Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchAficionado
It usually speaks to a failure of incentives. I've worked on projects where there are contractually agreed-upon schedule dates, where the general contractor can owe upwards of $10k a DAY to the developer if they turn the job over late.
These sorts of incentives to perform seem to be much better understood by American companies in large cities fwiw. Small timey developers like this are often not running as tight a ship and set the job up with a slow schedule from the outset. That being said, that can often have diminshing financial performance consequences given the carrying costs to pay for lane closures, equipment rental, security staff, etc.
|
Perhaps a slow timeline could also be attributed to smaller cash flow available to pay contractors at deadline-forced milestones? One would think that a smaller developer might not have the access to funds that a larger one might, and then progress might be more dependent upon progress at other projects, so a more “relaxed” schedule might work in their favour.
I see stuff like this often characterized as being on the verge of unprofessional, or at least that the developer doesn’t know as much as ones from larger more ‘worldly’ areas, but I wonder if that is actually the case. Of course I am not in the development industry, so take it with a grain of salt.