Conference 7.286::digital

    True story : CS guy answers phone, "Hello".
    "We bought your hardware and software and are following the
    instructions in the manual.  It says to load the three floppy
    disks into the machine.  We could only get two in."
    CS guy, "Can you get any out ?"
    "Gee it doesn't mention that.  Let me try.  Mumble...mumble.
    Nope.  They don't come out.  What should we do with the third
    one ?"
    CS guy (from under desk), "Uh, where are you now ?"
    "Page 3..."
    

    
    .-1
    
    humm..ok, i bite, where is the catch?
    
    \nasser

    Fantastic.
    
    I remember some 10 years ago.  The customer was instructed to
    file his 8inch floppies.... When he wanted to load them again
    he had problems and called. support "... can't read the floppies..."
    After long conversation the problem was found. He in fact punched
    holes in the floppies and filed them in a binder....
    

    Maybe the DECMIGRATE people should get crankin' on the Sun translator!
    
    Mark

    See also NOVA::WAR_STORY and NESFA::GOLDEN_TURKEY for similar stories.
    
    I believe the point of the basenote author was that he was alarm that a
    Digital computer sales rep would be ignorant of such a basic fact as
    binary incompatibility.

    DECmigrate is actually looking at a moving Sun apps to Alpha OSF. 
    If anyone sees revenue associated with this they should pass it
    on to DECmigrate product management. 
    
    John

    
    Re: DECmigrate from Sun
    
    I don't think this will fly.  If I have a customer running Suns in a 
    production environment, I can't expect him to use something like 
    AutoCAD or Frame run through DECmigrate and expect the software vendors
    to support it.
    
    If the customer is in a development environment, he has source and will
    recompile.
    
    -Ed
    

    Sun has 80% of the installed Unix WS base. This means that any change
    in the user's environment represents an obstacle to change (i.e.,
    keyboard layout). I would think that any tools that make the transition
    seem painless are worthwhile. 
    
    A translator for SUN seems worthwhile and I would think it would bring
    service opportunities. Most importantly though, it would send a signal
    to our potential new customers that we might offer an even less painful
    alternative than that of moving to Solaris. It would give them an
    "excuse" to move to Alpha rather than Solaris if it is perceived as
    less painful.

For those that have not seen the information regarding the recently introduced
SUN Trade-in program from Digital I am entering this note.

The following is being cross-posted from the DWT Notes Conference.  If you have
any questions please feel free to contact me.  Please remember that the DEC
3000 Model 300, 300L and 500X are not "officially" announced until 20 April
1993 but you are allowed to talk to customers today about the specific details
of this trade-in program.

Bob Newman
APS Marketing Technical Consultant
Workstation Upgrade Programs


                <<< TENAYA::USER$4:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DWT.NOTE;2 >>>
                         -< Digital Worksystems Teams >-
================================================================================
Note 4640.0                   SUN TRADE IN PROGRAM                       1 reply
TENAYA::HEATHER                               169 lines  31-MAR-1993 09:54:11.26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         U.S. PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT



PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS


	*****************************************************************	
	*  Unprecedented upgrades to ALPHA AXP workstations launched!	*
	*                                             			*
	* 	- Aggressive pricing on ALL upgrades to 		*
	*	  Alpha AXP Workstations from:                      	*
	*	       	SPARCstation 10                             	*
	*               SPARCstation 2                               	*
	*               SPARCstation IPX, ELC, IPC, SLC               	*
	*               SPARCstation 1, 1+                             	*
	*                                                               *
	*     	- 1.5 to 3 TIMES the performance of a SS10/30           *
	*         at 1/2 the price 					*
	*								*
	*	- Offer valid in the US through July 2nd, 1993		*
	*								*
	*****************************************************************



         UP TO $10,000 TRADE-IN VALUE ON YOUR OLD SUN EQUIPMENT!

TRADE IN YOUR:
          -SPARCstation ELC              SPARCstation SLC
              -SPARCstation IPX              SPARCstation IPC
                  -SPARCstation 1, 1+            SPARCstation 2

               ........even your SPARCstation 10!


BUY!                                   .......Trade-in Values......         

  ALPHA AXP WORKSTATION		      NEW CUSTOMER   EXISTING DIGITAL CUSTOMER
                                       Has no DBA      Has existing DBA
DEC 3000 MODEL 300 AXP
              16" Color Monitor:        $2,000            $2,000   
              19" Color Monitor:        $3,000            $3,000

DEC 3000 MODEL 400 AXP		        $6,000           Additional 20% *

DEC 3000 MODEL 500 AXP		       $10,000           "       "       "    

DEC 3000 MODEL 500X AXP		       $10,000           "       "       "


PROMOTIONAL PRICING EFFECTIVE THRU 7/2/93! 

	       ********************************************
	       *FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL 1-800-DEC-ISIT *
	       ********************************************
Sales Update 

SUN TRADE-IN PROGRAM:  "SUNDOWN"


     Fact:  Alpha outperforms SUN in all classes of workstations

     Fact:  All SUN OSII customers are going to have to convert 
            their software

     Fact:  Digital as the Services and the Hardware to make
            your customer happier than they ever.

     Fact:  Dollar for Dollar,Spec for Spec, SUN can't beat our new trade-in
            program.


            If you have SUN in your installed base see, if this
                     program can help you out.  

                            ********

The following trade-in program has been approved by U.S. Operations for 
trade-in of Sun equipment between April 1, 1993 and the end of the fiscal 
year July 2, 1993.

We are offering two different trade-in values depending upon whether the 
prospect has a DEC Digital Business Agreement (DBA) or not. The program is 
specifically targeting the current Sun installed base using the SPARC
architecture. We are not offering trade-in values for Sun's Intel or 
Motorola based systems.

1)What can be traded-in:

SPARC ELC     SPARC 1, 1+
SPARC SLC     SPARC 2
SPARC IPX     even the SPARC 10
SPARC IPC

2)WHAT ARE THE TRADE-IN VALUES?

  ALPHA AXP WORKSTATION		      NEW CUSTOMER   EXISTING CUSTOMER
                                       Has no DBA    Has existing DBA
DEC 3000 Model 300 AXP
             16" Color Monitor:           $2K           $2K (see 1)
             19" Color Monitor:           $3K           $3K

DEC 3000 Model 400 AXP
             19" Color Monitor            $6K           Additional 20%(see 2)

DEC 3000 Model 500 AXP
             19" Color Monitor           $10K           "     "     "

DEC 3000 Model 500X AXP
             19" Color Monitor           $10K           "     "     "

Note 1:  The DEC 3000 Model 300 AXP (Pelican) is non-DBA discountable.

