OSE Build Cost - Revision history

Marcin: /* Bottom Line */

2024-01-01T18:22:01Z

Bottom Line

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 1 January 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:

	==Bottom Line==		==Bottom Line==
	*$85k build cost OSE, $180k build cost industry standards		*$85k build cost OSE, $180k build cost industry standards. OSE features 2.2x lower build cost.
	*$25k labor cost OSE, $120k 'labor cost' industry standards		*$25k labor cost OSE, $120k 'labor cost' industry standards. OSE features 4.8x lower labor cost.

	=Industry Standards=		=Industry Standards=

Marcin: /* OSE Build Cost */

2024-01-01T18:20:31Z

OSE Build Cost

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:20, 1 January 2024
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Do you see any defects in my logic so far?		Do you see any defects in my logic so far?

			==Bottom Line==
			*$85k build cost OSE, $180k build cost industry standards
			*$25k labor cost OSE, $120k 'labor cost' industry standards

	=Industry Standards=		=Industry Standards=

Marcin: /* Industry Standard Construction */

2024-01-01T18:19:21Z

Industry Standard Construction

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:19, 1 January 2024
Line 7:		Line 7:
	##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query		##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
			*'''This can be reframed as the 'labor cost' over materials only is $120k.
	#This constitutes the [[Build Cost Formula]] in a typical scenario, based on markup over materials. Markup includes labor.		#This constitutes the [[Build Cost Formula]] in a typical scenario, based on markup over materials. Markup includes labor.
	#this is consistent with the [[NAHB Build Cost]] detail breakdown.		#this is consistent with the [[NAHB Build Cost]] detail breakdown.

Marcin: /* Industry Standard Construction */

2023-12-28T00:46:41Z

Industry Standard Construction

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:46, 28 December 2023
Line 7:		Line 7:
	##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query		##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
			#This constitutes the [[Build Cost Formula]] in a typical scenario, based on markup over materials. Markup includes labor.
	#this is consistent with the [[NAHB Build Cost]] detail breakdown.		#this is consistent with the [[NAHB Build Cost]] detail breakdown.

	==OSE Build Cost==		==OSE Build Cost==
	#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.		#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.

Marcin at 00:42, 28 December 2023

2023-12-28T00:42:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:42, 28 December 2023
Line 7:		Line 7:
	##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query		##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
	#this is consistent with the ~~NAHB build cost detail breakdown: see~~ [[~~Housing Statistics~~]]		#this is consistent with the [[NAHB Build Cost]] detail breakdown.
	==OSE Build Cost==		==OSE Build Cost==
	#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.		#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.

Marcin: /* Model */

2023-12-28T00:37:44Z

Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:37, 28 December 2023
Line 7:		Line 7:
	##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query		##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
			#this is consistent with the NAHB build cost detail breakdown: see [[Housing Statistics]]
	==OSE Build Cost==		==OSE Build Cost==
	#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.		#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.

Marcin: /* OSE Build Cost */

2023-12-28T00:36:32Z

OSE Build Cost

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:36, 28 December 2023
Line 8:		Line 8:
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
	==OSE Build Cost==		==OSE Build Cost==
	#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 75% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.		#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 85% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.
	##Highly skilled version: 500 hours		##Highly skilled version: 500 hours
	##Unskilled version: still doable, but takes 2000-3000 hours.		##Unskilled version: still doable, but takes 2000-3000 hours.

Marcin: /* Model */

2023-12-28T00:35:59Z

Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:35, 28 December 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=Model=		=Model=

