- Joined
- Oct 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,390
- Reaction score
- 355
I like the name, it has obvious potential.
The problem I see is that majority of this type of business is done on a direct level where relationships have been established and quality of service is paramount.
A major building contractor would rather know that the equipment and manpower is onsite on the day and time specified than save 10% of the hire cost.
If a site manager knows that he can pick up the phone and say "Fred I need a JCB blah blah here on Tuesday morning at 6am" and Fred delivers on time every time, that is worth much more than a possible saving of a few percentage points in the grand scheme of things.
That's a very fair point. I think there still has to be a level at which the bottom line comes first, and there are going to be times when Fred doesn't have the availability.
Always sticking with one supplier makes for an inefficient market, and that's maybe why it's so profitable. There must be ways to crack the reliability issue - such as penalty clauses for not delivering etc.
It's going to take a lot of talking to people who hire plant to work out how to approach it.
If nothing else I will hold it for sale at a profit, but I honestly reckon there is a good business to be built on this.