I'm having a granite countertop put in and would like to know the
experiences that others have had.

What is the conventional way to measure "square feet" to be multiplied
by the advertised price per square foot?

This is a description of the method my contractor is using

(1) First divide the counter up into rectangles in the obvious way --
the piece along each wall is a rectangle, the backsplash pieces are
rectangles, etc.

(2) Calculate the square footage of each rectangle.

(3) For the corner cabinet, which is a 33 inch corner, calculate it as
a 33' by 33' square. (In other words, add the triangular piece they're
going to lop off.

(4) Round each measurement up to the next square foot.

(5) Add them up.

The devil is in the details -- number 4 in particular -- at $60 a
square foot, the rounding up makes a big difference.

Does anyone know if this is standard?

Thanks very much.

CCS

"ccsikyr" wrote in message
The devil is in the details -- number 4 in particular -- at $60 a
square foot, the rounding up makes a big difference.

Does anyone know if this is standard?

It is standard practice in many industries to round up and to charge for any
scrap.

The outfit buying the material will generally have to buy his material in 1'
increments. If you need only 7' 4", what happens to the other 8"? Probably
scrap. Sometimes it is salvageable by someone for making a clock or
whatever, buy you don't build a business on "maybe" uses for cut offs.

In some cases countertop is price by the linear inch. Results will be the
same. On a given project that needs plywood, it comes in 4 x 8 sheets, or
32 square feet. and let's just say it is $1 a sq. ft. Let's say you need
20 feet. I have to buy 32 feet Would you feel better if I charge you a
flat $32 for material or if I charged you $1.60 per square foot? Either
way, you pay for what I can't use.

"ccsikyr" wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm having a granite countertop put in and would like to know the
experiences that others have had.

What is the conventional way to measure "square feet" to be multiplied
by the advertised price per square foot?

This is a description of the method my contractor is using

(1) First divide the counter up into rectangles in the obvious way --
the piece along each wall is a rectangle, the backsplash pieces are
rectangles, etc.

(2) Calculate the square footage of each rectangle.

(3) For the corner cabinet, which is a 33 inch corner, calculate it as
a 33' by 33' square. (In other words, add the triangular piece they're
going to lop off.

(4) Round each measurement up to the next square foot.

(5) Add them up.

The devil is in the details -- number 4 in particular -- at $60 a
square foot, the rounding up makes a big difference.

Does anyone know if this is standard?

Thanks very much.

CCS

A friend of mine just installed granite in his kitchen. Length X width then
they added 10%. That is the square feet that he paid for. $60 is competive.
My friend paid $6k finished and installed for 32 feet including the 5 inch
back splash.

Like boats and air planes if you have to ask you cant afford them.

In article 1139514357.343581.263200
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com,
says...
I'm having a granite countertop put in and would like to know the
experiences that others have had.

What is the conventional way to measure "square feet" to be multiplied
by the advertised price per square foot?

I would not play the $/SF game. Have them quote
total price for the job. Compare bid totals, you do
not care how they arrived at the bid total.

How much did your car cost per tire?

Thanks for the comments.

I agree with MikeP, what matters in the end is how much you pay for the
job.
At the moment, in the middle of a kitchen remodel, it's a bit hard to
get more bids for the counter.

The problem I have is assessing a two-part price. One part is the
price per square foot and the other is "square feet". The price per
square foot came in reasonable relative to what others are charging.
My question is how standardized the "square feet" measurement approach
is.

As Edwin said, the contractor can't return the scrap materials, so some
consideration for that is reasonable. SQLit's friend had a bid that
added 10%. In my case the square footage goes from 67 square feet when
measured as actual surface to 80 square feet using their method.
That's about 20%. Seems a bit rich to me, but what do I know?

I plan on asking the counter guys to give me the scraps and figure out
ex post what they used, but that doesn't help me now.

Any other thoughts?

On 2/9/06 10:04 PM, in article
, "ccsikyr"
wrote:

I agree with MikeP, what matters in the end is how much you pay for the
job.

And the quality of the job. That should come before concern about price,
especially considering the number of junior-bacon cheeseburgers you're
talking about. You don't want to be wishing later on that you'd spent more
for a better job.

Michael Keefe wrote:
On 2/9/06 10:04 PM, in article
, "ccsikyr"
wrote:

I agree with MikeP, what matters in the end is how much you pay for the
job.

And the quality of the job. That should come before concern about price,
especially considering the number of junior-bacon cheeseburgers you're
talking about. You don't want to be wishing later on that you'd spent more
for a better job.

Naturally, and the installer is very highly rated for quality. I don't
mind paying for that and fully expect I will.

I do object, however, to the price popping up by $950 because of this
rounding approach.

I called three well-regarded other installers this morning, and all
reported that you pay for square feet you use, period, with the
exception of the cutout for the sink, which you pay for. They all
indicated that the bottom line cost from the scrappage is included in
the price they set per square feet.