Note 2: For the 3000 Models 400, 500, 500X use the following formula to 
calculate the trade-in value for prospects who also have a DEC DBA.

Subtract the existing DBA discount from the SLP giving you a net selling price.
Take 20% off the net selling price (this is the trade-in value) to calculate a 
final selling price.

  SLP:  =  $18,495
  Less DBA - 1,850  (Assume in this example the DBA is 10%)
  Net Price:16,645
  Trade-in: -3,329  (20% of the net price)

  Final: $13,316  



3)Other terms and conditions:

-Program ends: July 2, 1993

-Allowance  code: TBD

-Must return old Sun Workstations within 60 days of installation of Alpha AXP
 workstation thru the nomal RA process.  Extensions up to 12 months can be 
 made using a HURA.  See your local Admin. support.
 
-No special corporate additional discounts beyond the standard DBA apply.

-Education, See your TEI price list.

-Can not be used with GSA discounts, mut be open market bid.

4)This program has been made created so that all of our channel partners
  may offer this to their installed base.  Aditional allowances are being
  made available so they may participate.  Contact your local 
  channels business manager for information on product adders and additional 
  program information.
 
5)Can be ordered thru Sales or Decdirect
    
	       ********************************************
	       *FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL 1-800-DEC-ISIT *
	       ********************************************


================================================================================
Note 4640.1                   SUN TRADE IN PROGRAM                        1 of 1
CSTEAM::FARLEY "Megabucks Winner Wannabee"      9 lines  31-MAR-1993 10:32:53.59
                         -< Here's the allowance code >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ALLOWANCE CODE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS "TBD"
    
    HAS BEEN DETERMINED.  IT IS - 900375
    
    Kevin Farley
    Competitive Hotline
    1-800-DEC IS IT
    

    
    The bigger problem is that everyone can "revenue associated" with
    something.  Since Digital failed to get the market share of the UNIX
    workstation market in the years 1988-1992, that creates the opportunity
    to "win some back" in 1993.

    The silver lining to every cloud, in other words.

    The bigger problem is that senior managers who should be in the middle
    of executing a plan to "capture revenue", have resigned or are
    resigning, or are in the middle of salvaging their career. 

    Migration of Sun's installed base is a laudable goal.  There's only one
    problem: Sun wants to hold onto their customers and grab a few of ours.

    This isn't a slam at DECmigrate:  It's a terrific, focused program with
    well-written SALES UPDATE articles that tell you exactly what it does.
    

Re: a few back

I haven't been able to access GOLDEN_TURKEY confernce for months now...

    Totally amazing story...Sad to sad I am not totally shocked though.
    
    Stick with it Ed and send the rep to Unix Bootcamp.  If it
    still exists. ;)
    
    Sandy
    
    

	This is one of a number of stories we could probably all tell.
	I beleive that the main issue here is that we have fewer sales
	support people and less technical sales reps.  There is definately
	something *WRONG* with this picture.

	If my sources are right, Sun runs about 1 sales support person
	to 2 or 3 sales reps.  Might be a little different in various
	geographies, but their sales reps are smarter than the average
	bear as well.  Aren't we 'right sizing' our sales support force
	in the wrong direction!?!

	anne

>>	geographies, but their sales reps are smarter than the average
>>	bear as well. 

I don't know about this.  Since they sell only a handful of products, it isn't
too difficult to appear more knowledgable than DEC reps who need to know
literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products and services.

    Re: 1
    
    Geez, if all CS reps replied to customer requests like you said, there
    would not be a DEC, since its the Service Reps who are onsite and 
    dealing with the people who buy our equipment everyday. 
    
    You need to speak about the Reps whose customers say if they get
    TFSO'd, they will buy from another vendor (it's happening). If you
    need some outstanding customer letters, praising Reps. for working
    all night, New Years Eve, other holiday's, let me know, our
    district needs to build a facility just to house these!
    
    Please don't categorize us all as in your reply. It's not fair
    to the majority of us who do an excellent job with our account base.
    
    BTW, the CS rep you told us about in your reply was TFSO'd (I hope)!!
    
    pjc
    

    > I don't think this will fly.  If I have a customer running Suns in a 
    > production environment, I can't expect him to use something like 
    > AutoCAD or Frame run through DECmigrate and expect the software vendors
    > to support it.
    
    Two answers to this:
    
    (1) It probably wouldn't be such a big deal for these customers to
    trade-in their Sun licenses for third-party software products for
    Alpha licenses.  Digital should look into facilitating this process.
    
    (2) It turns out that several software vendors *themselves* are
    selling and supporting translated versions of their products.
    Admittedly, they're translated ULTRIX versions, not translated
    SunOS versions, but it shows that DECmigrate has already established
    credibility with these vendors.
    
    And yes, the DECmigrate group is currently investigating Sun->Alpha
    translation among other options.  This introduces several technical
    problems that we did not have to deal with in previous DECmigrate 
    products (the endian issue, for one thing).
    

    FYI-there is a product by an ISV in NJ called UniPress that has a
    product called XVIEW that will allow Sun View applications to run on
    Alpha systems. If anyone is interested they are at 908-287-2100.
    
    

Ed,

Don't be so rash to sterotype, as you did in .0 and someone else did in .1 
Collectively, WE ALL ARE DIGITAL.  While I'd like to shake my head at your 
less-than-amusing anecdote - I find terms like "salescritter" and 
"sales-slime" (which you didn't use) VERY offensive.  I spent 5+ years as a 
systems manager, 2 years in Advisory support, 2 years as a worksystems 
sales specialist, and another 2 years in my current role of Corporate 
Account Manager.

I sold over $10M in MIPS UNIX boxes, and can install them, remote boot 
them, write C, C++, and SHELL scripts, setup NFS & TCP/IP, run VMS clusters 
etc ....

Perhaps ED, you should consider a career in sales!  Despite your abvious 
technical prowess you could use the opportunity to learn a few new skills.  
Like, the difference between an operating and a capital lease, how to 
calculate I.R.R. & R.O.I., cold-call Vice Presidents, and how to sell VALUE 
in a value-less model, how to charge $1000+ a day for consulting, how to 
book an order when AQS and other systems are down, etc ...

I find it too easy for people to fire missiles between Sales, Sales 
Support, Customer Service, Order Admin, Finance, and so on ...

Take the plunge Ed, customers want more technical account managers.  Just 
go and assume a $4M budget like I did years ago.  You might even put a 
little extra change in your pocket$.

