Manufacturers, Reward Integrators With Guaranteed Registration Payout

By: Brian Karas, Published on Jun 23, 2016

Project registration is broken.

And it hurts both manufacturers, who could win more deals, and integrators who have great local strengths.

In this note, we explain why this alternative would work better than the traditional model of adding percentage points of discounts only if the integrator wins.

******* ************ ** ******.

*** ** ***** **** manufacturers, *** ***** *** more *****, *** *********** who **** ***** ***** strengths.

** **** ****, ** explain *** **** *********** would **** ****** **** the *********** ***** ** adding ********** ****** ** discounts **** ** *** integrator ****.

[***************]

Historic ******** **** ******* ************

****** ******* ************ ******* complaints *******:

  • *** ****** ******** *** ******* integrators ** ** ***********
  • *********** ***'* **** ****** up ******** **** ******* a ********** *******
  • ******** ********* **** ******** orders ******* ***********
  • ********** *** *** **** incentive ** ******* *** "best" ******* ** **** feel **** ***** ***** lose ******* ****
  • **** ******** *********, *********** do *** **** ******** upfront *** **** ** wait *** ******** ****** quoting

Alternative ** ******* ************ *********

******* ** ******** *********** a ******** **** ******* only ** **** *** the ****, ***** ** incentive **** ********** **** a ****** ** *** deal ****** ***** *** integrator, ******* ** * finders ***.

*** ****** ** *** incentive would **** ***** ** the **** ** *** deal, *** *** ****** on **** ******* ******* margins.  ** ******* ***** be:

  • **** **** $***-$***: $*** Payout 
  • **** **** $***-$***: $*,*** Payout
  • **** **** $***+: $*,*** Payout

*** ********* ***** ** intended ** ** ***-******.  This ********** **** ****** deals ***** **** ************** more **** ** ******/******* than ******* *****, *** integrators ** ****** *** register ** ****** *******, not **** ****** ** secure * ************ ********.

How **** ****** ************ ********

  • ******* ** ****** *********** for **** ******** ******* of ***** ********* ** try ** ***** ****** power
  • *********** ********** **** ** providing ******** **** **** will *** **** ** matter *** **** *** deal
  • ********** *** **** ** a ****** ***********
  • ********** ***** ** ***** what ***** ********* **** be *** *** ********* price ***********

**** ***** ********** *** integrator to ***** ** *** best ******** ******* ** worrying ***** *** ** if **** *** *** a ************ ********, ** if *** ******* *** may ** ****** ***** scope.  

************* ** *** **** to ******** ** **** the ********** "***********" ** the **** *** ** not **** ** ****** frustration **** ** ********** who *** * ******* ********* does *** *** *** final ****.

*********** **** **** **** incentive ** ******* * manufacturer's ******** ** **** where **** **** **** may ** ** * greater ************, **** ** when *** ******** ** relatively *** **** ***** office *** **** ****** to ******* **********. ** this **** *** ********** influencing *** ****** ***** realize **** ***** ** lose *** *********** *** to ****** ***** ****, but **** ***** ***** earn *** ********* ******.

********** **************

**** *********** ******* ************ discounts, **** ******* ***** limit *** ********* ******* to *** ********** *** clearly ***** *** ****** and ********** *** ********/*******.  ******** managers ***** ** ******** to *** ***** ********** the **** *** **** do **** *** ******* ************ verification.

**** ******* *** **** eliminate ********** ******** ***** *** ************ discount *** ******** ******* needs ** ** *********** with ************.

*** **** ***** ******** it ***** ** **** to **** *** ********* payment ** *** ********, one ** ***** *** one ** ** **** completion.  **** ** ** ensure **** * ******* that **** ** ******* than ******** ** *********** *** accordingly.

**** ******* ** **** likely ** ** ********** for ************* **** *** project ************ ********* ** a *** ** *** end-user **** ** ******** small *********.

****!

*** ** **** **** you ***** ** **** alternative ** ******* ************ discounts.

 

Comments (35)

Im getting more suspicious on why manufacturers want our clients information. It is like they are trying to gather as much as they can, put it in a database, and 5-10 years down the road when due for equipment replacement or upgrades, they will use it to solicit the clients directly...just like third party warranty companies get vehicle data from dmvs and solicit you to buy an extended warranty when they calculate your car to be nearing the end of its factory warranty.

