Report comment

My take is this is an excellent move for QS. Riverview have done this since inception in commmercial work as well as high end ancils and seem to be doing very well. There are so many assumptions in some of the implied (and express) criticisms above that seem to me unfair without knowing more about the detail. If you read the article on the 'other' trade site, there is more detail for example: litigation will be dealt with in phases; quotes will be given for most areas once the 'bonnet has been lifted'; work will be carefully defined and additional work not included will be subject to a further fee etc. It's all a balance between certainty and not exposing the firm to unfair consequences and whether QS get the balance right remains to be seen... As a concluding point, fixed fee work is NOT less profitable - setting a price does not mean a cheap price (see Riverview's ancils prices for a good example of this - extraordinary!) and actually, when one focuses on efficiency, profitability tends to rise.