How Should Anixter Respond To Integrator Objections?

JH
John Honovich
•Feb 15, 2017
IPVM

Anixter has suffered significant criticism from integrators on numerous IPVM articles, most recently, e.g., Anixter Touts Selling to End Users, Anixter / Bosch Sells Direct to Amazon, Boycott Anixter, Says 82% Integrators

How should Anixter handle it?

We have heard / seen from various Anixter staff employees that it is an issue.

However, we have never received a single response to our requests to Anixter management, including Communale, Mehler, and Rothstein. I cannot speculate why they are not but that is uncommon. For example, we speak with ADI management every so often and I doubt they like us.

One way Anixter could help itself is a public comment clarifying their position / approach. Or they could just handle it on a case by case basis for each integrator / manufacturer who inquires.

So what do you think Anixter should do here?

MF
Michael Fusco
•Feb 15, 2017

i think Without integrator support companies like anixter serve no purpose and are toast. If everything goes to a direct model, manufacturers can do far better using massive drop-ship logistics companies like Amazon, Ingram Micro, Provantage, etc.

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
•Feb 15, 2017

Anixter should come out with a clear statement as to what their stance is.  If it is "we will sell direct when asked" or "we will sell direct on large accounts" then fine, be up front about it.  Integrators can make their purchasing decisions with knowledge of that fact.  Many may find it not to be an issue while some will.  However, that is better than nearly everyone assuming Anixter is deceitful.

Being duplicitous behind the scenes and silent in public is not a way to instill confidence an integrator.

JH
John Honovich
•Feb 15, 2017
IPVM
In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1

However, that is better than nearly everyone assuming Anixter is deceitful.

That's an interesting point.

But take Arecont. Arecont has known for a very long time they had a poor reputation for quality. They never did anything publicly to try to improve that. To be clear, they certainly improved their quality but in terms of communicating / messaging / marketing it, it was essentially nil. I do wonder if that is the Anixter approach.

UI
Undisclosed Integrator #2
•Feb 16, 2017

Anixter overall is a Fortune 500 $6B/yr company. I'm sure any of the executives you reached out to do not have the autonomy without consulting shareholders/board members to make a statement regarding these accusations. I would be surprised if they do issue a statement.

JH
John Honovich
•Feb 16, 2017
IPVM
In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #2

I'm sure any of the executives you reached out to do not have the autonomy without consulting shareholders/board members to make a statement regarding these accusations.

I disagree. Take Exacq and the US manufacturing shutdown. They made a statement in half a business day. And Exacq is part of JCI, a Fortune 100 publicly traded company, which has more than 10x the market capitalization of Anixter.

I do agree that publicly traded companies have greater concerns to address but lots of publicly traded companies comment publicly on many matters without convening a board of directors meeting.

As for 'accusations', communicating what your channel policy is a common corporate matter. 

(1)
(1)
New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions