I usually avoid this type of thread but I feel like I need to inform everyone of what I discovered a few weeks ago.
I spent an hour and a half talking to an Epicor Support Representative a few weeks ago about the cost of support and the lack of support we were receiving. I made it clear that we were thinking of dropping support completely if we were just able to find a stable version that would suffice. She made it plainly clear that Epicor's goal was in developing new versions and not in fixing current ones and that the bulk of their programming staff was allocated to new development. This came after I told her of my dissatisfaction with the time frame given for fixes they have acknowledged a need for. I have several so called fixes that are not due to be resolved until February 2009 and later. Even then there is no guarantee. I made it very clear than 9 months was not a satisfactory resolution to any problem.
I reluctantly decided to pay for one more year of support. That decision was more based on the fact that we are looking at purchasing additional modules than anything else. Once this is done, I will still very strongly consider dropping support. We can always purchase the SDK if necessary. I informed her that since we are being forced to purchase a new version of the software every 5-6 years it would be more advantageous and a lot less of a headache for us just to ride along with what we have and then look at purchasing a new version in 5-6 years. I would also suspect that we could probably get a pretty good discount at that time that might even be a substantial savings from what we are having to pay for annual support. I do however realize that we could lose our upgrade path though.
I do intend to make my concerns known this year at Perspectives and especially in the EUG group sessions if the opportunity arises. Our account rep is very much aware of our frustrations but that doesn't seem to matter much either. Epicor has their goals and they appear to be quite different from the users that purchased their software. I sincerely believe that it will take the threat of everyone of us dropping support before they wake up and see the writing on the wall. In fact it may take more than a threat. For us, I will wait one more year and see what happens. If nothing changes then we will more than likely not pay for support again. I am not sure that I can provide our Board of Directors with a decent enough ROI to warrant paying for it again.
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Brown
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Recap - What Epicor Can do to Address the 8.x Frustrations
Thanks for the info Todd.
I am extremely relieved that this is a VUG initiative & not a delay/diversion tactic by Epicor.
Your observation of Epicor announcing 177 customers had been 'won back' to support contracts is interesting (particularly in light of the stability users still on 5 & 6.1 report that you related). I'm sure that was painted as a positive but if you think about it, it is likely not.
I'm only guessing, but I would suspect these 177 customers were primarily 5 & 6.1 users (not on support contracts due to the stability they had come to rely upon which those versions had achieved) who upgraded to 8 - and quickly found (or were told by Vantage sales AFTER the upgrade purchase contract was finalized) that they needed the support contract to survive while the v8 bugs are worked out.
I'd also bet they got pretty good deals (at least for the 1st year) on the support contracts as, to their credit, Epicor sales reps have outright told me that they will NEVER lose a sale over price. (They seem to know their competition's pricing as well as their competitors know their own prices & 'wiggle room' limits to negotiating - and they seem QUITE adept at knowing just how much they need to discount a contract package price in order to overcome any prospective buyer's concerns over the v8 capabilities relative to competitive packages).
Now knowing this is VUG driven, 'where do I sign up'?
I have no confidence that Epicor will change on their own - but we can influence them (and quickly) if we can change KEY perceptions of where they stand with their existing users.
Is there something in particular I could do to further the cause?
Rob Brown
I spent an hour and a half talking to an Epicor Support Representative a few weeks ago about the cost of support and the lack of support we were receiving. I made it clear that we were thinking of dropping support completely if we were just able to find a stable version that would suffice. She made it plainly clear that Epicor's goal was in developing new versions and not in fixing current ones and that the bulk of their programming staff was allocated to new development. This came after I told her of my dissatisfaction with the time frame given for fixes they have acknowledged a need for. I have several so called fixes that are not due to be resolved until February 2009 and later. Even then there is no guarantee. I made it very clear than 9 months was not a satisfactory resolution to any problem.
I reluctantly decided to pay for one more year of support. That decision was more based on the fact that we are looking at purchasing additional modules than anything else. Once this is done, I will still very strongly consider dropping support. We can always purchase the SDK if necessary. I informed her that since we are being forced to purchase a new version of the software every 5-6 years it would be more advantageous and a lot less of a headache for us just to ride along with what we have and then look at purchasing a new version in 5-6 years. I would also suspect that we could probably get a pretty good discount at that time that might even be a substantial savings from what we are having to pay for annual support. I do however realize that we could lose our upgrade path though.
I do intend to make my concerns known this year at Perspectives and especially in the EUG group sessions if the opportunity arises. Our account rep is very much aware of our frustrations but that doesn't seem to matter much either. Epicor has their goals and they appear to be quite different from the users that purchased their software. I sincerely believe that it will take the threat of everyone of us dropping support before they wake up and see the writing on the wall. In fact it may take more than a threat. For us, I will wait one more year and see what happens. If nothing changes then we will more than likely not pay for support again. I am not sure that I can provide our Board of Directors with a decent enough ROI to warrant paying for it again.
