Readers' Forum

A letter to Mr. Sperber
Hi, Burt. I hope things are well with you. We’ve never met, but I just finished reading your recent interview (June Lawn & Landscape, “60 Years of Gardening”).

I wanted to drop you a quick note to say how much I enjoyed your perspective on the industry as a whole, and on the things any business should be cautious of regarding growth. Most of all, I really appreciate that you still consider yourself a gardener after many years of success growing a large business like yours. To me, that really sums up the whole idea of sticking to what you love, and to what you do well.

Thanks for the insight.

Joe Shooner,
Vice president of sales, GrowPro
Cincinnati


Marketing and water’s true cost
Good editorial in June Lawn & Landscape (“Staying on message”). You are so right; we have to get to the point very quickly. In addition, keep reminding your readers that we have to be 100 percent honest in everything we say. Once people assume that it is just another advertising piece, we are finished with that person. Too much advertising is that way and viewed as dishonest.

Also, your feature on Valley Crest (“60 years of gardening”) was excellent. Our industry needs to listen to the players who are shaping who we are. Valley Crest’s success was not an accident. I though Burt Sperber had great advice for those of us with smaller companies (that would be all of the rest of us).

His thoughts on acquisitions were excellent. He recognized it is about merging values and commitment to people and clients.
  
Your WaterSmart article (Brian Vinchesi’s “Water’s true price”) on the true cost of water was also excellent. What is the true cost of water? The easy way to reduce consumption is to increase the price. If everyone was given 10,000 gallons monthly at a nominal price and the price quadrupled for additional consumption, demand would drop immediately and significantly. It would show us that water is a luxury. I am not advocating this, but it is something to think about. Here in a Kansas City suburb where I live, they paid a consultant hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with a very complicated system for pricing. Life shouldn’t be any harder than it has to be.

Larry Ryan
President, Ryan Lawn & Tree
Overland Park, Kan.


Another letter to Huston
Every month I receive Lawn & Landscape magazine. I enjoy reading your articles and find them beneficial. I would like to add something that very few (if any) dare say.

In the May 2010 issue of L&L, you answered a question pertaining to competition amid what you call a hyper-competitive market. Your answer per the last paragraph of the article was to provide excellent customer service and to know one’s numbers. I agree with executing both, but do not feel that those actions are the most relevant in terms of gaining market share over your competition.

Over the last four to five years there has been a steady increase of new landscaping start-ups, particularly in lawn maintenance. Often I will approach these people and learn that most do not have a business license, insurance, pesticide applicator’s license, or any of the other requirements by law to operate a legitimate business. If local code enforcement divisions would regularly check out these new start-ups and penalize the ones who won’t comply with the law, much of the competition would disappear. I also feel strongly that if plumbers, electricians, HVAC technicians and other professional tradesmen have to meet mandatory educational requirements and pass a state exam for their field, so should landscape contractors. To work a career that requires no training in the public’s eye doesn’t say much for that career – it damages it.

You are probably familiar with Project Evergreen and its goal to promote professionalism within the green industry. What they are doing is correct in motive, but not enough when viewed by the public. There will always be the type of client who places price above everything else, and does not give a hoot about quality. So be it, but what kind of company is working for this kind of client on a routine basis? The one with all the overhead of a legitimate business (much of which is intangible), or the company that does not feel such overhead is necessary? Any company – no matter how much volume they do – can only cut its profit margin so low before they are forced to give up some overhead. Should this happen to a new/small one-man or two-man start-up, what do you think will be first to go? The equipment required to perform the tasks necessary or some unseen intangibles?

Benjamin Bodnar
Owner, Integrity Landscape Management
Hampton, Ga.

Huston’s response:
I agree. While I don’t like mandatory education, it seems that if contractors aren’t required to get educated, they won’t. Sometimes education needs to be mandatory. Come to think of it, at the time I didn’t have much say in going to grade school. Mom and Dad didn’t allow me to vote on this one. So much for democracy.

I tell my clients that there will always be low ballers in their market. The best thing to do is to out-service and outperform them, while maintaining proper pricing. I also tell my clients that they want three or four other companies in their area that display professional practices, a commitment to quality and good pricing. 

Jim Huston
President, JR Huston Enterprises
Granby, Colo.