Conference 7.286::digital

what kind of turf war you guys talking about?

    Which country are you in? This sort of behaviour disappeared in the UK
    a long while ago. The channel is well controlled on pricing and
    customers are well versed in what the get from where and what value is
    added by whom. There may be the odd instance of a grey or cowboy TVAR
    or somesuch coming in to try and undercut prices but that is rare in
    the ABU. 
    
    If you are still fighting the channel partners you *are* in a bad way.
    
    Paul

    
    I am glad to know that the channel problems are licked in the UK. I
    wish it is like likewise in the US, which to make matters worse have
    this problem compounded multidimentionally. For example:
    
    - you heard about the ABU and SBU example where the ABU rep takes the
      deal after the SBU guy did the work. Another example is when
      nobody manages a sales situation cause looking at from one angle, it's
      ABU's then at another angle, it's not.
    
    - in the former StorageWorks BU, you get the distribution channel
      (distributors, VARS) competing with its own OEM channel. Another
      is when ABU reps are not allowed to sell StorageWorks
      Multivendor gear on non-DEC platforms within their installed
      base. They have to bring in a partner/VAR which in some of these
      ABU accts raise a lot of discomfort.  Then there's the issue of
      StorageWorks multivendor partnumbers cannot be sold for onbase
      systems; the SBU wants better profit margins, but guess what,
      when push comes to shove, it's done anyway.
    
    My real frustration WHY and HOW COME  Digital for
    years (decades???) still cannot resolve this business impediment?
    Maybe it is time to just emulate one that is successful elsewhere,
    instead of forever tweaking it ourselves to no avail?? 
    
    I acknowledge that a corporation is NEVER free of politics and
    turf-building, but to the extent that that would actually impede
    its success, and for its business practices to be build around 
    turf-building is like committing hara-kiri.
    
    It would be interesting to have a non-threatening and constructive 
    mechanism to actually account for the total and actual cost of sales 
    as a direct result of channel conflict per opportunity. I would bet
    that even if a deal is closed, it would not be as profitable (if it is at
    all) as it ought to be. 
    
                                                

I'm in the ABU. 

We have a situation that is very similiar to the above regarding 
storagewarks. But our problem is that the customer will not (and does
not want to buy from channels). We have a lot of off base systems that it 
would be great if we were allowed sell storage for, but we can't (because 
off base is to be sold through distributors). Something is definitely wrong 
with this picture.



Rick c.

    
    
    
    
    from USENET comp.sys.dec... note posted 11-April by ComPro Systems,
    Inc...
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Out of curiousity, I'd like to hear of any positive experience being a
    DEC reseller. I've been thru the bull of that's what the corporation
    wants to do but also have been "screwed" by DEC themselves bidding to 
    the customer at less than I can buy the product. I mean, why a reseller 
    if DEC competes directly with you anyway.??
    
    Intergraph sells some swell Pentium Pro servers at nearly half the
    price of DEC and half the hassle. Is DEC really serious about resellers?
    
    ..curious
    
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
    
    

    Whew - for a moment there, I thought he was talking about us but he's
    talking about some company named `DEC' whereas EVERYONE knows we're
    Digital (if you're feeling feisty, go head and add the `Equipment
    Corporation' - come on, you know you want to - it'll make you feel
    good -- there, now don't you feel better?).
    
    8-}

    another instance uncovered today where ABU slaughtered an SBU partner
    who did all the work, only to be given the knife at the 12th hour so
    that the direct rep could book the business...where's the ethics?

 I'm in the ABU and I've heard just the opposite regarding SBU partners. I've
seen situations where Digital ABU/SBU people and resources had to work a deal
because the SBU partner just didn't have the "right resources" to put together
the right response/configuration, then the partner got the business. So if what
you say is true, then its appears that its happening on both sides of the fence, 
that is, SBU partners taking business from ABU reps and ABU reps taking business
from SBU partners. Thing is, the latter doesn't make sense, because ABU reps get
around 80% credit for the partner business and they don't have to lift a finger
to get that credit. We've been encouraged to allow our partners bid on projects
and to give them leads, and we've been doing just that. Part of our metrics are
based on how much business is done through partners... so who knows whats going
on.


