RE: RE: ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

["Andy Nolen-Parkhouse" <aparkhouse@xxxxxxxxx>]

Your statement is accurate Mike in that IBM does not want to talk to
their Business Partners, at least on the hardware side.  I'm not sure
whether you're being tongue-in-cheek or not, but you're right.  In
exchange for a per cent of the sale, hardware business partners must go
through larger non-IBM entities (I've forgotten the acronym).  These
folks then deal with IBM.

I spent four years selling and installing systems for a smallish
business partner.  I must say that for us, the system worked rather
well.  When we had obscure technical requirements, we could get hold of
an expert.  They had people who dealt exclusively with lease rollovers,
maintenance extensions, and all of those other horrible things that mere
mortals can't get IBM to do effectively on their own.  It worked well
for us.  We had to be aware that things needed to be done but we did not
need to know how to do it.  I can't imagine the chaos if every business
partner had to do that kind of IBM bureaucracy navigation, let alone
every customer.

I don't know how it works for those business partners who only do
software packages.

Regards,
Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

> Subject: Re: RE: ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
>
> Hmmmm . . . So first they tell you to find a BP; then they tell you to
> become a BP. Maybe that's it -- maybe we should _all_ become BPs! :-)
>
> Then we'll all be able to deal with IBM directly in an easy and
efficient
> manner.  The  problem will be when IBM figures out that this is just
the
> same as the old days, when IBM dealt directly with "customers", and
> decides that it will only deal with "Super BPs". Then all regular BPs
will
> have to find Super BPs to go through. . . .
>
> Of course, anyone who experiences difficulties with this will be
> encouraged to become a Super BP, and then everything will be fine. . .
.
>
> Joe Pluta writes:
> >It's also been recommended that I become a BP, and some of this would
be
> >resolved
>
>
> Mike Naughton