Just food for thought.

If the manufacturer has in their program a way to "protect" the reseller that did the work selling the opportunity I understand the need for the end-user info. Then they can know if another reseller submits a registration for the the same client they have it flagged to protect the original partner by not giving them the same discount or no discount at all (however the program is designed).

But as we know most of these programs are not designed to offer the protection so for those I would agree to be suspicious of the need for your end-user data.

Your client information? It's a team effort and there has to be some overlap/sharing of the client relationship. Integrators and manufacturers are regularly replaced. A shared relationship is required for continuity in the event someone is kicked out.

Yes...MY client information since I operate a good chunk of my company by word of mouth.

I wouldnt put it past a manufacturer to pull some stunt as I previously described...a manufacturer pulled it once on my distributor and got ripped a new one. Manufacturer rep skipped the dist, went straight to client, client said "oh no no, I only do business with bob".

Lets see how pleased manufacturers are when we start asking for data privacy disclosures...for shits and giggles Ill start asking and have my lawyer review them.

Preaching to the choir- its been mentioned plenty on ipvm...manufacturers dont care about the integrators, especially hikvision...selling to end users direct, and driving price and margins down, and playing other games, so please dont give me "its a team effort" Hillary, because 10 years down the road I can bet money yall will be going thru that database and skipping around the integrators.

I was tolerant of your ignorance up to the "Hillary" statement. "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater."

Ok, let's be cordial please.

Been through many situations where distributors immediately ask for end user information and after being burned a couple times I just provide fictitious information. When the PO comes from my customer I then reference the project registration number. Of course there are a few that slip through the cracks but this is one way to mitigate manufacturer/distributor poaching.

From the votes so far, integrators are showing a preference for the guaranteed payout, while manufacturers strongly prefer status quo.

End-users, were any to respond, I imagine would prefer the guaranteed way, as it makes the dealer more willing to invest time with the prospect.

I've never seen a manufacturer 'protect' an integrator, specially not a small one as ourselves. Manufacturers ar profit driven and there's nothing wrong with that, i'm profit driven to. However, in my experience they'll just drop you as soon as it wins them a deal.

I'd rather not have the litle extra marging but keep the client. I agree with UI1, MY client.

Ha another nice 'partnership' terminated by a manufacturer a couple of weeks ago on a distributor event. The manufacturer sales person came up to me apologising for the termination or our partnership with them and that discounts would still be given etc etc. Well, that was the first time i heard our 'partnership' had stopped to exist... I know what the problem was, we're just to small to be interesting to them

But hey, let's stay positive. I'm open to any manufacturer whishing to prove me wrong :-) Untill then, i'll go my own way and position myself manufacturer independant which is a better way for the customer to get the best fit camera's for every situation because i'm free to choose and mix whatver i want without having to be bothered by targets etc

We have definitely seen a bit of the negative side, but have also seen a positive side of manufacturers that it'd seem a lot of the above haven't gotten to (I'd chock that up to fairly dependent on the RSM in that area).

There have been a few instances of us being the only integrator talking with a prospect, and all of a sudden after mentioning it to manufacturers about registration other competitors show up in the picture. On the flip side, I have also had manufacturers definitely go out of their way to help protect us to the customer.

I definitely think that a newer way of registration would definitely help motivate our sales people to get project registered with manufacturers (guaranteed payout to them, and helps manufacturers in making it more likely they sell); though counting on a guaranteed payout is probably still going to be a bit of sour grapes if you lose the overall deal

Maybe make it so the registration information is completely confidential to manufacturer reps at certain levels as to eliminate poaching.

Let the computer system check to see if theres an existing registration and answer back with a yes/no answer.

Kinda like how call center agents at credit card companies can't randomly access your account without you giving them certain information.

As a manufacturer I don't think project registration is dead, but I do think the value of "partnerships" seems to be waning. And maybe that is a manufacturer issue, or maybe an integrator issue. I really don't know.

What I do know is I value mindshare and partnership over volume. The volume will come if I can get the first two. Or maybe not, I have small guys that do great. Love them.