Good Luck,
Mario

    Re .-1
    
    Well said. I'm in engineering and it always annoys me when I see people
    trash our sales force. I think if people bothered to find out you'd see
    how HARD their job is.
    
    	- They're expected to be generalists.
    	- Being generalists they need QUICK access to ACCURATE information.
    	  Two things that the antiquated support systems in Digital don't
    	  deliver at all well.
    	- They have to fight to quote products correctly. Nothing in place
    	  to make it easy. Corporate information that is out of date
    	- Corporate people don't call them back
    	- There are no well defined processes to follow to get help. And
    	  the processes there are take too long to work which fosters
    	  people to go around the system.
    	- They don't have clear direction on strategies to follow
    	- They're measured on CERTs per second not on developing good
          business
    
    So .0 next time you want to trash our sales force think about the
    barriers they have to doing a good job. They're not given the tools to do
    their job. It's like asking an engineer to design a complex computer
    system using a PDP 1 and a paintbrush.
    
    Dave

    
    RE: Dave-They're measured on CERTS per second.
    
    
    You've got that right, and it is the same throughout many organizations
    in the corporation.  Some of management cannot see 2" in front of them. 
    We've been doing this and micro-managing things for so long now, that I
    wonder if management knows what long term means.  Let's stop managing
    week by week, month by month and quarter by quarter.  After all, we are
    here for the long haul.........aren't we?
    
    
    Mike

                                           
    Re: .19
    
    Sorry if you took offense at "salescritter"  I do know the difference 
    between talented sales PROFESSIONALS and those lesser forms of life
    that carry the same job codes.
    
    I'd LOVE to have a crack at selling if I honestly though that I'd get a
    fair shake at the job.  Unfortunately, politics plays too big a role in
    the selling game.  With all the "anti-engineering/anti-Ken Olsen"
    feelings around the company, It is highly unlikely we'll be moving
    technical persons into sales roles anytime soon.  
    
    I appreciate your comments I am sensitive to how difficult the job is.
    Unfortunately, there are too few people out here with your talents
    
    Re: .20
    
    I don't take comments from people who consider UNIX a "mere page from
    history" too seriously.  I will agree with your analysis as far as 
    Digital providing a poor support infrastructure.  Quite perceptive for
    someone whose personal_name is helping to perpetuate the "DEC hates
    UNIX" image.
    
    Having said that, I've worked in sales support EXCLUSIVELY for
    the last 10 years both within Digital and outside. I think I understand
    the issues you mentioned and have felt their influence directly.  Your
    analogy with asking engineers to work with obsolete tools misses the 
    mark.  It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools. 
    
    Please note I am not bashing *ALL* salespeople.  Some of the best I've 
    ever worked with work for or have worked for Digital.  I will say that
    I've also seen some of the worst wearing Digital badges.  The story was
    the same when I was at Unisys.  For some reason the bigger a company
    gets, the greater the likelihood non-nutitive filler exists.
    
    To lay the blame on the fact that Digital salesreps are "generalists"
    misses the mark as well.  The blame rests squarely on the "DECnocentric"
    attitude that prevails.  Too many got into the habit of simply sitting
    back and waiting for VAX orders and upgrades to come in.  Too many
    simply are parroting words like "open" and "client-server" and expect
    to have customers beat down the doors.  A good salesrep can learn the
    basics of UNIX/Open-Systems technology in a day.  Unfortunately, we
    have too many who are either too lazy or lack the mental capacity to 
    do so.  Even worse, we have plenty who consider NT to be the panacea 
    because they see it as VMS on steriods.
    
    -Ed
    

    
    Re:
    
>    I don't take comments from people who consider UNIX a "mere page from
>    history" too seriously.  I will agree with your analysis as far as 
>    Digital providing a poor support infrastructure.  Quite perceptive for
>    someone whose personal_name is helping to perpetuate the "DEC hates
>    UNIX" image.
 
    Today I agree that my personal name is not accurate. But you miss the
    point of it. It is meant to be a quote from the future. If in 5 years
    UNIX closes the gap with the PC operating systems (today I believe
    there is a 100 to 1 factor of CPUs shipped with DOS as against UNIX)
    then I'll agree I was wrong.
       
>    Your
>    analogy with asking engineers to work with obsolete tools misses the 
>    mark.  It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools. 
 
    I would agree if the exact same set of tools was being successfully
    used by others.
    
    Re:
    
>    Too many
>    simply are parroting words like "open" and "client-server" and expect
>    to have customers beat down the doors.  A good salesrep can learn the
>    basics of UNIX/Open-Systems technology in a day.
    
    The definition of "Open" is pretty simple. It means, if I can get a
    solution to my problem cheaper somewhere else then your solution is
    not "Open". SUN microsystems were masters at selling proprietary
    solutions as "Open". They succeeded and Digital failed because Digital
    was way off the price performance curve. It had nothing to do with the
    fact that Sun sold Unix.
    
    Also all the O/S flaming is missing the point. The other message from
    my personal name is that the underlying O/S is immaterial and the
    battle will be higher up the stack. It's just my personal opinion that
    a more feature rich system such as NT that was designed in the 80s and
    not the 60s/70s stands a better chance of helping people move up the
    stack.
    
    And finally I still maintain that given the right environment most of
    our sales force could be as competive as if not more competitive than
    others in the industry.
    
    Dave

          
    Sorry if this has turned into an OS war.
        
    >Today I agree that my personal name is not accurate. But you miss the
    >point of it. It is meant to be a quote from the future. If in 5 years
    >UNIX closes the gap with the PC operating systems (today I believe
    >there is a 100 to 1 factor of CPUs shipped with DOS as against UNIX)
    >then I'll agree I was wrong.
    
    Regardless.  It smacks of typical DEC UNIX-Bashing.   Just because 
    something sells in large volumes it does not follow that it is a
    panacea.  
       
>>    Your
>>    analogy with asking engineers to work with obsolete tools misses the 
>>    mark.  It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools. 
 
    >I would agree if the exact same set of tools was being successfully
    >used by others.
    
    There are people who are making their numbers.  If that were not the
    case, there would be no "Circle Of Excellence" or "DEC100" attendees.
    
    Re:
    
>>    Too many
>>    simply are parroting words like "open" and "client-server" and expect
>>    to have customers beat down the doors.  A good salesrep can learn the
>>    basics of UNIX/Open-Systems technology in a day.
    