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Brown
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Recap - What Epicor Can do to Address the 8.x Frustrations
Thanks for the info Todd.
I am extremely relieved that this is a VUG initiative & not a delay/diversion tactic by Epicor.
Your observation of Epicor announcing 177 customers had been 'won back' to support contracts is interesting (particularly in light of the stability users still on 5 & 6.1 report that you related). I'm sure that was painted as a positive but if you think about it, it is likely not.
I'm only guessing, but I would suspect these 177 customers were primarily 5 & 6.1 users (not on support contracts due to the stability they had come to rely upon which those versions had achieved) who upgraded to 8 - and quickly found (or were told by Vantage sales AFTER the upgrade purchase contract was finalized) that they needed the support contract to survive while the v8 bugs are worked out.
I'd also bet they got pretty good deals (at least for the 1st year) on the support contracts as, to their credit, Epicor sales reps have outright told me that they will NEVER lose a sale over price. (They seem to know their competition's pricing as well as their competitors know their own prices & 'wiggle room' limits to negotiating - and they seem QUITE adept at knowing just how much they need to discount a contract package price in order to overcome any prospective buyer's concerns over the v8 capabilities relative to competitive packages).
Now knowing this is VUG driven, 'where do I sign up'?
I have no confidence that Epicor will change on their own - but we can influence them (and quickly) if we can change KEY perceptions of where they stand with their existing users.
Is there something in particular I could do to further the cause?
Rob Brown
--- On Mon, 8/4/08, Todd Caughey <caugheyt@...<mailto:caugheyt%40harveyvogel.com>> wrote:
From: Todd Caughey <caugheyt@...<mailto:caugheyt%40harveyvogel.com>>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Recap - What Epicor Can do to Address the 8.x Frustrations
To: "vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>" <vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>>
Date: Monday, August 4, 2008, 12:08 PM
Rob,
I agree with most of your sentiments about the deep rooted things that Epicor needs to change. Things that probably are beyond the scope of a single session at Perspectives. These are the same issues that have been raised for several years....even before anyone heard of "Sonoma" (early code name for 8.x). What I find sort of amazing is that 6.1 is now pretty darned stable. Once they stopped adding features it only took a half dozen patch releases to get most of the issues resolved (without creating too many new ones). I know there are still issues in 6.1.5xx but most people have figured out how to deal with them.
I've been in off-list conversations with a few other sites who are seriously considering staying at 6.1 indefinitely and have decided that all the new features in 8.x are not worth the apparent grief. Staying at 6.1 then begs the question whether to remain on a maintenance plan. If enough 6.1 sites start dropping support that revenue stream dries up. Face it, Vantage is Epicor's cash cow and this may be the greatest point of leverage left for getting 8.x (or 9) fixed. To get the lagging sites migrated up to 8.x should be a huge priority for Epicor and two things have to happen to achieve this...
1. A stable and reliable 8.x system...meaning they need to fix their quality control processes in a hurry. Aaron Hoyt's report of the packing slip issue has me extremely concerned about their patch testing procedures
2. FREE (already paid for by maintenance fees) migration tools....not just trying to sell their professional services group of consultants as the only route to migrating
By the way I noted in the 2nd qtr results press release they have "won back" 177 customers onto support contracts who had dropped support. Begging the questions why did they leave and what did Epicor have to "give" to get them back. Or, more importantly, the question why it was felt this needed to be reported.... is there some sensitivity amongst shareholders already in place about customers dropping support and not upgrading?
As for the Vantage Leadership Council....this is not in any way connected to Epicor's sales group. Basically (and at risk of raising a sensitive subject for this group...I really was trying to be discreet) VLC is a sub-group within the Epicor Users Group or EUG. Although key Epicor personnel take part in the discussions VLC is made up of real Vantage users. Based on the teleconference I reported on I am seeing a big change in the relationship between EUG and Epicor with more emphasis on advocacy for the user base. There has been a long standing impression that EUG has been a bit too chummy with Epicor. I think the attitudes of the current membership have definitely swung the other way and the VLC may become a very useful communication channel. At least it appears to be asserting more independence. I'm just the messenger reporting what I've seen which may be of interest to this group and not advocating or promoting any other group. Most of the
membership of VLC are vocal members of this Yahoo group anyway so, aside from Epicor reading these posts, I am very confident the sentiments posted here are being passed along. Maybe even in time for direct, candid, responses at Perspectives which was the original intent for the thread.
-Todd C.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________
DISCLAIMER:
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]