A friend of mine presented me with a situation. Basically they have an employee who MUST learn basic computer skills that are lacking in order to retain their job. They asked me what I would charge for instructing that individual, I quoted a price of $25 for an hour's session, and I would charge less for additional hours if followup instruction was needed. I could tell they weren't crazy about the price, but I've learned to put a value on my time, and that hour's instruction must take into account transportation time and preparation time, which, in my opinion, make the offer a value.

On another thread someone asked about setting up someone's wireless service with third party hardware, and I explained the pitfalls. The individual wants to avoid paying $100 labor to the contractor the ISP uses. A $100 labor charge that, in my opinion, is also a value.

It is interesting that people will foot $65 an hour on up for a mechanic that demands they deliver their vehicle to the worksite, yet flinch at paying similar costs for PC repair that is ONSITE. The IT pro has similar costs to the mechanic's: we, too, must pay for tools, certifications, and must keep current with the newest technology. Yet the mechanic's time is more valued.

The person who wrote the article that started me thinking about this was certainly thinking; at least by asking, they are potentially avoiding pitfalls, but they may well be getting into it over their heads. Can they make a patch cable? Can they make a crossover if needed? Can they make them well enough that they won't have crosstalk issues once the cable is made? Can they crimp coax cables for an antenna? Can they find the best signal or the best tower with which to associate? These are all things they are buying with their $100 payment; someone who is already prepared to handle these things.

I'm the world's biggest cheapskate. But I came to realize long ago that sometimes being a cheapskate means you look for the best deal, which is not necessarily the lowest financial cost.