    >The definition of "Open" is pretty simple. It means, if I can get a
    >solution to my problem cheaper somewhere else then your solution is
    >not "Open". SUN microsystems were masters at selling proprietary
    >solutions as "Open". They succeeded and Digital failed because Digital
    >was way off the price performance curve. It had nothing to do with the
    >fact that Sun sold Unix.
    
    This is without a doubt the most infantile statement I've ever heard.  
    Performance was indeed an issue, but there were plenty of other reasons
    why UNIX is considered more open than other OS's.  Openess involves
    things like portability and investment protection.  These are achieved
    through standards.  Low prices are the result of standardization and
    openness.  A cheap solution is useless unless I can use it.  
    
    Are you aware of how much C code came from VAX UNIX systems and was
    ported to MC68000 Sun systems in the early 80's?  Do you know that the
    price of those cheap Sun machines would have been irrelevant had those
    early Sun machines been running CPM?  Do you know how many companies
    were producing cheaper microcomputers than Sun was in the early 80's? 
    
    No, price does not equate with openness.  Admittedly, Sun has managed
    to push many propreitary products into the marketplace with varying
    success. But, only those who are jealous of Sun's success or have an
    irrational hate for UNIX dwell on this.
     
    >Also all the O/S flaming is missing the point. The other message from
    >my personal name is that the underlying O/S is immaterial and the
    >battle will be higher up the stack. It's just my personal opinion that
    >a more feature rich system such as NT that was designed in the 80s and
    >not the 60s/70s stands a better chance of helping people move up the
    >stack.
    
    Nice try.  Unfortunately, we need revenue TODAY.  You're wrong if you 
    think you can sell NT to someone who is considering putting together 
    a downsizing effort from IBM CICS system and needs to cut over live
    within the next year or so.  Also, what makes you think UNIX is
    standing still?  In fact, care to tell me what UNIX is?  is MACH 
    UNIX? Is MACH 1960's/70's technology? 
    
    Finally, You'll notice that NT gets it's "Openness" by providing
    UNIX APIs.  Also those interfaces "higher up the stack" (I assume you
    are referring to DCE and such) are being initially developed on UNIX.
    Oh I forgot, DCE is crap to the NT bigots of the world....  VIVA WOSA
    OLE'!!
    
    No Dave, you'd be hard pressed to make your CERT numbers selling NT 
    at Digital in the next two years or so.  Not many customers I know are
    willing to bet their businesses on an immature product from a bunch of
    egomaniacs in Redmond.  Yes I realize that things may be different in
    about five years.
    
    >And finally I still maintain that given the right environment most of
    >our sales force could be as competive as if not more competitive than
    >others in the industry.
    
    Please describe the environment you envision.  If you mean having as
    many UNIX support people in the field as Sun and HP, I'm all ears.
    If we simply spent as much time getting geared up to support UNIX sales
    as we are NT, we might have been profitable THIS quarter instead of
    having to slash more headcount to make our numbers in June.
    
    -Ed
    
    
    
    
    
  

I believe there are several other things that keep our sales reps from 
being as effective as they could be.  

I attended a sales training for the Aerospace, Defense Electronics and 
Government (ADEG) group where there was an excellent speaker talking about 
bulding relationships, consultitive selling, understanding the business 
problem etc.  When the time came for a Q&A, one of the questions was "have 
you talked to our management, and if so, what did they think?"  His simple 
answer was that he had talked to them, they did not understand that 
customers wanted solutions to business problems, not necessarily hardware.

I am trying to get sales reps to work with me on a couple accounts, there 
is no method to even assign reps to opportunities with "competitors."  If 
they are a mini-computer vendor they are automatically a competitor, 
regardless of what we are trying to sell them.  I consider HP, Sun, Unisys, 
and IBM qualified leads when they call asking for some software that we 
make that runs on their boxes.  We still think we are exclusively a HW 
manufacturer.

We ask sales people to use tools that are atrocious on a good day.  Have 
you ever tried to get the DBA number for a customer?  I must be too dumb to 
figure it out.

We reorganize so often there is no way to learn how to best utilize the 
resources that DO exist.  I met with a Corporate Account Manager last week 
who did not know who he reported to as of last Monday.  Does anybody know who 
the services managers report to?  How about the practices?  How do I 
quickly engage a specialist that does not report in my organization?  I 
gave up tracking how much time I spend with custis in comparison to tracking 
and managing DEC (Digital?) resources.  It was too embarassing.

I doubt that the people creating and offering sales training even do basic 
marketing to determine at what level the training should be offered.  The 
assumption is that all sales people are dumb and must be led to the promised 
land (hot product of the week).  The few reps that are already somewhat 
knowledgeable in the product are not offered anything beyond the basics and 
so do not attend.  The learning is aborted because those teaching have 
never actually sold the product, and those who have are not in attendance 
because of the assumptions made in setting up the class.  This leads to 
very little added development as the newly trained don't know enough to be 
successful.  They go back to selling what they know, not what they need to 
learn to sell.

These are issues that exist and will continue to exist regardless of 
whether we assign bright and hard working people to sales.

Ed, I respect your ability, but I doubt that you have tried and are willing 
to move into sales.  I agree that sales is political, but I strongly doubt 
that it is more political than support in Santa Clara.  I have done both.

To state my prior biases, I was an IC designer, then an IC Design 
consultant with a chip company.  I then did AE work, Marketing (but in DEC 
so it may not count).  I was then a software consultant and now a sales 
rep.

There is some competition between line people and corporate people.  This 
is GREAT, but when the name calling begins (salescritter vs. corporate 
overhead seagull vs. technodweeb) then we have gone too far.

Matt

    
    Matt,
    
    I agree Santa Clara support is political since I used to work there 
    before coming to SF.
    
    Hey, I'd gladly take a relocation to Texas and try selling there.  
    Unlikely to happen tho.....
    
    -Ed
    

    So I read all of this pontification about Sales Folks, O/S glock, and
    the rest.
    
    I'm in sales -- Have been since three days after the crust of the earth
    solidified.  Learned some stuff --  By the way, I was a practicing EE
    doing computer systems designs -- Skied into a tree one winter and
    suffered irreversible brain damage -- Made me a peddler to go with
    diminished mental capacity.
    
    Some baselines:
    
    Soutions sell Hardware and software ennvironments.
    DEC Executive management missed the boat on O/S directions, and on
    Desktop directions -- We lost momentum
    ALPHA is a start to recovery
    ALPHA needs solutions
    Sales Reps need more than the Kindergarden level of trainging offered
    by the Training organization
    Sales Reps within DEC have been numbingly trained to work as a team
    with technoids 
    Technoids like to immerse themselves in technoid junk
    DEC's competition sell high flyer applications to get in the door --
    Their technoids know those applications
    DEC Marketing is an Oxymoron (sp?)
    We are being outmarketed
    We are missing windows of opportunity to gain marketshare
    We let the technoids drive the company
    
    YUCK!
    
