Re: notifier verifire softwarw

["Roland Moore" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am not an EST or Notifier dealer. However, I can understand why some
companies prefer to sell through dealers and not distribution.
If you are a small dealer then the chances of staying current on training
for a product is less and the tech support time the company has to spend on
you tends to go up. These companies do keep track of that sort of thing
(down to the minute actually). They also believe in the 80% - 20% rule. That
is 20% of the dealers do 80% of the sales volume. To see the industry evolve
over time from a dealer base that was a mostly mom and pop size sort of
business to what it is today is not without regret. That said (again I am
NOT an EST dealer) if you only installed a couple of those systems a year I
am certain you would eat a lot of tech time. Talk about an over engineered
product. There is no way to simply walk up and upload and download a high
end EST panel unless you basically wrote the program to begin with. If
you've ever done an EST system it takes days some time to program, debug,
and test, especially on a big system. Granted the system can do just about
anything you could imagine, but parsing through a database like that
(especially since it is Borland) in all that picky point by point detail? If
you didn't have to sell it to keep your status as a dealer and it wasn't a
spec job why would you? I am not trying to pick on EST but how about
Stentofon for a good bit of unnecessary complexity. We had a Stentofon shut
down because the customer's network configuration changed - they added more
routers to the network path we used - and no one could remember that you
need to check multiple routers versus single router. Same story about not a
dealer and not a spec? So I think there is more going on by not using
distribution than to protect substandard dealers. I think there is a lot of
time saved in engineering a product knowing no matter how stinking complex
they make it there will have to be a group of technicians forced to be
shipped off to learn it. I think that sort of product delivery environment
wouldn't make it in a distribution product. It is a choice someone is
making. And after all that training for sales guys and technicians only to
have a job underbid (either by mistake or smaller overhead) by a dealer
getting it through (back door perhaps) distribution doesn't seem like
something the factory boys could sell to authorized dealers.

"J. @netscape.net>" <jsloud2001<removeme> wrote in message
news:r2afi21irm8o6djtdcie8l4lnda438km8f@xxxxxxxxxx
> On 6 Oct 2006 12:27:53 -0700, "jewellfish" <jewellfish@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>You think Ford should have the right to tell you that you HAVE to go to
>>the dealer??
>>
>>The whole dealer-proprietary concept is a pile of horsefeathers!
>>
>
> Ford can't do that because of the Magnuson Moss Warranty Ac of 1975.
> Otherwise, they probably would.  The MM Act may have some relevance to
> proprietary FA panel service.  I wonder if it's ever been challenged
> in court.
>