T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
22.1 | What's a CAM in FY92 sales-speak? | FDCV07::CHERNACK | Nu challnges require nu approachs | Thu Jun 13 1991 13:25 | 14 |
| re. 22.0
Please don't misinterpret my question, AND, I don't want your good
question to be lost, but.....
<innocence on>
Since we are talking about FY92 and we have a new vocabulary,
what's a CAM?
<innocence off>
|
22.2 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | time's nerve in vinegar | Thu Jun 13 1991 13:38 | 8 |
| re: .1
Corporate Account Manager.
Nope, not talking about hot cars! ;^)
Joel
|
22.3 | Further to 'what is a CAM?' | FDCV07::CHERNACK | Nu challnges require nu approachs | Thu Jun 13 1991 13:50 | 13 |
| Thanks and right. Referring to note 11 (the 'new' vocabulary for
FY92), Joel, how would you ask your question?
"What expenses are being funded by <fill_in_the_blank>?"
My point is, given the new roles and responsibilities in the Sales
organization for FY92, are they all clear? Based on how you fill in
the "fill_in_the_blank" in your question, you are asking different
questions and thus could come up with different answers.
Do you want to rephase your question, or do you still feel CAM is an
operative term for FY92 in your account/account set/account group?
|
22.4 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | time's nerve in vinegar | Thu Jun 13 1991 14:18 | 12 |
| re: .3
Ok, ok. AGM0 would be the new term. Used to be CAM. Now
AGM0.
So - anyone know if travel for local reps will be funded
by AGM0's?
Any AGM0's *like* their new title? ;^)
Joel
|
22.5 | another expense question | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | time's nerve in vinegar | Thu Jun 13 1991 20:56 | 35 |
| Another expense question: should Sales budget for 100% coverage of
all internal equipment? This is turning into a sticky issue
in our office, and I suspect elsewhere. The sum of getting all
these details "wrong" could spell the difference between success
and failure of everyone's plans. Hope you all don't think
these kinds of questions are too small; for want of a nail...
Current *official* Digital Services policy is: (3.6.10, pg. 1)
"All internal Digital products must be covered by a Customer Services
Agreement. Per Call Service is only available for installations,
deinstallations, and after hours service. If a service call is
logged on products not covered by a contract, the call should be
completed and the products added to a service agreement...effective
immediately."
Local Account Groups are planning their budget on the assumption that
only a portion of their internal equipment will be under monthly
contracts. Local billers-of-internal-equipment-costs are not
under that impression. For us, the above is the regnant policy.
Sales Finance tells me an e-mail has gone out revoking the
Digital Services policy quoted above and that putting equipment
under contract is now voluntary.
I happen to feel that it *should* be voluntary and will be very
glad to track down the source referenced by Sales Finance.
Otherwise, my explicit charter is to continue billing everyone
for everything, and this I do not want to do. If I do this,
plans are going to be out of whack by a margin point or two.
Not acceptable.
Anyone out there know of a solution for this conundrum?
Joel
|
22.6 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | splitting oyster vowels | Mon Jun 17 1991 11:27 | 7 |
| ...meanwhile, any movement on being able to answer these
questions about expenses?
Thanks.
Joel
|
22.7 | Sales Rep Expenses | HAMSTR::HOFFMANN | | Mon Jun 17 1991 16:49 | 26 |
| In response to your question "what expenses are being funded by the
CAM's"
All of the normal sales rep expenses are included in the CPP (cost
per person). There are:
- salary/benefits - travel/training/meetings
- facility expense - telecom
- information services - investments
- other - rotation
- materials - agency and contract
- depreciation - office supplies
- vehicle/fleet expense - hiring/relocation
- In-DEC services
However, if the AMo/AGMo requires the sales rep to travel over and
above the normal business travel within the local geography of the
account set, the AMo/AGMo must work with the AMs in identifying the
additional funding needed during the expense budgeting period. The AMs
would then include this additional expense in their SES submission.
CPP also includes the expense of the Account Group such as the AGMg,
account group indirect staff, account set indirect and HQ-related
rewards and recognition expenses. The AMo/AGMo funds the AMs by
incrementing the budgeted account effort in the account set by 10%
since the AMs is not included in the CPP.
|
22.8 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | splitting oyster vowels | Tue Jun 18 1991 11:37 | 6 |
| re: .7
Thank you! Very helpful.
