Help for industry vendors is coming soon.

[Blaine Wiley]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Well then Blaine, you sell a low-ticket item and keep the whopping 8% then. Email me and I'll tell you who the vendor is.

Jim, correct, I don't receive $100, or even 10 cents from any vendors.

The incentive when charging 8% or even 10% would be volume. Every business is looking for volume. If you sell one low ticket product, 8% is nothing. Sell 1000 of them, and 8% becomes a desirable amount of money. Get 50 vendors, and the commission becomes exponential.

Advertising budget is money set aside simply to sell the item. The person who designs and markets the item or product is foolish if they give away 25% of their business for dubious or unproven results. Office staff, phone bills, personnel, etc. are not considered advertising expenses, unless the sole purpose of those items is for advertising.

If I were the vendor, I might agree to a graduated scale based upon performance with proof, rather than innuendo. Anyone can claim to do anyting, but the proof would be in increased sales.

I doubt inspectors here are giving anyone 25% of each inspection they do in a particular real estate office. If they are, not only are they fools, but ESOP is looking at them.

Oh, and my understanding is that 25% was turned down, and 50% of gross was requested. Nice work if you can get it!

[Nick Gromicko]

Blaine, the vendor came on the thread and admitted in person and publicly that it wasn't

25% of their business

It was 25% of only the NEW business that InterNACHI would have to cover all the costs and take all the risks in generating. InterNACHI would have to pay for all the

Office staff, phone bills, personnel, etc

required to generate this NEW business. So

performance

is no concern of the vendor. It was a straight percentage.

[Blaine Wiley]

I know that. He was also told 50% would be more like it.

I'm stubborn. I wouldn't budge for anyone unless it was a sliding scale on the results, period. That is the problem when claims are high and deliveries are low. Everyone claims they will get you xxx more business, and it is often far, far below the boast.

Again, great work if you can get it!

[Nick Gromicko]

BTW, Kenton pays InterNACHI 50% on his www.nachi.org/narratives.htm and we haven't made any money on them yet.

[Blaine Wiley]

Originally Posted by gromicko

BTW, Kenton pays InterNACHI 50% on his www.nachi.org/narratives.htm and we haven't made any money on them yet.

I'll withold my negative comment, but at 50% he ain't makin no money either.

[jvogan]

Originally Posted by gromicko

BTW, Kenton pays InterNACHI 50% on his www.nachi.org/narratives.htm and we haven't made any money on them yet.

Nick, didn't you post earlier in this thread in response to James that Nachi doesn't take a penny from vendors????? I don't get it......

[Nick Gromicko]

Oh Kenton makes money because he has zero costs. When $99 comes in he keeps the entire $49.50. InterNACHI has the costs out of its $49.50.

We have straight commission sales people here and they won't even pick up the phone unless they have a shot at making $30/unit... simply because they have to make an hour's worth of calls to get a sale.

If I bring them a low ticket item with a 25% commsission, they won't even try to sell it. No money in it for them.

[Nick Gromicko]

jvogan: I don't see such a response by me or Jim on that matter. Where do you see that? Post it in a quote here.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by bwiley

I know that. He was also told 50% would be more like it.

I'm stubborn. I wouldn't budge for anyone unless it was a sliding scale on the results, period. That is the problem when claims are high and deliveries are low. Everyone claims they will get you xxx more business, and it is often far, far below the boast.

Again, great work if you can get it!

There is the key.

"if you can get it"...

Everyone has a choice to accept or disagree to any terms.
No damage done. No harm done. No problem.

I know someone who will give you 25% for selling their low
ticket item. I doubt you want it either. No harm done.

[jvogan]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Blaine,

Yes, and the offer was rejected.


Nope. Not a penny ever.

????????????

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by gromicko

No vendor has ever paid us a penny for the free exposure they've always enjoyed.

Don't believe me? Call them all up and ask. Here they are: www.InspectorMALL.com

Let's be fair here.

Nick is saying that vendors get free exposure on "The Mall"

They have to pay for the "boiler room services".

I know it's hard to understand Nickspeak at times.

Takes practice.

[Blaine Wiley]

And for the record, and Nick knows this, I'm not against us charging vendors for advertising, or anything else. We should have banner ads, and be up front about what they cost. Hell, Joe Farsetta and I were all over trying to get Nick to put ads on the site. All vendors should be charged a monetary figure to do business as they are at any other trade association.

I just bristle at the way it was handled as presented by Jim, and I don't ever want the association to have a pay for play preferred vendor list.

[Nick Gromicko]

Someone has to pay them.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Someone has to pay them.

I am in agreement with that. It's not a welfare operation.

[Nick Gromicko]

I just bristle at the way it was handled as presented by Jim.

Me too!

I'm glad the vendor came on and publicly explained the 3 main points:

1. The 25% was only on NEW business that InterNACHI pays for.
2. All the sales and marketing costs to generate it would be InterNACHI's solely.
3. The deal was rejected by InterNACHI.