But without information sharing there is no partnership. And things can get messy. For example- I may have more than one dealer going at the same project and because one didn't share that they were in first and actually driving product, I register it to a second.

And for the individual thinking we are holding on to info for 10 years in the future. I have to admit I laughed out loud. Maybe other manufacturers are more organized that I have not seen but every one I have met, worked for or have friends at- no way are they that organized to cohesively put a targeted plan together to go after all that info. My company is fairly large and it's all we can do to chase down current business.

I don't like the guaranteed payout option as this would simply give "some" lazy integrators a way to register the project, without really working to close the business. I see some integratiors registering the "project" with multiple manufacturers, solely for the purpose of hitting the lottery on guaranteed payouts, no matter who wins the project.

Much like "some" lazy realtors that don't work to sell homes but rather put out effort, only to get the listing. This way when the home sells, they get paid commission, without any substantial work/effort. This may be the exception rather than the rule, but it does happen.

The whole issue of project registration, begins with the integrity of the manufacturer and its representatives. We too have been burned in years past by manufacturers and/or their rep firms who elected to either go direct or share project information with other integrators and as such, we don't do business with them anymore, period!

Ultrak comes to mind from years ago and I am sure others could be named here!

Developing a honest, trustworthy and healthy relationship with a manufacturer can be a huge benefit for both the integrator and the manufacturer.

Integrator benefits of project registration for us go beyond the additional discounts that we may receive initially, and includes technical, engineering and sales support before and after the sale.

In the big picture, project registrations help manufacturers with forecasting sales and as such, integrators benefit and are less likely to be in a position of having product delivery issues, because specified products are unavailable.

We value our relationships with select manufacturers and trust that they respect and value their relationship with us!

I see some integratiors registering the "project" with multiple manufacturers, solely for the purpose of hitting the lottery on guaranteed payouts, no matter who wins the project.

Who would this be objectionable to? An "integrator" doing nothing but registering unknown projects would essentially be doing lead generation, no?

Who would this be objectionable to? An "integrator" doing nothing but registering unknown projects would essentially be doing lead generation, no?

No! Registering projects solely for the purpose obtaining guaranteed payouts isn't lead generation. At least, not with reputable manufacturers. Again, I emphasize the importance of bi-directional honesty and integrity between the Manufacturer and the Integrator

It is objectionable to any hard working integrator who is legitimately trying to win the business with a particular manufacturer's technology and solution.

It is objectionable to the manufacturer who is trying to give their products a competitive edge and not just offer everyone/anyone a payout for registering a project.

Most manufacturers I know want Integrators who will grow their business, with their brand, beyond the single project registrations, vertically and horizontally in the marketplace.

Financial benefits of project registration, whether they are additional discounts, rebates or payouts should be a reward for a WIN, not the completion of some registration form.

This anybody can win, just sign up approach is, in my humble opinion, stupid!

Give us the best possible margin to work with, and let us compete with our other value-added differentiators and we will WIN the business, most of the time.

It would be really irritating to bust our &%$@ to win the business and have some competitor get a $5000 Guaranteed Registration Payout.

This anybody can win, just sign up approach is, in my humble opinion, stupid!

Not anyone can win. You have to know who the customer is, what the scope of the project is, which products are to be used, how big the budget etc.

And know it before anyone else.

Doesn't that have a value to the manufacturer? The way integrators talk around here, *just* that information alone is gold.

Public Bid projects, obviously wouldn't be eligible for guaranteed payments.

This doesn't preclude the manufacturer compensating an ass busting Johnny come lately integrator when deemed appropriate either.

I don't like the guaranteed payout option as this would simply give "some" lazy integrators a way to register the project, without really working to close the business. I see some integratiors registering the "project" with multiple manufacturers, solely for the purpose of hitting the lottery on guaranteed payouts, no matter who wins the project.

I understand your concern, however like traditional project registration, the deal would need to meet some basic criteria before the regional manager would register the project to the dealer.

Similarly, an integrator cannot (or, should not be able to) just register a bunch of projects by supplying only minimal information.

If project registrations were that easy integrators would register everything as a project, just to get a "free" 5-10% discount, but we know that does not happen.

In the past I have seen numerous cases where an integrator is able to register a project, due to their initial efforts with the customer, but then loses out on the final bid. In those cases integrators are essentially giving away free designs and consultations, and I do not think that sets up a "healthy" relationship either.