	It took 2 years for me to understand this, and for us to prove ~~this 75% so far:~~		It took 2 years for me to understand this, and for us to prove a competitive build model to industry standards. Here is a detailed assessment of OSE Build Cost, compared to industry standards.
			==Industry Standard Construction==
	#Subcontractor margin is 54% typical , so 100% markup [https://www.invoiceowl.com/blog/general-contractor-markup/#:~:text=Most%20contractors%20are%20looking%20at,difference%20between%20margin%20and%20markup.]. This is industry standard.		#Subcontractor margin is 54% typical , so 100% markup [https://www.invoiceowl.com/blog/general-contractor-markup/#:~:text=Most%20contractors%20are%20looking%20at,difference%20between%20margin%20and%20markup.]. This is industry standard.
	#Contractor margin is 35%, or about 54% markup [https://www.gierschgroup.com/News/JobCosting]. This is industry standard.		#Contractor margin is 35%, or about 54% markup [https://www.gierschgroup.com/News/JobCosting]. This is industry standard.
	##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query		##Note that there is a lot of confusion regarding 'margin' and 'markup', and there are many numbers that float around the internet, but the above 100% and 54% markup are consistent with OSE's observations and online query
	#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.		#This means that if you compound these, the cost over materials (for labor of contractor and subcontractor) is 3.1x the cost of materials!!! To see this, imagine $60k in materials, the subs charge the general contractor $120k total, the contractor hiring the subs takes in 0.54*120k + $120k = $184k. This is just the production cost of a house, no land/legal/anything else.
			==OSE Build Cost==
	#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 75% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.		#By comparison, our cost is $60k+$25k (1000 hours *$25/hr doable with semi-trained workers, 75% data-backed build time assumption), plus our construction manager (construction manager industry standard pay is 5-15%), and in our case on the low end of 5% because of the reduced build time. So our apples-to apples comparison is $90k vs $184k house. This means, that without even considering 'profit' - we are at $94k net advantage per house over the competition. This $94k is the advantage we have for a small house 2 bath/3 bed of 1300 sf, and it will be greater than this for larger homes. Our cost/sf goes down for larger homes, while our cost advantage to the customer increases over the competition.
	##Highly skilled version: 500 hours		##Highly skilled version: 500 hours

Marcin: /* Model */

2023-12-23T11:10:12Z

Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:10, 23 December 2023
Line 14:		Line 14:

	Do you see any defects in my logic so far?		Do you see any defects in my logic so far?

			=Industry Standards=
			*10/10 rule of overhead/profit for a builder enterprise. [https://buildingadvisor.com/project-management/bidding/pricing-the-job-overhead-markup/#:~:text=Custom%20builders%20typically%20work%20on,rates%20for%20overhead%20and%20profit.]

	=Sequencing=		=Sequencing=

Marcin: /* Solar Concrete and Solar Steel */

2023-09-24T23:46:26Z

Solar Concrete and Solar Steel

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:46, 24 September 2023
Line 48:		Line 48:

	Here we decentralize to [[Solar Concrete]] via a 400 kW PV array at every campus.		Here we decentralize to [[Solar Concrete]] via a 400 kW PV array at every campus.
	*8% reduction of global warming via [[Solar Concrete]]		*8% reduction [https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk026QG9BbsZl0rNsBS9KmerMgczY_w%3A1602863734253&source=hp&ei=dsKJX6q8DJDYsAXHkpG4Cw&q=what+percentage+of+carbon+emissions+is+concrete+production&btnK=Google+Search&oq=how+to+configure+nvidia+geforce+gtx+1650+super+on+linux+mint&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIFCCEQoAEyBQghEKsCMgUIIRCrAjoOCAAQ6gIQtAIQmgEQ5QI6DgguELEDEMcBEKMCEJMCOggILhDHARCvAToLCC4QsQMQxwEQowI6CAgAELEDEIMBOggILhCxAxCDAToFCAAQsQM6AggAOgQIABAKOgYIABAWEB46CAghEBYQHRAeOgcIIRAKEKABUMsQWOmzAWD8tAFoBnAAeACAAeQGiAGhS5IBDTExLjQ3LjMuMi42LTGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEG&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwiqz4DcvLnsAhUQLKwKHUdJBLcQ4dUDCAk&uact=5] of global warming via [[Solar Concrete]]
	*		*11% reduction in global warming via [[Solar Steel]]. [https://www.sustainable-ships.org/stories/2022/carbon-footprint-steel#:~:text=Global%20steel%20emissions&text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20steel,it%20is%20closer%20to%207.2%25.]

	=Assumptions=		=Assumptions=