Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-18-2013, 02:36 PM
meets1's Avatar
meets1 meets1 is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NW, Iowa
Posts: 3,578
What is the correct ratio? 25-3-10 as an example?

I have two new guys in business this year. 340k property I got out bid. There ratio was off the board and as we bid were made to give the 25-3-10(example) on the bid sheet per app. Now I have been doing this since 1992 so I have been in the game but suddenly these people are questioning my ability compared to the new guy that got the bid..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-18-2013, 09:41 PM
DA Quality Lawn & YS's Avatar
DA Quality Lawn & YS DA Quality Lawn & YS is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 7,362
I guess I am not following. The property mgr/owner specified what fert you must use? Wow if thats the case probably best you didn't get them.
__________________
7x14 Stealth SE Enclosed with 48" side ramp
08 Toro Z400 48" deck, 21HP Kaw with EZ Vac twin bag
09 Exmark Turf Tracer HP 36"
21" Toro SR4 Super Recycler
Stihl KM90 Kombi w/ straight shaft trimmer & tiller heads
Husqvarna 125B Blower
PG Magnum
Turfco XT5 Aerator
Turfco LS-22 Overseeder

I can do all things through Him who gives me strength.
Philippians 4:13
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-18-2013, 09:59 PM
RigglePLC's Avatar
RigglePLC RigglePLC is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posts: 8,815
Naturally the other salesman told them you were not giving them good fertilizer and suggested that the ratio he used was the best. You could counter with higher ratio, for instance say 28-3-10.
Better still, counter with a top laboratory soil test that recommended 1 pound of nitrogen with at least 50 percent of nitrogen as slow-release. Explain the main determinant of quality is the percentage of slow release. Soil test would likely recommend no phosphorus. Explain how phosphorus was a water contaminant, and how they could get in trouble if too much phosphorus washed off paved surfaces and got into the water. Not to mention how if any got tracked into the pool or blew in--then they would need expensive pool treatments. There is no way to remove phosphorus except to drain the pool.
Also tell them you are willing to let them count the number of bags on your truck. In fact you encourage same.

If you are forced to go cheap--you can have a fert elevator blend some 25-3-10 with zero slow release--very cheap.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-19-2013, 10:42 AM
Smallaxe Smallaxe is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 9,746
I doubt there are many lawns that require anything other than N throughout the growing season, and I agree with Riggle that 50% slow release is probably a good idea...
__________________
*
Now that I know that clay's texture(platelets) has nothing to do with water infiltration, percolation, or drainage
,,, I wonder what does...
*
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-21-2013, 12:19 AM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by RigglePLC View Post
Explain the main determinant of quality is the percentage of slow release.
Why is the proportion of slow-release N the main determinant of quality?

I've had some very high quality fertilizer than had 0% slow release an I've had some very poor quality fertilizer that had 50% slow release.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-21-2013, 06:29 AM
Raymond S. Raymond S. is online now
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 862
Maybe he was referencing the quality of the results? No slow release,more apps, color fade, cheaper...slow release, less apps, consistent color, more expensive, etc.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-22-2013, 11:20 AM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond S. View Post
Maybe he was referencing the quality of the results? No slow release,more apps, color fade, cheaper...slow release, less apps, consistent color, more expensive, etc.
Posted via Mobile Device
I think I know what he was hinting at, but the post didn't make much sense. I've seen top-notch lawn quality on 100% soluble applications and I've seen poor lawn quality on 50% slow-release apps. The amount of slow-release has NOTHING to do with lawn quality! Slow-release N is all about service intervals -- it is all about the provider, NOT the customer. I don't most customers would care what you used or how often you had to make apps, so long as their grass is green and the weeds are gone.

A few other points:

1) Counter with a higher ratio
The ratio doesn't matter to the customer. You can get the same results with a 17-2-5 as you can get with a 34-4-10. What matters is the amount of nutrient, NOT the analysis on the bag.

2) Counter with a top laboratory soil test
The basic state lab test is no different in quality than the private lab test. A customer usually hasn't heard of any testing lab names, but they've all heard of their state's land grant school.

3) Explain how phosphorus was a water contaminant
Do we really need to go there? If we tell a customer that something we've used or could use can be a water contaiminant, they're going to wonder what else we're using that may contaminate something. Why not just say that you're going to apply only what the lawn needs? Maybe you can say that you don't want to charge the customer for nutrient that the lawn doesn't need.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:44 PM.

Page generated in 0.06894 seconds with 9 queries