Programming for money

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

See if you can get one of those firms to build it for you for less than $4000 (R9).

Better make that $400:

Originally Posted by 2015 Game Manual

R10

No individual, non-KOP item shall have a value that exceeds $400 USD. The total cost of COMPONENTS purchased in bulk may exceed $400 USD as long as the cost of an individual COMPONENT does not exceed $400 USD. If a COTS item is part of a modular system that can be assembled in several possible configurations, then each individual module must fit within the price constraints defined in R10. If the modules are designed to assemble into a single configuration, and the assembly is functional in only that configuration, then the total cost of the complete assembly including all modules must fit within the price constraints defined in R10

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Better make that $400:

My assumption (possibly a bad one) was that a team willing to do this would work out specific invoicing carefully enough to get past the $400 limit.

[FrankJ]

I am not sure how selling programing time is any different than selling extrusions or a swerve drive module.

Of course as other have said, it becomes a COTs item and needs to meet all the COTs item rules. Including it needs to be an established company & ready to meet reasonable demands of all team? If the team modifies the code it then becomes a modified part. Not legal for next year's robot?

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

I am not sure how selling programing time is any different than selling extrusions or a swerve drive module.

Of course as other have said, it becomes a COTs item and needs to meet all the COTs item rules. Including it needs to be an established company & ready to meet reasonable demands of all team? If the team modifies the code it then becomes a modified part. Not legal for next year's robot?

How would this be any different than example 6? I could even argue that it doesn't even need to be included in the BOM. It's just 2 teams making donations to each other.

R11 The BOM cost of each non-KOP item must be calculated based on the unit fair market value for the material and/or labor, except for labor provided by Team members (including sponsor employees who are members of the team), members of other Teams, event provided Machine Shops and shipping.

EXAMPLE 1: A Team orders a custom bracket made by a company to the Team’s specification. The company’s material cost and normally charged labor rate apply.
EXAMPLE 2: A Team receives a donated sensor. The company would normally sell this item for $52 USD, which is therefore its fair market value.
EXAMPLE 3: Special price discounts from National Instruments and other FRC Suppliers are being offered to all FIRST Teams. The discounted purchase price of items from these sources may be used in the additional parts accounting calculations.
EXAMPLE 4: A Team purchases steel bar stock for $10 USD and has it machined by a local machine shop. The machine shop is not considered a team Sponsor, but donates two (2) hours of expended labor anyway. The Team must include the estimated normal cost of the labor as if it were paid to the machine shop, and add it to the $10 USD.
EXAMPLE 5: A Team purchases steel bar stock for $10 USD and has it machined by a local machine shop that is a recognized Sponsor of the Team. If the machinists are considered members of the Team, their labor costs do not apply. The total applicable cost for the part would be $10 USD.

It is in the best interests of the Teams and FIRST to form relationships with as many organizations as possible. Teams are encouraged to
be expansive in recruiting and including organizations in their team, as that exposes more people and organizations to FIRST. Recognizing
supporting companies as Sponsors of, and members in, the Team is encouraged, even if the involvement of the Sponsor is solely through the
donation of fabrication labor.

EXAMPLE 6: A Team purchases steel bar stock for $10 USD and has it machined by another Team. The total applicable cost for the part
would be $10 USD.
EXAMPLE 7: A Team purchases a 4 by 4 ft sheet of aluminum, but only uses a piece 10 by 10 in. on their ROBOT. The Team identifies a source that sells aluminum sheet in 1 by 1 ft pieces. The Team may cost their part on the basis of a 1 by 1 ft piece, even though they cut the piece from a larger bulk purchase. They do not have to account for the entire 4 by 4 ft bulk purchase item.

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

How would this be any different than example 6? I could even argue that it doesn't even need to be included in the BOM. It's just 2 teams making donations to each other.

The difference is the other Team is not donating time, they are charging for it.

On the other hand a literal reading of R11 doesn't address if the time is donated or paid for so maybe you are right. Only the GDC for future games knows for sure.

[nickmcski]

I don't this this need to go in the way of whether of not its gp, I know if a team needed help programming their robot or couldn't get their code working I would be more than willing to get their code working free of charge. And i'm sure I know a lot of other people would be willing to help each other out. I just think there are a lot of people that would be willing to do the same thing free of charge.

[JesseK]

IMO, it's a troll looking to poke at a larger subject which may actually have longer-term ramifications. I think the applicable rule which allows this is <R11>, as outlined in Example 1:

Originally Posted by <R11> Example 1

The company’s material cost and normally charged labor rate apply

FIRST would have a very hard time governing this. Paying for software development is a very tricky game in and of itself. What if the client isn't happy? Sure they'll get negative rep. but there goes a team's season. What if the client keeps changing what they want and therefore will never be happy? The programmer may not even get paid. What if such-and-such breaches the contract and now the team's school is being sued - is FIRST liable - parents are very litigation-happy, after all.

Even if a team can navigate that, the considerations do not stop there. Professional consultants with 10 years of documented positive testimonials can easily get $75-$100/hr for a high-value client. College students who've worked closed problems for 4 years, more like $16-$21/hr (pretty typical for an internship). FIRST alumni who did FRC programming for 4 years could probably net more than $16/hr due to the specialty, but how much more given the total cap on robot expenditures? What regional ramifications are there for programmer pay - a programmer who's worth $100/hr in San Fransisco isn't worth half that in rural Georgia simply due to cost of living adjustments, yet each must live within the $4k robot cost.

GP in this context is irrelevant. The client & consultant aren't competing with each other, nor is there necessarily a public disclosure of the details of an arrangement. It's a non-traditional and perhaps therefore frowned-upon" practice. Yet for hungry college kids who aren't looking to swindle a team, it could be a highly mutually beneficial experience.

A curious question IMO, is whether or not it's GP for Team A to enact a non-compete agreement with a programmer so the programmer doesn't help Team B who's 10 minutes down the road.

Edit - totally missed that this is a team being paid for another team's services. If there are governing entities involved (like school districts) add another layer of bureaucracy, yet otherwise the same issues apply. Otherwise the Team performing the services becomes the "company" in <R11>.