Excellent analogy. Too bad the VM's do not seem to consider that. The usual charade of their negotiating volume discounts is a case in point. I can not begin to count the number of occasions on which I was asked for a volume discount in which the VM was not able to a offer minimum number of orders per week in return to justify the discount. One of them told me that they would assign all their Connecticut orders to me in return for a discount. The problem was that they could not quantify "all their Connecticut orders". They seem to have some difficulty understanding that they are asking the abstractor to commit to a reduced dollar value each week without being able to provide a corresponding commitment for weekly volume. It really is not a difficult a concept to comprehend.

The flip side of the coin is that any volume whether definite or indefinite often fades or disappears with several weeks or months , but the abstractor is still expected to deliver on the discount price. Unfortunately so many abstractors have fallen into this trap. Once the price is agreed it is nearly impossible to raise the price.

We ended the volume discount system several years ago. Instead we off a discount connected to our receipt of the closing for which the search was performed. Seems to work. The VM gets the reduced price on the search without having to commit to the guaranty of weekly volume. We make up the difference on the higher priced closing. There is a lot more room to negotiate with respect to the price of the closing than with the price of the search.

While the VM's may not be able to afford to be loyal...their greed and self interest may be a valuable tool that can be used to the abstractor's advantage.