    Bottomline:
    
    DEC's problem isn't with the Sales Force -- Somemone once said: 
    "Nothing Happens until somebody sells something."
    
    The problem is that you need something to sell.  DEC has something on
    the order of 30,000 model numbers of products and services.  No one
    will ever have a command of note even 1% of them  -- 
    
    Regarding N/T:
    
    The PC changed the world -- Users who can take care of their own system
    are becoming more prevalent than in the past -- Even this brain damaged
    peddler can set up UNIX and MS/DOS environments -- With N/T, we have an
    opportunity to attack an installed base of over 140 millionn.
    
    Further, it is more user friendly than UNIX -- It can be supported by
    non-technoids.
    
    If a customer can have their windows applications sitting on a desktop
    device running hi-powered applicationns like PRO-E, or qad's MFG-PRO,
    they'd jump at it in a New York Minute.
    
    N/T is a DEC differential advantage -- It's more than VMS on steroids --
    It's a way to make money -- Ed:  May protect U from getting the
    "Package."
    
    Solutions sell, and our Technoids are the ones that need to be
    retrained on "Flagship Applications."  Marketing knows what they are --
    We just need to get the technoid's noses out of their "SHELL."
    
    The Street Peddler
    
    
    
    
    

    
    I'd gladly learn more about NT if politics and budgets would allow for
    it.   Seems career Deccies with VMS experience are the ones being 
    "groomed" to become NT experts.  Those of us who came to Digital in
    her time of need to help sell UNIX seem to be the lambs brought to
    slaughter. 
    
    Why the continued UNIX bashing?  Yes, I know UNIX is not for everyone,
    but why can't we simply sell the customers what they want?  Why is
    everyone trying to bury OSF/1 when all indications I've seen say it
    is our best weapon in UNIX shops? 
    
    Look, if a customer wants NT, I'll gladly help sell it.  Too bad
    Digital is doing such a lousy job educating the field beyond the 
    marketing fluff we see touted as "NT training".   Please note that 
    I don't believe NT is garbage.  I simply am not being given the
    opportunity to learn more about it.  Why is it such a nightmare to
    get a copy of NT and a PC big enough to run it?  Why are so many
    "NT experts" I've met so damned closed-mouthed about it?  
    
    I can't help but feel that much of what I see is based on treachery
    and selfishness.
    
    Damn!  what a rathole I've started!
    
    -Ed
    

re: .27

>    The problem is that you need something to sell.  DEC has something on
>    the order of 30,000 model numbers of products and services.  No one
>    will ever have a command of note even 1% of them  -- 

>    Solutions sell, and our Technoids are the ones that need to be
>    retrained on "Flagship Applications."  Marketing knows what they are --

Those are interesting statements.  If Marketing knows which of those 30K
products and services are our "Flagship Applications", they ought to tell
someone, because I've never seen a list.

If we have even 100 "Flagship Applications", and allowing for 100 possible
combinations of those, why do we sell the other 20K+ products and services?

Bob

    Hi,
    
    I understand that there is a programme underway to slash the numbers of
    products.  I'm not sure what the 30,000 will come down to - but it is
    probably in the range of 10,000.  The date I've heard is the first day
    of Q1.  I seem to remember that someone has done a study as to who buys
    what and it had some stunning results (eg: 25% of all products not sold
    over last n years, 25% only sold to 10 customers, 25% only to 100
    customers - and I've made these numbers up!!!!  However, they do give
    the right picture)
    
    Anyone have any further info?
    
    regards
    
    Chris
    

There are two different programs running. One is being spun out of analysis
done in Geneva by the pricing folks (Philip Flynn is one of the people I
believe). The other is part of the engineering budget cycle, with products
prioritised based on CBU fit or BU volume potential.
								- Ian W.

    re: .30 - you're probably thinking of the study summarized in a rather
    loooooong newsletter which appeared in many mailboxes recently called
    "The Supply Chain Connection".  The newsletter was filled with many
    technical terms from Manufacturing & Logistics, so some of us from
    other organizations may have found it difficult to understand.
    
    But one of the more clear sections was on the bottom right corner of
    page 3, in the article by Jim Hart:
    
        - We have 140,000 active part numbers in Europe
    	- During Q2 we received 30,000 orders
    	  . 10,000 part numbers were sold once
          . 10,000 part numbers were sold less than 10 times
          . 10,000 part numbers sold more than 10 times
          .  3,000 part numbers generated 85% of Product Revenue
    

    The problem is that this simplistic view of what's tracked with "part
    numbers" doesn't reflect the real world.  It's an obsession.
    
    A more realistic model is:
    
    "system" all the components (CPU, monitor,
    keyboard, mouse, etc.) for computing tasks
    
    "components" (mostly powered devices) disks, expansion boards, etc. 
    (the things that create variants of a system)
    
    "replacement parts" cables, cases, switches, etc.
    
    Rationally, we can't ask people who are maintaining laser printers to
    throw out the printer because Digital can't "afford" to track a part
    that's broken in it.
    
    The important distinction to be made is between removing "a part
    number" because it's not profitable to carry in the "catalog", and
    removing "a part number" and discovering that it's necessary to
    maintain the equipment that's been sold.
    
    To use an example from my life, Sony will sell me an eyepiece to a
    camcorder that's no longer sold as a complete camcorder.  If they
    didn't, what recourse would I have.  What would my satisfaction with
    Sony be if that were the case?
                        

    Pat, I've ordered single replacement parts from manufacturers in the
    past, and been pleased to be able to do so.  But how can you argue
    against the numbers -- at least, if they are true worldwide and if they
    continue over a year?  
    
    I don't see this as a catalog issue.  A part number in the catalog
    that's not ordered is not just a documentation/administrative
    annoyance.  It represents a product that was planned, designed,
    engineered, tested, documented, manufactured, packaged, shipped,
    stored, AND catalogued.  Every operation has its cost.  For these costs
    we expect to gain profit, or at the very least comparable revenue.
    
    And yet we have learned that very  large number of Digital stocked
    parts are note being ordered *at all*. How "necessary" could they
    possibly be?

