|
So......using this logic, why wouldn't IBM sell PC servers and advocate server farms? There's be a LOT more services you'd sell that way. In fact, why sell the iSeries at all if this is such a loss leader on services? I think that there's more here than Jon's analogy, not to say he's not right, but I'd imagine there's more to this than just the services end of it. Shannon O'Donnell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Paris" <Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:06 PM Subject: RE: More anti-midrange propaganda > >> I don't get this argument. What "lost revenue"? Show me a simple > hypothetical calculation showing how revenue is lost when more iSeries boxes > are sold. > > Interesting that I saw your reaction before I saw my posting! > > Don't know what's not to "get" - even IBM admit this simple truth if you get > them off the record. I will do the math - but you'll only argue with it. > > Suppose that IBM sell an iSeries to a new customer for (say) $200,000. Net > profit from that is (guess) $30,000. Potential revenue from services is > probably zero (lots of cheap unemployed iSeries folks). But even if we > assume non-zero then it won't be a huge amount of work 'cos the box it too > darn good. A pretty high estimate might be 100 hours at $250 an hour - they > net (say)$125 per which means 100 X $125 or $12,500 is the net profit. > Total profit is $30,000 + $12,500 = $42,500 > > Now suppose instead of the iSeries they sell an RS/6000 for (say) $150,000. > Net profit from that is probably about -$10,000. revenue from services is > huge (ask Don Rima how much difference there is in workload). > Conservatively to have someone set up security, install and tune DB2, etc. > etc. you are looking at 500 hours plus. So that would be 500 X $125 or > $62,500. $62,500 - $10,000 = $52,500. > > So to sell the non iSeries box nets them $10,000 more. The really sad thing > is they probably make more if they _don't_ sell the hardware and just supply > the services. > > Agree or disagree it really doesn't matter. IBM is in the business of > making money - they make most of their money through services. If a box > doesn't generate much service revenue (e.g. iSeries) they aren't going to > push it. > > Same story applies to all the so-called independent consultants who > recommend systems. They will recommend the systems that drive the most > services revenue. heck - how else can you explain SAP? It was designed > from the ground up to be a pig to install and configure. By doing so they > guaranteed the folks who recommended it massive service revenues. It is a > sad state of affairs, but I'm afraid it is true whether we like it or not. > > Jon Paris > Partner400 > www.Partner400.com > > > _______________________________________________ > This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list > To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, > visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l > or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives > at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. > > > >
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.