Rick C.

Re -.1

I think that's the biggest issue we still need to resolve (yes, I'm in the 
ABU also)...

Real problem for Digital when the ABU invests time/energy on a project and 
the business then goes through the SBU.  This does NOT affect me negatively, 
for as was stated, I receive revenue credit regardless.  What's unfortunate 
for Digital, tho, is that we are abosrbing the cost of sales AND we are 
getting lower margins on the sale (i.e., if an ABU deal averages ~15-20% 
discount from list price, and the large-volume channel receives ~25-35%) 
costing Digital 10-15% FROM THE BOTTOM LINE!

What's the solution?  Very complex.  We've oriented our clients towards 
buying from resellers (VARs, distributors, etc).  Now when we invest in 
pursuing a project which is complex enough that it should be addressed 
directly (given of course, it's an ABU Account:-), the client,particularly 
the purchasing groups,  tries to figger out "why is this different from the 
last deal where we bought through <mumble>".  Even given that this get's 
resolved, even in large ABU accounts, we are unable to match the pricing of 
our partners.  They're willing in many cases, to do business at 8-10% deal 
margins.  

My "cut" on this...if we intend to truly GROW the business in the x00 ABU 
accounts, we should establish the ABU as a "Corporate Sales" function.  I've 
got a great relationship with my primary reseller partners, but it doesn't 
work when we (Digital) absorb the cost of sales and the reseller is simply 
fulfillment, which happens much too often.

Just my $.02...


SteveS

    This particular situation I'm referring to deals with an ABU account
    where two partners were added to provided additional coverage of this
    large account.  The dba's were identical, and the rules of engagement
    were that whoever found the business, booked the business.  On several
    opporties thus far, when the direct reps found the business on partbner
    was looking after, they went in, underdid the partner and took the
    business.  reputedly, head of the abu for the federal guvt region
    claims that Q4, direct reps need to pull in all the business DIRECT as
    possile.

    4/15/96 issue of Computer Reseller Nws has an article about AST in
    effect saying they are aiming at Dell for their mail order business. 
    CEO mentions "we are fully committed to our resellers, our channels,
    and enhancing that relationship."
    
    Too bad Digital can't see clear to make such a policy statement and
    then committ resources to stick yo it.

    
    
    
    In my opinion, most of our traditional competitors have not mastered 
    the issue either.  The one exclusion is Compaq, who seems to be eating
    up the midrange NT market.
     
    Talked with a friend of mine yesterday at HP, NYNEX Account Manager, he
    lamented about the fact that Anderson Consulting had resold some HP
    equipment into his account.  Yes, he did get credit, but his management
    expected it to go direct -- not unlike Digital.
    
    However, they don't have as many SBU distributors (ex. Avnet), but more VARs
    mapped into their accounts.
    
    Channel conflict will always be an issue, however, we need to clearly
    communicate to our partners where we are investing.  When we tell them
    up front, this issues goes away.  
    
    I find that the toughest issue we need to solve is how to focus our
    partners, and to reward those that invest.  Large Corporate Purchasing
    departments like to bid this stuff out, and many times the SBU partner
    who invested does not get the deal -- ecp's help on system sales only.
    
    Palo
    
    

    The saga continues...abu rep comes in after SBU rep and cuts price
    below channel cost....
    
    why are we doing this, Digital?

    Just had a meeting with some of the Distributor's on Thursday last week
    and they indicated the new alignment of the ABU within the SBU should
    eliminate this type of conflict from happening in the future.  They're 
    encouraged by the alignment and we need to wait and see.
    
    	Regards,