.33 is right on.  we need to do better analysis and make better decisions
about what products to offer.  it would help if someone was responsible for
the accuracy of the forecasts that were used to get a product developed.

once the product is offered life gets more complicated. i'm sure there
are some products that should be discontinued. the decisions should be made
on incremental costs vs incremental sales, ignoring the past costs.

keeping spares on hand is a cost of being in business. new products should 
be reviewed for unnecessary new parts.

re: .28

>    Why the continued UNIX bashing?  Yes, I know UNIX is not for everyone,
>    but why can't we simply sell the customers what they want?  Why is
>    everyone trying to bury OSF/1 when all indications I've seen say it
>    is our best weapon in UNIX shops? 
    
Is this really true?  Who is trying to bury OSF/1?  Of all the platforms
we have to run on Alpha AXP this looks like the one with the most promise
for short term growth/$$$.  (At least until Intel starts shipping CPUs that
require you to have different binaries from what you already have for DOS
and Windows software.)

Do we have accurate data on what platforms are being sold into new accounts?
It just seems kinda dubious to me that OSF/1 would not be the leader here...
(But maybe that's a question for the MARKETING notesfile.)
								- paul

OSF/1 has been available on Alpha AXP platforms for around a month here.
OpenVMS since November. Looking at the sales figures yesterday, I reckon
OSF/1 will derive more revenue here than OpenVMS FY93ytd in around 4 weeks
time.

Let the customer decide. We've got the best of all of them.

								- Ian W.

    The operating systems war discussion continued in ASIMOV::MARKETING
    2173.

    
    Re:.37 & more OSF sales than VMS on Alpha
    
    I was saying this a year ago.
    
    I still hear NT/VMS bigots bashing OSF at Digital.  I hope this is on 
    the decline.
    
    -Ed
    

    re:37/39
    agree the mine is better/best mentality won't cut it in the 90's
    customers want solutions, if we only offer i OS choice they go
    elsewhere, we need openVME/OSF/NT as each will appeal to different
    customers....
    

    Who's on First?!!
    
    Fundamentally, it's a matter of money --  OSF will get us more bucks in
    the near term than N/T -- Soooo, we lead with OSF and prop it up with a
    spiel on investment protection on the platforms by telling the customer
    they can go t N/T at any point in their systems' life cycle -- The new
    DEC motto should be:  "It JUST DON"T MATTER!"  Let the customer pick
    what they want -- If they think UNIX has a benefit over VMS - Fine --
    It's one less thing that needs to be sold.
    
    An N/T prop forces the competition to react -- They don't have a good
    story there other than on the INTEL platform.  DEC will no doubt give
    this one away by refusing to scale N/T across the complete ALPHA
    platform
    
    VMS is not the engine to use in trying to get marketshare -- It is only
    for installed base AND it only works if they haven't been courted by
    the UNIX folks.
    
    A perfect world would be to roll VMS functionality into OSF/1 -- I'd
    settle for DEC Marketing to know the market forces at work.  Hopefully
    Palmer will get the old DEC country club to see the light.
    
    The Street Peddler  

    Hey!
    
    You've grabbed my vision.  Over the past year or so I've become fairly
    confident that Digital will move all VMS functionality over to OSF/1
    and so it would only be the h/w dependant code that is different (below
    the kernal).  All that is then required is for NT to join in and we
    have a single operating system that meets a fair bit of the
    functionality over a wide range of platforms (eg: VAX, Intel, Alpha)
    
    All my vision is missing is timescales.  Does 5 years sound reasonable?
    
    regards
    
    Chris
    

RE: .43

	It's NT, not N/T.. (Actually, it's Windows NT)

						mike

    	Sounds great. Let's make sure we make it as simple and convenient
    as possible for our entire customer base to migrate away from
    everything we make money on. Then in 5 years, we should only need about
    10-20k employees to support the company you envision (or less if we're
    unsuccessful).

    
    If we don't our competitors will (They are already!)
    
    -Ed
    

    re: 44
    
    	that's what our customers have been doing because "everything" we
    make money on is NOT the solution they want. We can stay with it and
    go out of business OR change and provide hat they want....if we don't
    our competiors will...

    This is a testy little conference!
    
    The message is that there comes a point in time when DEC has to read
    the customer's lips! 
    
    Now, if we had a Marketing organization, we could dirve Engineering to
    put a UNIX front end on VMS  -- That way all of the 'Noids will get off
    on a new shell!
    
    What we're being told in the field is that the customer's need service
    and support - Unfortunately, when the consultant folks have built up a
    country club membership that rivals the DEC of old --  We charge
    $175/hour and expect to get away with it -- Now if we're gonna fix
    something, we need to fix this Consulting Business Model before it' to
    late.
    
    Regarding competition -- My humble opinion is that we can kick @#$ if
    we want -- We just need to have to want to do it -- Our twinkies and
    'noids are as good as our competition -- Our peddlers can keep up with
    the folks from the Far side -- We need someone to shake the DEC tree to
    get rid of those bone heads who believe that the customr will buy from
    us just because we are Digital.
    
    The Street Peddler
    

re .47:

� Now, if we had a Marketing organization, we could dirve Engineering to put a
� UNIX front end on VMS

I know it's a bit more than a "UNIX front end" but wouldn't POSIX do quite
nicely here?

Paul

RE:                      <<< Note 2458.47 by GLDOA::DBOSAK >>>

    
    >- Unfortunately, when the consultant folks have built up a
    >country club membership that rivals the DEC of old --  We charge
    >$175/hour and expect to get away with it -- Now if we're gonna fix
    >something, we need to fix this Consulting Business Model before it' to
    >late.
    
Well, as one of the consultant folks for 6 years now, I must say that you've
touched ona raw nerve here.  I would first like to know what you mean by 
"a country club membership that rivals the DEC of old".
As to the prices we charge, they are definately WAY out of line.
There are lots of talented independants out there more than happy
to undercut us and take our business away.  So what do we do? we keep our
prices, and lay off consultants, which in one move assures that there will be
less of us billing, AND assures that there will be MORE competition.

I have asked many times, and in many forums why our prices are so high.  I can
ASSURE you that my salary is not even a major portion of it!  When I was shown
a breakdown of where the money goes, there were numbers there for covering all
sorts of overhead from my manager to finance to desk space that I never see 
( and for 50% of my time at Digital, I HAVEN'T EVEN HAD a desk at ANY Digital
facility!!)  THEN there was a large, generic OVERHEAD number.  
All this was then added up, and the requirement of additional PROFIT is added,
all of which adds up to $150-175 per hour.

