Sadly true. Lower cost for our maintenance agreement. Standard discounts for
software and licenses (no more discount dance). We even get a 10% discount for
training at BMC/Remedy facilities if we book through them. A greater discount
if the training is through their training center.
Dave
--------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wireless)
----- Original Message -----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) <arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Sent: Wed Apr 18 16:37:21 2007
Subject: Re: New Support Policy?
**
Dave ... come on now ... reduce their charges no way ... reduce their costs ...
probably !
On 4/18/07, Shellman, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**
We've looking at using a VAR where would actually be paying them less
for the same level of support that we currently have with BMC/Remedy. I wonder
if BMC's intention is to reduce costs by reducing Support and Sales Staff by
pushing us to VARs.
Dave
________________________________
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> ] On Behalf Of Joe
D'Souza
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 3:31 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: New Support Policy?
**
If you do want to go that route, make sure that the support center you
are going to turn to, not just has the necessary certifications, but that your
support with BMC would remain valid too for reasons of upgrades, etc..
There are companies around that act as primary support cells with
conjunction to BMC, meaning that they are the 1st line of support. So basically
when you buy support from them, you are paying not just for support from them,
but also for future upgrades etc. The support fee thus might be marginally
higher than you are if you are paying BMC directly for support. I used to work
for a VAR (value added reseller) so I do vaguely remember that the markup
prices for support was about 15% over the prices you might pay to Remedy
directly if you buy it from them.
Question of whether or not that is worth doing is entirely dependent on
the credibility of that VAR. If they do have qualified experienced people
working for them, that 15% markup is perhaps worth it.
Remedy support is still liable to support you as 2nd line of support
should you go that route, if your 1st line is unable to solve your issue for
you.
Hope this helps
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> ]On Behalf Of Wilson, Bruce B
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 2:11 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
Subject: New Support Policy?
**
The trail is becoming more twisted…
Apparently, when you now call the BMC support center with a new
issue, you no longer speak to a support technician.
Instead, you speak to someone who takes some cursory notes and
creates a ticket for you.
Basically, it is the same thing as if you were to go online via
Remedy support and create your own ticket.
I remember previous to this, you got someone who could not
speak very good English and would attempt to solve your problem with the
limited knowledge they had and would then TEXT MESSAGE the BMC support engineer
you previously were able to speak directly to.
Add the fact that the on-line Remedy knowledge base is
incredibly slow to search and retrieve and you basically complete the poor
support.
We are paying thousands and thousands of dollars for incredibly
poor support that seems to continuously get worse.
What is next?
I am seriously considering utilizing a non-BMC service center
for support.
I am told at one vendor, the technicians go through a
certification program.
You get the same person each time you call so they get to
become familiar with you.
Does anyone have any good (or bad) experiences with non-BMC
service center vendors?
Sorry for venting, but enough is enough!
Bruce Wilson
C&S Remedy Administrator
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Atlanta , GA
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted
with HTML in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML
in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML
in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
