Ted Roche wrote:
> I had a client I've worked with before approach me for a follow-on
> project. They're strapped for cash at the moment, but had been perfect
> with payments on time in previous project that lasted 10 months.
> They'd like to defer some of the costs of development for a period,
> which I can sympathize with, but I'm not a bank and am fairly naive
> over the terms offered. Anyone have an opinion (ha! In this crowd, has
> anyone got an opinion -- what a funny guy!) on whether this is ever a
> good idea or gotches on these terms:
> 
> Time billable at $X.00 / hour
> 
<snipped>

What's your feeling on the scope of the project? $2k? $10k? $100k?

If it's small enough you can miss the $ if it doesn't show, then that 
would mean just going for it since risk/loss is small...

If it's a big project, and that time/money vanishes, and yet you lost 
that opportunity to be making that $$$ from PAYING clients, then of 
course you are hosed...

I'd consider scoping the project and putting a cap on how much in the 
hole they can go before work stops or you get the CEO's luxury car, or...

Also, I think there's a document you can file that puts you "first in 
line" in case of certain types of bankruptcy... of course, by this time 
you may be the 100th entity "first in line", but at least you are a step 
ahead of anyone that didn't file the doc...

The more credit you extend them, the more you risk to lose by walking 
away later, then you extend them some more, then.... you can go in the 
toilet real quick that way...


Matthew S. Jarvis
IT Manager
Bike Friday - "Performance that Packs."
www.bikefriday.com
541/687-0487 x140
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to