Now the questions I have are:
*Where, EXACTLY, is all the overhead coming from?
*Shouldn't profit be added before overhead (take overhead out of profit)?
*It seems to me like there are some organizations skating along on my back,
making my efforts seem unrealistically unprofitable.  If I bill 4-6 TIMES my
salary, it had D%MN well better be profitable!  Yet, on the books, it looks
pretty marginal, so lots of folks think we should scrap it.

RE:48, 49 :  If you're selling a $30 Million solution that will enhance the
             productivity of 10,000 employees at our customer's workplace,
             and DON"T have access to our best consultant's....we will get them
             from the outside!  Perhaps only for a short time, but either way,
             in large projects there will be organizational dynamics, technical
             architechture issues, or industry specific expertise THAT is worth
             AT LEAST 3% of the contract value....simply in lowering the risk
             that the customer can integrate their organization into the proposed
             new environment.  Now, it is another issue entirely as to how long
             we will be able to sell a resident into an account for 8 hours a
             day for 6 months at those prices, but I do know, it still does
             happen.  The trick is to sell a bigger picture, and to do that,
             you have to bring credibility to the table at ALL levels of the
             customer's management.


Mr. Palmer arranged to speak to a "standing room only" audience on Friday 4/23 
to brief the Semiconductor Operations Group on some of the things that have been
keeping him busy since he last spoke in HLO.  The session was recorded, but
after being a part of this audience, I hope the tape copy justly reflects his
enthusiasm.  I hope someone reading this from HLO knows more about if/when the
tape will be available, but this was one that you will want to see.  Sorry, I
did not see the DVN broadcast so I can't comepare it directly.

Specific to this topic, a question was asked from the audience about how we 
intend to "pull off" in the systems integration portion of our business the 
same kind of performance gain and "leap frog effect" that ALPHA-AXP performance
accomplished on the hardware side of the business.  His answer was to give
a more detailed backround of Mr. Gresham Brebach who will be joining the company
the first week in May.
  
While the press release on livewire does explain that Mr. Brebach had a
successful career with Anderson Consulting, his own consulting practice, and
then McKinsey, it does not tell the whole story.  Mr. Palmer explained that he
had to sell the idea to Gresham as a "once in a lifetime opportunity".  I will
defer other detail to the tape, or others who wish to comment.

Overall, the discussion was the most upbeat encounter I've witnessed with top
management in the past four years! I think that Mr. Brebach will bring 
considerable credibility with him in building the SI business.  

I sincerely hope Mr. Brebach can rescue our SI business.  It was once great.
Digital has systematically destroyed our ability to  competently deliver big SI
projects, outside of a few isolated pockets.

I have personally worked on several multi-million$ SI projects.  Out of the
couple-hundred highly talented and motivated technical professionals who
pulled them off, only a handful are still working for Digital in the field
today.  Most have been layed off, or have bailed out to other organizations,
seeing the writing on the wall...

There are those who think that the way to deliver SI is to put a Digital
management team in place, and sub out all the rest.  From my experience,
without exception, my customers wanted to get rid of the Digital project
managers and keep the technical folks.  This does not mesh with the scenario
above.

Kevin

    re: .51 and Gresh Brebach rescuing our SI business ...
    
    If I read Bob Palmer's speech right, he feels that hardware, not
    software or SI is going to be our core business.  Based on that, it
    looks like we will be *out* of the software and SI business in short
    order. The only hope I can see is that Digital spins off the SI
    organization as a separate company. We are being killed by outrageous
    overhead expenses, ineffective selling strategies, and a dubious
    track record. I hope the message will come very soon that Brebach
    has been given full authority to straighten things out.  If that
    doesn't happen, then I think we will be out of SI in 18 months.
    
    Geoff
    

    re: .52
    
    Huuuuuhhhhh??  How many times have I heard "chips, software and
    services" over the last 6 months?  Although we'll no doubt continue to
    manufacture systems since we're pretty good at it, nobody
    believes there is much money to make there anymore.
    
    As far as the rest of your point goes, it's on the mark.
    
    If you look at the people BP has surrounded himself with (in the
    executive suite), I thing you get a pretty good idea of what he thinks
    is important.
    
    Al
    

    RE .49
    
    As someone who, in one way or another, has been a consultant for over
    25 years it is my experience that as a rule of thumb the ratio between
    base salary and fee rate charged is approximately 1:3 for large
    organizations and 1:2.5 for smaller ones where the "overheads" are not
    such a factor.  This holds true in the Americas and Europe.
    
    Companies that charge below 2.5, even very small ones, go out of
    business at the first sign of trouble.  Those who charge significantly
    over 3.0 get dropped by their customers.
    
    As an illustration (UK � ~ $1.5).
    
    Consultant's base salary �50,000 (well you can dream)
    Hours worked in year 40 x 45 (holiday, training, sickness 7 weeks) =
    1800
    
    Hourly direct cost �28
    
    Thus a reasonable fee rate would be around �85 per hour or �680 per
    day.  An independent consultant would probably charge around �450.
    
    It is naive to expect customers to pay much more for long term
    assignments.
    
    It is worse to price yourself too low.
    
    Hope my jottings are of some interest.
    
    Tony

    Awooooo!!!!!
    
    Looks like I got something going on the Consultant thing -- The
    Business model is WRONG!  
    
    Further, the Consulting Practices SHOULD BE spun off into a separate
    AND DISTINCT subsidiary -- That'll lower overheads enormously --
    
    WHile I'm on it -- The Practice should be able to sell and get credit
    for the hardware solution -- If they have a 30 Mil order AND it
    leverages 25 MIL is Hardware and SW, then they should get the margin
    for that stuff -- It'll drive their cost of sales down and improve
    their P&L -- Of course, this kind of stuff would be too simple for DEC
    to implement.
    
    I think much of your comments are right on the mark -- The $200/hour
    stuff is from dreams generated from smokin' too much of that funny
    stuff -- 
    
    If we had the right business model, we could make a killing at a lower
    hourly rate -- Before I became the brain damaged street peddler, I used
    to be in this SI world -- AND IT AIN't a whole lot of fun -- DEC will
    never achieve greatness is this arena as long as they play by the
    existing rules -- This New Guy - Whatshisname -- He will need to lay
    waste to the DEC country club -- If he makes each delivery manager a
    P&L with incentive compensation, I will guarantee anyone that overheads
    will drop substantially.  I'm shocked at the amount of heads supporting
    an Ass-in-the-Grass consultant.
    
