|
Cambistat
and the Business of Pruning
Cambistat vs Pruning
The Dollars and Sense
Applying Cambistat is more profitable than pruning and more cost effective for
your client. Applying Cambistat is very quick and easy – (however
it does require training and a knowledge of tree species).
It is at least 3 times more profitable per hour than pruning.
Cambistat - More Profitable than Pruning
Cambistat application is very profitable. The average company
brings in revenue of between $200 - $300 per hour of production
when doing Cambistat applications. This is because it can
be done very quickly and efficiently. It also requires low
overhead, so expenses are significantly less than pruning
trees. Compare this to pruning, where the average company
makes between $60 and $90 per hour of production. Pruning
also requires a large investment in equipment, insurance,
and specialized labor. Add to this dumping fees and limited
production based on limits of crew capacity, and it becomes
clear that Cambistat is far better for your company’s bottom
line.
Cambistat is Very Cost Effective for Clients
Pruning is more expensive than Cambistat application. On an
average 25” diameter oak your client will pay around $500
for pruning while it will cost them around $200 for a Cambistat
application. In addition, they get all the other benefits
Cambistat brings to their tree.
Is Your Company Stuck In the Pruning Mode?
New technology has been changing the world very quickly. This
means that companies also need to change by educating themselves
and learning new ways of doing things.
|
|
| |
|
|
How the Railroads Missed an Opportunity
Imagine if the railroads at the beginning of the 20th century
had seen the revolution coming in transportation. In their
heyday, the railroads controlled most long distance passenger
traffic and distribution of products. However, as time and
change went on, they made a very critical mistake. They saw
themselves as being in the railroad business – not the transportation
business. Thus they lost most of their business to trucking
and airplanes. If they had been more open to change, they
would have invested in these new methods of transporting people
and goods. But they did not and today most railroads are struggling
for their very survival.
|
 |
|
|
|