Joel
|
22.9 | Digital Products Contract Coverage | HAMSTR::MURPHY | Sue Murphy MKO2-2/D14 dtn:264-0723 | Tue Jun 18 1991 17:17 | 7 |
| Reply to 22.5--
Coverage of internal Digital products by a Customer Services
Agreement is voluntary. The choice to cover or not should be based
on the cost center's abiltiy to afford the contract cost, compared to the
potential down time of the product and it's effect on the operation
of the group.
|
22.10 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | splitting oyster vowels | Tue Jun 18 1991 18:40 | 28 |
| re: .9
Thanks for the info. What I wonder is when the policies of
we who actually "bill" internal products is going to reflect
this. As I said, we have zero vested interest in perpetuating
the current policy. But we are unfortunately obliged (for
example, by periodic audit ratings known as `SST's) to follow
written DS/CSRA policy which is as I stated in .5 of this
string.
I am quite interested in hearing from anyone in the DS/CSRA
P&P organization to try to resolve this discrepancy. I am
inclined to stop "billing" this internal equipment, per
local needs, and take my chances with the auditors. Do the
right thing and all that. But employees in my position are
*extremely* vulnerable to the formal evaluations of the
auditors.
And, unless we are formally notified of this change, the
auditors will consider me to be doing the wrong thing if
I "violate" this policy.
Rather a conundrum - perhaps we can use this conference to
assist in the resolution?
Joel
|
22.11 | DIAL instead? | RIPPLE::NOLLRO | | Tue Jun 18 1991 18:47 | 9 |
| Additional point regarding 22.5 and 22.9
Suggestion:
If your group uses older products which are more expensive to
have on contract, look thru DIAL for expensed, ie free except
for freight, replacements. Order one as a hot backup and take
them all off contract.
|
22.12 | Consignment Inventory | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | splitting oyster vowels | Tue Jun 18 1991 20:02 | 37 |
| Following is a request from Scott Engel, NWAG Sales Finance,
relating to BLUELINE Consignment equipment. I hope someone
can help us, ASAP.
Thanks.
Joel
[follows question from Scott]
Please post the following questions regarding BLUELINE Consignment
inventory in the GERBIL notes conference.
Since consignment IS NOT included in the CPP how is BLUELINE consignment
inventory to be planned for in FY 92.
A. If all BLUELINE consignment should be transferred to the account
cost center then how :
1. do we identify or reference the cost center to which the
inventory should be transferred?
2. Is the expense for BLUELINE inventory being included in the
BLUELINE account plans?
3. When a sale occurs locally who does OMS notify to relieve the
inventory if the accounting ( tracking ) of the inventory is
being monitored elsewhere in the Country?
B. No transfer of BLUELINE Consignment - then
1. How does the local AM plan (Budget) in SES for consignment
inventory over which he/she has no control over?
2. Who will be responsible for the manangement and relief of this
inventory?
|
22.13 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | splitting oyster vowels | Thu Jun 20 1991 11:06 | 5 |
| Any news or update on treatment of BLUELINE consignment
equipment? (see .12 in this string)
Joel
|
22.14 | a question about expenses of others | NYEM1::MILBERG | My boss called- Red, Blue or White? | Fri Jun 21 1991 12:05 | 9 |
| A new question on expenses:
If we (an account team - whoops, business unit) use someone from a
corporate organization ie. Telecomm for a customer presentation - do we
have to pay (jv) expenses (and time?) since we are already paying the
corporate 'tax' for those organizations?
-Barry-
|
22.16 | | RIPPLE::GRANT_JO | eyes film their cloth | Fri Jun 21 1991 13:46 | 6 |
| re: .15
Thanks, most helpful!
Joel
|
22.17 | No Charge Service | GERBIL::MURPHY | Sue Murphy MKO2-2/D14 dtn:264-0723 | Fri Jun 21 1991 16:22 | 3 |
| Reply to 22.14
At this time there is no additional charge for the type of service
you mention in your note.
|
22.15 | Check US Budget Advisories | GERBIL::MURPHY | Sue Murphy MKO2-2/D14 dtn:264-0723 | Wed Jun 26 1991 15:51 | 31 |
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to 22.12 on "Blue Line Consignment".
This issue has been addressed and answered completely in the
U.S. Country Budget Advisory. If anyone needs to get on the
distribution of this frequently published and updated report,
send a mail message via ALL-IN-1 to USCSCADVISORY @MRO.
To summarize somewhat what can be found in the budget advisory
that pertains directly to Scott's questions:
A1. Rotation and Consignment is also known as Loan (consign.) and
Demo(Rot.). There is a customer number or AMID number associated
with the equipment within the TRACE system. Therefore the expenses
associated with the equipment will be charged to the account
automatically. Therefore there is no need to identify by cost center.
A2. The equipment is controlled locally and expense for it budgeted
locally, but the actual expense rolls to the account.
A3. The equipment is being monitored locally.
B1. There should be a "white line" discussion between the two
managers.
B2. The local manager where the equipment is located.
|