Selling ******
** *** ****** ***** / ******* award *****, *** ***** ********* describes Genetec ** *** ******* contractor:
Bidding ** ******* / ************
** *** ****** ***** ***** *** ***** *** *** ******* ***** shows, ******* **** * number ** ***** **-******* / ********* *** *** win:
*** ************* ** **** in *** * - 6 **** *****, * is *** *** ******* license ******* *** *,*** licenses *** * - 6 *** *** *******/*********** licenses *** **** ** the **** * *****.
***** ******* **** ********:
Genetec ********
******* *********:
****** ***** ** * prestigious *** *** **** ** an ********* *** ******* client *** *** ***** integrators ** ******.
******* *** *** ******* to *** ***** ** selling ****** *** ******* or *** *** ***** integrators ********* **** ****.
** *** *** *** pricing, ******* ****:
*** ***** ** *** to *** **** **** this *** ** ******* of ******** ******** ********.
** **** *** **** to ************* ******* **** point *** **** *** ******* annual ******* ******** **** **** low ******.
Big ***** ***** ** ***** *****
***** **** ******* *** enterprise *** ******** ** relatively ****, ***** *** price ** ************* ********** to *** *** *****. This ** ********* ** covered ****: **** ********* ** ********** VMS ********
Selling ****** ** ***** *****
******* ****** ** ***** deals **** ****** (*.*., that ** ******** *** China ************ / ***** government ***** ** *****), though ** ** ***** a ************* ******, ********** for ********* **** ******* that **** ******* * controlled *** ********** ****** channel.
Vote / ****
Update: ******* ******** ** ****** *******
** ***** ******* ***** their ******** ** ******* direct. ***** ********:
*** *********** *** **** up *** ******* ******* program *** ******* ** the ******* ******** *****, and ***** ** *** continued *******. ***** *** been * **** ***** number ** ****** ******** in *** ******* (**** than *.*% ** *** global *** *****). *** when ***** **** ******** they **** **** **** highly ******* *******, ***** global, ***** ** **** taken * **** *** then ************ ****** **** integrators ** ****** **** the ******** ****** ** to ** ********* ******** (unification **** ***, ******* Control, ***.). ** ********* these ******** **** ********* and ******.
** ***** * ****** up **** ******* ***** the *.*%, ************ **** percentage ** ******* **** makes ** (*.*., ***** they *** ****** *** users **** **** ********* a ****************** ****** ********** of *******). ** **** *** any ******** ** ****.
Comments (37)
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
I voted no, but as an integrator that is strictly going by party lines. I'd be interested in the contrarian viewpoints: dealers who might accept a the manufacturer doing a direct deal in certain cases and manufacturers and end users who might feel sticking to the channel is more appropriate.
Create New Topic
Sean Nelson
04/30/18 05:33pm
Ouch, was it determined that any of the competing bids were also quoting Genetec?
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #2
The price is due to the fact that this was an upgrade of existing Omnicast licenses.
As far as I know, it was an old DV Tel system. Funny how Genetec still think of DV Tel as an Omnicast OEM
Create New Topic
Paul Shah
Is this the first deal Genetec has done directly?
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #3
No, and I’m sure it won’t be the last. [IPVM: Redacted]
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #4
Motorola is watching.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #5
My experience with Genetec in Canada is that they are very supportive of the Integrator channel, including the procurement of licenses only.
Perhaps Genetec in other countries have different go to market strategies.?
Create New Topic
Alexander Bakke
Why would anyone say yes, even if you are a manufacturer?
Create New Topic
Christopher Uiterwyk
05/01/18 01:16pm
Security integration requires an ecosystem of partners where layers of competency come together to delivery a successful project. Snubbing distribution and integrators comes from a position of arrogance and greed.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #7
This would be a pretty big break from the consistent messaging of using the integration channel exclusively. If it turns out that it is true then that would have a major impact on our long term partnership with them, as it would with any manufacturer or distributor that does sell direct (not the end of a relationship, but a definite change).
