> That may be true. But think of the possible damage if all their
> paying customers said "hey we want in on that deal also. Can we
> get a refund of the difference between what we paid in maintenance
> and how much this person paid to get the upgrade? Why should
> someone who hasn't been loyal get special treatment while we get
> taken advantage of?"
So when I first read this I though: "Yep good point, why treat the
customer who didn't pay the same as the one that paid all along." But
then I realized they didn't. Those that didn't pay, didn't get updates,
they didn't get fixes, they didn't get enhancements, they couldn't call
the help desk with questions, problems, or ideas. They couldn't request
new enhancements or attend conferences, webcasts, or other training.
Essentially they got what they paid for, nothing.
Meanwhile the company did all their own research, fixed problems,
enhanced the software, and learned on their own.
So while they were able to use the software they clearly did NOT get all
the benefits and while they may be getting 'special treatment' it's not
so much the good kind. Making them pay all the years back is ridiculous
as they won't get all that stuff retroactively, they'll get ONLY the
updates, very EXPENSIVE UPdates.
Again, should they pay? Absolutely. Should they be required to pay
maintenance going forward? Perhaps. But there should be dialogue
discussion and honest negotiation with the goal being a retained
customer and vendor revenue.
- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis
On 4/30/2014 7:41 AM, rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
That may be true. But think of the possible damage if all their paying
customers said "hey we want in on that deal also. Can we get a refund of
the difference between what we paid in maintenance and how much this
person paid to get the upgrade? Why should someone who hasn't been loyal
get special treatment while we get taken advantage of?"
I realize that it really grinds people to pay maintenance when you know
that all the person is doing is paying off their last buy out with that
maintenance money and not putting a dime into support and development. We
solved that. We switched vendors. We switched from a few vendors who
weren't 6.1 ready within a couple of months after GA. IBM gave them all a
years notice before 6.1 came out that ANZOBJCVN was coming and I was tired
of listening to their whining about possibly getting a new box to replace
their old one that couldn't run anything past V4R5. Obviously they were
in the wrong business.
I also don't expect my vendor to support V2.1 with new enhancements when
they are currently offering version 8.7.5.