Define minimal information.

Would Customer and Contact, Budget and Time frame, and Proposed Product be enough?

Many years ago I had a short stint in car sales. We had a sales guy that would be sure to be the first to introduce himself to almost every customer that came on the lot. By default, he was entitled to 50% of the commission because of how the structure worked within the company. For 6 months, he was our number one sales person, despite not being directly involved with any sale on a personal level.

In a relative term, he registered each client walking in the door and spent at most 2 minutes with them only to hand them off to someone else to do the hard part. While he was smart in taking advantage of the program in place, he upset the rest of the sales staff and customers in the process. After 1 year he was fired from the company, thankfully...

Paying a dealer for project registration regardless of who wins the project strikes me as similar to my example above.

Fast forward: I don't allow project registration unless the dealer has a compelling case, in which case I will do my best to protect them.

In a relative term, he registered each client walking in the door and spent at most 2 minutes with them only to hand them off to someone else to do the hard part. While he was smart in taking advantage of the program in place, he upset the rest of the sales staff and customers in the process.

Yes, that is nearly useless for everyone involved.

That's because he was taking advantage of the sales and marketing effort already expended to get the person to walk thru the door to begin with.

Let me ask you a question, if he had brought the prospects on to the lot himself, prospects that may never have walked thru the door otherwise, and then proceeded to hand them off, would anyone have had a problem compensating him then?

I don't support a dealer simply being a lead generator, I expect them to be a active partner in chasing the opportunity. I have plenty of loyal dealers that work hard to promote our product, and in turn I work hard for them as well.

Direct to you question, he didn't bring in new clients, not one... Had he done so, I would still be against the 2 minute hand off that he did. If you don't have time to secure/chase the opportunity, please don't ask me for registration credit.

If you could pay a consultant $500 to spec your products into every job they touched, would you?

Then consultant become my salesman

right?

Yes, you could look at it that way.

Short answer is no, as $500 might exceed the profit on very small projects. I'm all for true project registrations that represent new opportunities, but trying to register because you mentioned my name in a conversation over drinks about a existing opportunity seems over the top.

Consultants are already paid by the end user to come up with a solution that best meets the needs of the end user. Manufacturers paying the consultant as well sounds like corruption to me, of which I want no part of.

I think that "consultant" and "very small project" do not often go together, I'm thinking about larger projects, something where the customer is going to spend a lot of money, and thus engage the services of a consultant to advise them.

I'm all for true project registrations that represent new opportunities, but trying to register because you mentioned my name in a conversation over drinks about a existing opportunity seems over the top.

Agreed, though I do not think anyone said or even implied that.

As far as paying the consultant, I am trying to ask how you would value a lead for a larger project. Who cares if the person bring you a qualified, legitimate, new lead calls themselves a "dealer" or a "consultant" or a "lead generation service"? If they are bringing you a good opportunity that you would not have otherwise had, do you not think it is fair to compensate them?

Brian, yes there is value in a new lead, and as such a comp should be in place to reward.

My thoughts are that it should be clear that its a new opportunity. Also, said person should pick a partner, and not project reg. with everyone. Much like integrators, manufacturers network as well, and occasionally I find someone has submitted project registration with multiple manufacturers.

How can you submit project registration to multiple manufacturers, unless they are all components in a solution?

Are you saying that you have seen someone submit the same project to Axis and Arecont (for example), but where only one of those two vendors would actually end up getting used in the deployment?

Yes, I have seen a integrator try and register the same project with multiple manufacturers. Once I discovered this, I severed my relationship with them.

That seems like a problem no matter how you're handling project registrations then.

Why?

Integrator should not register a project with 2 different manufacturers?

What about when your doing two either/or quotes, a down 'n dirty vs. upsell, e.g. quote with Hik cameras AND a seperate quote with Avigilon cameras?

In a perfect world you would be upfront with both mfrs and explain that you are doing right by your customer and the mfrs would be grateful for the opportunity.

In the real world I doubt that happens much.

In a real world

I offer HIK with Avigilon soft

IMO killer combo :)

You won't need to soft sell anything once Hik "unveils" a battle tested iVMS 5200 across North America...

