My contractor asked if we wanted nice lighting.
“Depends the alternative and the cost”.
I’m somewhat surprised by his surprise at my answer.
Like.
Sure: of course I want nice lighting. If you ask me that question in a vacuum, the answer is definitely yes.
But that question is only meaningful if it has a comparison.
What is the other option for lighting?
What are the actual trade-offs?
Is “nice” lighting one million dollars, while “normal” lighting is a buck fifty seven?
I keep running into this situation with contractors.
I hired this contractor due to their line items.
I decided not to get a recessed niche in my shower…
due to that shower niche being ~$2k.
At $2k, we’ll put our shampoo on the windowsill.
My contractor – and his designer – often find this approach confusing.
It’s not that I’m unwilling to spend money.
It’s that I can’t say “yes” to a thing without even a ballpark.
And that ballpark should come with a basic comparison.
Do people not do simple economic analyses when renovating a home?
Not even a super-deep preference list, but just a simple “This light costs $100. That light costs $200. Would I pay an additional $100 for that light?”
On plenty of parts, my preference ended up being cheaper.
In working with my designer, we must train each other to work well together.
One part of that is the way he proposes options.
I hired him for his opinion and skill.
I want his recommendation – not merely to view all the options and choose myself.
And I also want his tradeoffs: what are the traits that would lean you toward this over that, and what are the summaries of other reasonable options?
I don’t know how other people choose their elements
but I can do the simple gut check of “Would I pay $375 for an additional power outlet there?”
That’s the beauty of money: it’s a universal comparison.
The best things in life are priceless.
For everything else, it’s a clear unit.
Julian Wise 