Create New Topic
John Honovich
General note: We are interested in covering large deals, especially when they are sold direct. We prefer to have documented evidence, like in the post above, to have proof. Email us at info@ipvm.com or john@ipvm.com
Create New Topic
Jon Dillabaugh
05/01/18 03:19pm
I voted yes because I don't want to be hypocritical. I don't want anyone else telling me who I can and can't sell to, so I won't assume to do the same.
If one of my clients is better served by the manufacturer direct, so be it. Why force my services on anyone? I would rather win on the merits of my work than rules that say who has to buy where.
Anyone who is mad about this should have worked harder to stand out and give a reason why they should have been chosen instead. If you feel like you got burned by your partner (likely so with the low pricing), time to let that bridge burn and move along and find another partner who is willing to keep you in the deal.
Create New Topic
Nils Petterson
The Panama Canal is a very demanding customer so we believe they will loose money on this deal.
per example the other supplier of cctv equipment for the ACP is servicio tactico de seguridad bid on item for the support $ 80,423 and Genetec 22,351
and this company is working closely with the ACP in other cctv project and know exactly why they charge $ 80 k for the yearly support on site 24 x 7 we really don't know how Genetec will comply for $ 18 k from Canada.
also the supplier of the ACP cannot promote the reference of any installation,
Create New Topic
John Honovich
Update: we asked Genetec about their position on selling direct. Their response:
I asked a follow up this morning about the 0.3%, specifically what percentage of revenue this makes up (i.e., since they are global end users they must represent a disproportionately higher percentage of revenue). If they have any feedback, I will add.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #9
If we were a Genetec dealer, which we are not, we would drop Genetec from any new projects immediately and put our loyalty into a true partnership. Instead of helping a Genetec dealer win the Panama Canal Project, they simply cut the legs out from under their partners and sold it direct, and likely at better than dealer pricing!
Fair Game? How would Genetec like it if the tables were turned and a certified Genetec dealer, who was given a huge project to bid by Genetec, switched it over to Geutebrück, Milestone or OnSSI? They would terminate that dealer partnership so, why should dealers tolerate this behavior?
Whether they make money or lose money on the deal is irrelevant. It is BS when any video manufacturer sells direct, no matter what the circumstances!
No Excuse!
As for "Motorola is watching", direct to the customer is and has always been their core business model so,... stand by!
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Manufacturer #10
I work for a manufacturer and I voted 'no.'
However, there is something else to consider here; I have personally been to the Panama Canal twice over the last 10 years to help them clean up the shoddy work of integrator's. There are a lot of very capable integration companies out there but there are also companies that completely blow it - which in many cases can make the manufacturer look bad. Both times I went down there the integrator was blaming our equipment even though the issues were due to installation/configuration - my job was not just to fix the problem but help repair the relationship with the Canal. This is not the only example either; I have been to airports, nuclear power plants, government buildings in DC and more under similar circumstances.
Even though I voted 'no' I can understand why manufacturers may want to go direct in some cases.
Create New Topic
David Lieberman
If integrators sign on with you because you represented to them that you sell through them, then you have a moral obligation -- whether or not a legal obligation -- to adhere to that business model.
Further, I believe that if the mfr keeps the largest transactions for itself, eventually the threshold for "largest transactions" will drop, leaving just the "crumbs" for integrators.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #11
I am not sure this is new news but it does appear that Genetec is taking more risks going direct in recent times as well as making integrations with other providers more difficult. We dropped Avigilon years ago because of this same trend but I can say that we have personally met with many municipalities to discuss projects to find that Genetec has been dealing with them directly on software and LPR deals. In response to one post above, we in all cases have not, however, seen any price savings. The design is often built to maximize go forward support and licensing costs and resulted in that municipality being locked into a very expensive solution with high switching cost - which is understandable for a software provider's interest versus an integrator that is looking to work with them on several competitive projects for years to come. We have had a much better experience with Milestone respecting these lines but curious if there have been any horror stories there from any of you? John - appreciate your posts. I think it is important for all of us integrators to understand if it is a few greedy sales people or a corporate strategy and if it is the former that Genetec will make it right. Personally I am wary at this point of registering projects with them that aren't publicly marketed.
Create New Topic