about the connection between "envelope and technology." What he lacks – but which is usually too expensive for him – is a salesperson who takes care of these matters for him. His architect has long been one of his best friends. His customers usually see the good quality and do not worry about long-term consumption because they know that their acquaintance – who made the recommendation – only has good things to report. So his survival is secured.
The majority of builders will continue to sign with cheap operators, as the technical connection only costs them cold cash, which they would rather invest in better sanitary equipment or a new kitchen.
An example from my daily practice. The most frequent sentence we hear from interested parties in the initial conversation is: "I want a passive house, at least a KfW 55 house." When we then clarify the expected costs, I can be sure that in the end – provided the interested party and we fit together personally at all – a maximum of a KfW 70 efficiency house will be built. If our advice consistently results in the stupid answer: "the competition can do it cheaper," we close our files, thank for the coffee, and politely explain that we do not fit together under these conditions and wish them all the best for their building project. Quite often, I find these – then builders – in new housing developments with a construction sign from the well-known cheap operators. Few of them are honest; some, however, are. They then explain to me: "our predictions were almost 100% correct, and they are now marching toward the final price we indicated in the initial discussion; but with lots of delays and trouble. Could have been."
NB: Truths do not make you rich, but you can sleep very well with them. The question is what is really helpful in the long run ;-)
I see it the same way.
What I want to express with this – I wish you would also address the questioners here on their shortcomings and not just prematurely put the blame on the salespeople. Also explain that there can be no Bentley at the price of a Lupo. I know a large number of excellently trained salespeople (none work for a cheap operator) who do not work differently than we do. Builders regularly defended by you do not come closer to the truth but discredit a predominantly very well-working professional group.
Best regards