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports on Integrators

Vunetrix Health Monitoring Company Profile on Nov 26, 2019
Vunetrix boasts that they make the integrators the 'HERO' by using Vunetrix's monitoring. We spoke to Vunetrix to better understand their...
Top 2020 Trend - AI Analytics on Nov 22, 2019
170+ Integrators answered: What do you think will be the top industry trend in 2020? Why? For the 4th year in a row, AI/video analytics was...
Top Manufacturers Gaining and Losing 2019 on Nov 18, 2019
2019 has been an explosive year for video surveillance, with the world's two largest manufacturers, Dahua and Hikvision, being sanctioned for human...
ADT Stock Surges - "Leading The Commercial Space" on Nov 15, 2019
Don't call it comeback... but maybe call it a commercial provider. ADT, whose stock dropped by as much as 2/3rds since IPOing in 2018, has now...
Open vs End-to-End Systems: Integrator Statistics 2019 on Nov 11, 2019
Preference for open systems is on the decline, according to new IPVM statistics. We asked integrators: For video surveillance systems, do you...
Biggest Low Light Problems 2019 on Nov 08, 2019
Over 150 integrators responded to our survey question: "What are the biggest problems you face getting good low-light images?" Inside, we share...
Axis Cracks Down On Illicit Channel Sales on Nov 01, 2019
Axis has stepped up efforts to crack down on illicit channel sales according to various industry sources, though, Axis denies this. Online sales...
Remote Access (DDNS vs P2P vs VPN) Usage Statistics on Oct 25, 2019
Remote access can make systems more usable but also more vulnerable. How are integrators delivring remote access in 2019? How many are using...
Integrated IR Camera Usage Statistics 2019 on Oct 21, 2019
Virtually every IP camera now comes with integrated IR but how many actually make use of IR or choose 'super' low light cameras without IR? In...
Altronix Claims Tango 'Eliminates Electricians' on Oct 15, 2019
Power supply provider Altronix claims its new Tango power supply 'eliminates the need for an electrician, dedicated conduit and wire runs'. In...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Disruptor Wyze Releases Undisruptive Smartlock on Dec 06, 2019
While Wyze has disrupted the consumer IP camera market with ~$20 cameras, its entrance into smart locks is entirely undisruptive. We have...
Bosch Budget 3000i Cameras Tested on Dec 05, 2019
Bosch has long had a hole in its lineup for, as it describes, "competitively-priced cameras". Now, Bosch has released its 3000i series cameras...
Anixter Resisting Takeover From Competitor on Dec 05, 2019
Mega distributor Anixter is going to be acquired but by whom? Initially, Anixter planned to go private, being bought by a private equity firm....
Security Sales Course 2020 - Last Chance Save $50 on Dec 05, 2019
This sales course is customized for the current needs and challenges specific to professionals selling video surveillance and access control...
Ireland National Children's Hospital Chooses Hikvision End-to-End With Facial Recognition on Dec 05, 2019
The world's most expensive hospital project ever, the New Children's Hospital in Ireland, has chosen an all-Hikvision surveillance system including...
AVTech ~$70 IP Cameras Tested Vs Dahua and Hikvision on Dec 04, 2019
Taiwanese manufacturer Avtech is taking direct aim at low cost leaders Dahua and Hikvision with ~$70 starlight and white light illuminator...
Ultinous European Analytics Startup Company Profile on Dec 04, 2019
European analytics-startup Ultinous pitches customers to "Have your own video analysis service!" We spoke to Ultinous to better understand their...
Access Startup Multi-Mount Aims To Streamline Reader Installs on Dec 03, 2019
Startup Multi-Mount claims it makes installing access readers 'Fast', 'Secure,' and fit 'any size frame.' The company states its bracket 'fits most...
Resideo CEO To Step Down on Dec 03, 2019
Resideo's CEO, Mike Nefkins, is stepping down, just 18 months after being brought in to lead the now plagued spin-out. Inside this note, we...
Arcules CEO Retracts False GDPR Claim + Dahua and Milestone Claims Examined on Dec 03, 2019
Arcules CEO has retracted a false claim about his organization being a "fully compliant GDPR company" after IPVM reporting (Arcules CEO Threatens...