Turnkey or self-management?

I work in the field of property management and am also responsible for the offers and awarding in the area of renovation/remodeling. I would never recommend a layperson to take on this area. Even we still make mistakes, for example at the interfaces between the trades. If I were RICH!, I would have all phases planned and executed by a carefully selected architect. For new construction, I would rather work with a general contractor and trust that problems with the builder’s insurance can be managed. Half-baked solutions – meaning a bit of architect involvement and the rest in self-contracting – always go wrong because in case of defects, discussions about responsibility in planning and coordination of trades and planners always arise. In times of material shortages and rising costs, it becomes even more difficult to keep track. If then it has to be discussed whether a replacement for a building component is "baugleich" or "gleichwertig," that’s when the fun really starts.

3-4 hours of preliminary talks felt more like an advertising event than a real project initiation...

You are approaching this with the wrong expectation. When you go to a car dealer, you also don’t expect independent advice (“instead of the Mercedes, take the Skoda at half the price”) but a sales pitch. Others sell houses. In small companies, the sales talk is still done by the boss himself, in larger ones you have professional salespeople. Basically, you must not expect advice there; you have to educate yourself and familiarize yourself with how to read a construction specification. Or you hire an architect who is paid for independent consulting services. Both are valid options. And the recommendation to build with the technology that the general contractor normally uses applies not only to the bricks but also to the building services. Also, when it comes to equipment, the general contractor should be as close as possible to your wishes with their basic standard. Although in principle everything can be upgraded, a initially cheaper general contractor with many upgrades usually ends up being more expensive than a general contractor with a higher standard.

Okay, I was more interested in getting a feel for where I would end up price-wise compared to an off-the-shelf house (e.g. Viebrockhaus, Town & Country, etc.).

You should let go of the thought that someone will build your dream house much cheaper than someone else. The price depends less on the seller and much more on you. If you want to compare offers, you should list your equipment and service requirements in detail. When we did it that way back then, all the corresponding offers were within a range of +/- 10K. Some fall out because they may not offer your desired standard. Others may be far above. We then decided on one of the most expensive in our segment - purely gut feeling and sympathy. Off-the-shelf houses can actually be cheaper. But then it really has to fit exactly. It’s not just about walls, number of rooms, windows, and the selection. Important would be, for example, whether and how easily your plot can actually be built on? Can a standard house really be placed there quickly and easily, or are terrain optimizations or development work necessary, for example? The more complicated, the less suitable off-the-shelf houses are. "Simple" can ultimately be done by anyone – only the equipment counts.

Hello neighbor, would you like to reveal exactly where you are building near WOB? We also live very close by and have our topping-out ceremony tomorrow :-) We also went to the companies with a self-designed floor plan. Except for Viebrockhaus, all were on a similar price level. Our chosen company was a bit more expensive than the others, but offered a much more comprehensive description of the construction services. In this company, carpentry and masonry are under one roof. So fewer subs who want to earn money on the construction project as well. It is a local family business. I always said: The boss still has a certain local patriotism. When she goes to the sports field on a Sunday afternoon, she doesn’t want to be pelted with rotten eggs ;-) In that respect, the company stands for solid craftsmanship. We tried to award the heating and sanitation trade ourselves. Initially, our inquiries were offered cheaper than through the general contractor. But less was offered, which we as laymen did not notice. Our general contractor looked at the offers and pointed this out. So we ended up taking their sub. Also a local company for decades. Known for top quality but also a high price. In the end, we still did not pay more than if we had awarded the scopes equivalently ourselves. There are also discounts between the general contractor and the subs. By chance, we spoke to some unrelated people who are professionally involved in construction. They all told us that with this company we don’t need external construction supervision. With the other local companies, most recommended it. And before any wrong impression arises here: this was told to us before we said which company we are building with. Of course, not everything that glitters is gold, but so far we are very satisfied with the general contractor. Also all the coordination, e.g. with the sanitation specialist, the discussion about where the water pipes run, integrating that into the drawings, etc. Doing and coordinating that yourself… No thanks. We are building with air conditioning, which was also awarded externally. But our general contractor still coordinates everything directly with them, implements the shafts in the drawings, etc. I’m digressing.... ;-) To sum it up: In this area, everyone makes you an offer based on an individual floor plan. An architect, due to their percentage-based payment, has no real interest in keeping your construction costs low. Near the Mamastadt VW, it is difficult to get craftsmen. The general contractors just have their subs ready there. Therefore: another vote for the construction company and against the architect!