    One way to get overhead down -- Refuse to sell this stuff -- I'm in the
    middle of a bid where the customer is ASKING US to submit a bid on
    what WE WOULD like to do -- I have been trying to get this out of the
    consultant group since Feb 8 - I still don't have it AND worse yet, I'm
    in the middle of what looks to be a turf battle --- Aaarrrrggghhhhhh!
    
    Tis better to have a defined spec with the complete world bidding on
    the thing than go in and try to be creative!
    
    Have a nice weekend!

    Uhhh?
    
    We should charge what the customer is willing to pay and what we can
    afford to recieve.  I know that sounds a bit "trite", but it is true.
    
    Yes - there are large slices of "consultancy" that are "commodity" and
    so the prices are rock bottom.  However, there are consultants in this
    company who are in "niche" areas that command high prices.  What I have
    found is that some people find it hard to distinguish a person who can
    command $75/hour from those that can command $500/hour - or is it that
    we can not distinguish between customers willing to pay those prices.
    
    As someone said in an earlier reply.  If a company is going down the
    tubes (or in danger of doing so) then they are often prepared to pay
    consultants large sums to get them back on the rails.  $3,000/day is by
    no means unusual - even I managed that on one occasion in another life
    and $1,500/day is straight forward.
    
    regards
    
    Chris

My point in an earlier response, was that I went out and told a customer I'd
solve a problem they were having at a cost of $7,000.  I spent 10 hours total
on the customer site gathering input. I spent 15 hours in analysis writing the
report.  I had some "go to meeting time" in that week as well.  I spent 2 half
days on the presales efforts in seperate visits to the customer.

The customer said the work was worth 10 times that much in resolving some
business issues.  I told him to come up with a list (of some really tough ones)
and I would consider staying another week for $25,000.  
He laughed, and said he'd call me back soon.
He called back in three weeks to tell me he  was promoted to a new assignment 
before he could get the P.O. put through!!!  He said it would take a few months
to build a new list! Meanwhile the sales staff in the Digital office was 
downsized!  I EVENTUALLY heard back from this customer. 

The way to build a consulting practice is to be sure the solution is good enough
that the sponsor gets a promotion. To build a REALLY successful business, be
sure your customers can find you after they get rewarded. . 

Nick 

    There are some subtle points being raised here -- Charging for Value --
    That means charging a customer on the basis of what the consultancy
    will do to help the business -- 
    
    "We can solve this problem for X dollars."  My little consulting gig
    highlights a break/fix mentality -- "The price for this service is
    $42,000.  This is based on an hourly rate of $175/hour.  We ..."
    
    The consultancy effort is workth $42K to the customer.  Identifying an
    hourly rate raises a flag.  The customer then says:  "Gee, do I really
    want to spen $175/Hour -- I can get that done cheaper."
    
    I know this sounds dumb, but tis true -- Hourly rates seem to make
    customers take pause.  The flat fee seems to be more palatable.
    
    It would be interesting to see comments on Pricing Development for S/I
    projects -- This Red team, green team, magenta team review process
    seems to be a method guaranteed to ensure that the final price is
    stratospheric.
    
    In the clouds,
    
     The Street Peddler 

    Sounds like the key is the guarantee.  $45K with a guarantee to solve
    the problem is a lot better than charging $175/hour with the same
    number of hours expected (but with the customer paying the difference
    if more hours are required).  In effect, the customer is willing to buy
    insurance that the solution will work.  A more accurate assessment
    might includes $20K for labor and $25K insurance on the labor, but this
    is just musing.
    
    Steve

    I've been involved in an experience with customer that was similar to
    the reply before where we (Digital) did the analysis and suddenly got
    dropped before the PO could be formally approved.  In my case, we 
    actually showed their people how to migrate their CODASYL database as
    we did the analysis and estimated the cost.  They couldn't have done it 
    without our help.  They suddenly reneged on their promise to give us the 
    contract.
    
    I learned about a year or 2 later that that customer had a habit of
    making verbal promises of contracts and then stealing our analysis work
    for free.
    
    It's a jungle out there.
    
                                         Kurt

    re: .58, .59
    
    There is nothing wrong with value pricing a job, as opposed to just
    quoting a straight hourly rate. But you have to do it *right*.  Their
    is a lot of legwork and experience involved in setting the right price,
    and a lot *more* establishing the level of value to the customer.
    
    Historically, we have a checkered track record at making programs
    successful from both the technical and business ends. Where we have
    failed to establish value, we have lost repeat business. Where we
    have failed to set the right price (mostly by underestimating the
    crushing load of "unidentified corporate overhead" or UCO), we have
    lost money.  We can't lose money, and we can't continue to bring
    one-shot projects in.  EDS, D&T, and Andersen are all excellent at
    managing add-on and repeat business, and we have to learn how to do
    the same, or it's curtains.
    
    Geoff 

    There is a big difference between long term consulting rates and short
    term.  It is not unreasonable to charge $3,000 per day or more for
    vital, urgent work but you will not find many customers for three
    months at that rate.  If you cost in the selling time, preparation and
    unsold time between such short assignments you will rarely find an
    average fee rate per annum around these numbers.
    
    I could name at least five consultants who charge over �2,500 per day
    but their annualised billed time is less than 40%.
    
    Tony

    re .60
    Welcome to the real world
    
    Wunder

    re: .62 
    
    you indicated that annualized the consultant was 40% of 2500 pounds,
    which (I hope I did this right) gives me 2500 * 40% * 365 days
    
    = 365000 pounds per year income... 
    
    whew. I'll take it!
    
    :-)   Bruce

re .64
>    you indicated that annualized the consultant was 40% of 2500 pounds,
>    which (I hope I did this right) gives me 2500 * 40% * 365 days
    
>    = 365000 pounds per year income... 


I believe that 40% utilization is of the available working days.  
52*5-(15 holidays and sick-20 vacation-15 training-10 incidental lost)

gives 2500 * 40% * 200
	= 200 000 pounds per year.


Using $'s, to be worth $500 per hour (roughly your number of 2500 punds per 
day) you will probably be doing a lot of pro bono work.  Regis McKenna gets 
big bucks for work and speaking time, but he spends a lot of time doing 
free lectures and writings as well.  Senior Anderson Consulting and 
Deloitte and Touche partners also do a lot of review and training that eats 
of the down time.

Matt

    re .65
    
    Spot on.
    
    Tony

    Okay, folks -- We have buried the subject of Consulting -- I'm not at
    all surprized at the kinds of responses we have -- I hope the Country
    Club members have read this stuff -- NOW -- Let's bash something else
    -- Pick something of interest -- 
    
    Noted Out
    
    The Street Peddler