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)
Undisclosed Integrator #1
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #1
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #4
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.
Create New Topic
Brian Karas
From the votes so far, integrators are showing a preference for the guaranteed payout, while manufacturers strongly prefer status quo.
Create New Topic
Gert Molkens
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
Create New Topic
Matthew Netardus
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
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #1
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #6
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed Integrator #7
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!
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #8
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #8
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.
Create New Topic
Undisclosed #8
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.
Create New Topic