@ TE: If you really want to build cheaply, then you should actually take everything into your own hands (except for the planning and a scope of work for the individual trades) and consider both materials and craftsmen from abroad. Both in the East and Southeast, there are excellent companies/well-trained craftsmen and the same materials are used as in [D]. BUT: Learn, for example, Polish (and pray that you don’t hear the word "kurva" from the craftsmen), give up on warranties, and be at the construction site daily with the building plans (bringing coffee in the morning helps to start, then a few hours for inspection at noon/afternoon, as far as possible for you). And then there are also craftsmen who waive invoicing. Don’t understand why, but it is said to happen. Besides that, own labor is the last point to significantly reduce the price. But that is not without difficulty either, since a) friends/acquaintances have to be involved (do they always have time and are willing?), b) you yourself should be skilled and c) the construction then usually takes significantly longer (double burden with rent can reduce the advantage again). THESE are ways to have very cheap construction. P.S. I know all these possibilities from my own building projects (I come from the real estate sector). I cannot recommend this to any layperson.

First of all, you should familiarize yourself here with the questionnaire (pinned at the top of the floor plan section). If you meet the ideal constellation "Two adults with a shared bedroom, total of children and home office two, slab-on-ground property without special flatulence in the development plan," I initially see no reason to speak against a catalog design. The catalog design (also called a type house, Gabriele’s favorite Heinz says "system architecture") and the construction company in whose drawer it lies naturally belong together: a catalog design by Meierbau realized with Müllerbau would still be a custom plan there. A catalog design is only suitable if you use it a) originally or with the displacement of a few non-load-bearing walls, or b) only extend along the ridge axis: extensions that touch the base of the gable triangle constructively create a different house (a linear increase by changing the knee wall height has, however, minor effects—less than those of story height). A catalog house is an inseparable combination of house design AND construction and performance specifications of the respective general contractor!

You should ALWAYS approach a custom plan (in the sense of the perfect Bavarian negation "never no exception not"!) with a freelance architect. An architect-designed house only becomes more expensive when you a) plan it individually also as a design unique or/and b) plan it with an artist. Unfortunately, the latter are not guaranteed but can be recognized quite reliably by the fact that they only offer service phases 1 to 4: they cannot estimate costs well and supervise construction—then their designs are unsuitable for affordable and uncomplicated realization.

Secondly, you must decide "religiously" on one path: namely, whether you prefer to let yourself be guided in awarding by the result of a tender, or whether you want to follow your own or buddies’ belief systems (e.g., awarding the shell construction package en bloc and then all trades individually). When it comes to tenders and awards, keep in mind that the leverage effect is about 2:1, i.e., a layperson in this way can expect about twice as much extra expense bad luck as savings luck (please sum this up yourself now).
Addenda are items you forgot in your request for proposal. Here the contractor compensates price increases and also takes the most suitable revenge for any price squeezing;
Increases are items that come up otherwise—also note that your own quantity and mass determinations are worthless if you miscalculated;
Time-and-material work are hourly charged extra works, where the contractor first has to establish the plan-actual congruence of a preceding trade before starting his actual work (e.g., chipping off/plastering what the predecessor messed up).

Regarding the scope of the architect’s commission, I recommend googling (with the search phrase in quotation marks) "A house construction roadmap, also for you: the HOAI phase model!" which I unfortunately may not link here. The popular commissioning of service phases 1 to 4 is not recommended regardless of further strategy, nor your idea of phases 1 to 3: if you go to a general contractor (to plan individually but with their draftsman), service phase 3 would already be a waste of money, as the draftsman can just as well base their approval planning on preliminary designs of phase 2 (their usual raw material is even the SweetHome DIY stuff proudly created by the homeowner’s spouse on the computer). The "working drawings" of the draftsman are not remotely on the level of an architect’s detailed planning of phase 5 but barely more than a formwork plan—in a draftsman’s planning, drywall bumps are as certain as amen in church!

According to my recommendation, the royal road is to put the design, detailed planning, tender, and site supervision into the hands of one and the same planner. The resting time between module A and module B is also of significant importance, even if one (which should be the rule) is already sure after module A to continue the further path with the same planner. In "Of site managers and … site managers," you will find explained the differences in objectives between your architect site manager and/or accompanying expert and the only nominally likewise named general contractor site manager. Therefore, never waive your "lawyer with the folding rule."

You do not have to run away immediately if your chosen contractor turns out to be a franchise partner of a big name, but you should avoid deliberately approaching big names. Their size lies in marketing and legal departments; the construction competence lies in the mason’s trowel at the base. The same applies to the tender: let the professional tender the trades as single lots and do not exclude general contractors, but I see no sense in limiting to general contractors only as contractors; discuss with your planner whether you want to carry out the tender in two parts (shell construction / finishing). I see no objection to the homeowner’s own participant proposals being submitted.