The $5 Million Trick: How Your Money is Wasted

By John Honovich, Published Feb 25, 2013, 07:00pm EST (Info+)

Wasting money on unnecessary, gold plated equipment is a common risk, especially among deep pocketed customers. Vendors know this and realize that if they can convince users that certain features are 'mandatory', their sales can increase robustly.

This soon to be classic article titled, "Why a one-room West Virginia library runs a $20,000 Cisco router" is a great case study. You pretty much know where this one is headed and, frankly, it's zero surprise to us.

** *** *** ****, *** **** to ************ **** *** *** ***** and ******* ** **** **** ***. On *** *****, **** ****** *********, leaving **** ***** **** *** **** priced *** *********** *********.

*** ***** ** **** ********, *** recipient ** **** *********, *********** * ******* *** ********** ********** *** **** ********* ******** **** in ********* *** ***** *********.

The ******* ********* / *** ****** *******

******* *** ******** ******* *** *** West ******** **** ** ****** **** over ****** ********* *** ***-**** ***** libraries. ****'* ******** *****:

"*** [*****] ******** **** *** ******* he *** ****** ********* *** *****'* instructions, ***** ******** *** ** **** out * ************* **** ******* **** "******** **** power ********"—***** *** *****. ** *** ******* dug **** *** *****, ********* ** know **** **** ***** ******* *** made, *** ***** ******** **** ** originated **** *** ***** ********** ** Education. *** *** ******** *** "****** to ******* *** *********** ******* **** any *-***** ** ***** *************" ** this ******." [******** *****]

**** ******* *** *** ****, *** it *** *** **** ** *** vendor's ****** *****. **** ******* **** is * **** ** **** *** such * ****, **** ******** **** power ********, ******* * ********* ***********. Even ** *** ****** *** *** suggest **, **** ********* *** *** going ** ****** ******* ** ***** forces ********* ** * **** **** expensive ******* ****. ********, ******* **** every ********** ** ******** ***** **** additional ******** ****** ** ********.

Cisco *** ************

***** ****** ********* ** *** ********* is *** **** ** *** ************ market. ** * ******* **** ****** relations *****, *****'* **** ************ ********* bragged ***** ********* ********* *** '**** *** ******** **** '*****' ** the ***.'

** *** ******** ****, **** **** we **** **** **** *** *** Cisco ***** ************ ****, **** **** a **** ****** *** ******** **** on ********** ******** *****. ** *** other, ***** ************** ***** ***** **** **** ******* ** the **** *** ** *** ******, increasing *** **** **** ***** ***** customers **** ** ****** **********, *********** solutions. 

***********, ***** **** ****** ****** ****** ******** *** ************ ** ********, ********** *** *********** ********* ******* trick **** *** ***** *******, **********, increases ** ****.

Comments (17)

Someone asked about a comparable IP camera example. It would be like specing a 20MP camera or a bullet resistance one. These are features that are sometimes worthwhile but add huge costs and are impossible to justify in such a simple, small application.

I always have this feeling when dealing with ATEX equipment. I mean... €10.000 for a ATEX dome ?

Also, the first large IP project done here on our site was build by Bosch due to our department lacking knowledge. The customer trusted them so much they got talked into buying a core switch (€27k) from Cisco. Even though I had my doubts. Ok, it isn't for a single room but 40 camera's, but still.

Our IT department uses Cisco switches and routers, and our IT department sole-sourced a large quantity of Cisco cameras for a dozen buildings.

The Cisco Video Hardware and Software is terrible, unstable, unreliable, and incompatible with just about anything else. Their software supports very few HD or better cameras. They sell it to you as an appliance on low end hardware at a huge price premium. This also exludes you from using any VM or SAN/NAS.

They spec out a USB port and USB drive at a 100x markup, then deprecate the feature. Cisco also advertised their "Cisco Media API", yet won't give it out.

We are no longer procuring Cisco Video hardware or software.

I've come across this in the past with Pelco with municipal projects - but I'd blame the reseller on this one not the mfg. Its not that they oversold them on a feature but just flat out pushed their margins every year and were never called out on it. The last "incident" i remember was a pelco spectra iii was being charged $9,000 to the municipality. It was just for the camera not any labor. Safe to say they aren't buying any more 9k spectras from that reseller and have been a client of mine for 4+ years.

Paul, did they just essentially say, "Hey a Pelco Spectra costs $9,000, sign here." If so, I've seen that type of tactic as well (from various resellers). However, that's a lot harder to execute today when a buyer can simply google "pelco spectra iii" and get numous prices in an instant. In the old days, when such information was scarcer, buyers might simply think that's an honest, realistic number.

yeah the pricing would get "hidden" in invoices but as you said people are focused on cost saving and budget review so they catch this more often by googling pricing but im sure its still going on

A related tactic that might help them / hurt users is relabeling products such that no one else offers that make/model except for the bigger.

John,

I am afraid that many end users just go with what ever is recommended. When I was designing a new video system for my employer, I looked at every popular camera and VMS, including CISCO. CISCO was recommended by our IT folks. Their solution was costly and difficult to use.

The end user needs to educate themselves. I found a lot of great information on the Internet. One was PELCO's internet for Dummies series. I am not sure it is out there.

I saw this happen with computer customers who talked with Dell sales reps. Seems Dell sales reps are trained to focus on keywords you say like "database" to upsell you higher end servers. So some small doctors office with 5 workstations was told to buy a $10,000 server with SCSI drives and dual Xeon CPU's and other stuff not needed. Turned out the software the office was using only needed to access a shared file on the network. A $1000 desktop, including a cartridge backup system, would have worked, and which did eventually replace the $10,000 server and worked fine.

We just replaced a VSOM system in a K12 entity where Cisco and the Cisco reseller had brain washed the IT staff into using IP cameras that were in most cases 2 generations behind current technology.

The state gov't had originally sanctioned CISCO as the network standard. That enabled them to pitch security at every gov't entity they could and pressure this point of standardization.

The door has swung open for my company now because CISCO hasn't kept up with camera handlers or even offers ONVIF as a potential help. Common sense cost of ownership conversations along with best security practices tore the CISCO walls down very easily.

Recently a new recording system was provided at every school plus a new VMS (10 stations) installed for the headend control for less than the annual SSA charged to the end user by CISCO and their reseller! Wow!

You must look at the photo of an actual location using this $20,000 router:

You could double the size of the library building for that money.

Good point, I should have referenced that in the original post!

Reading the posts above make me sick. This should never happen. Does having freedom mean we can abuse our customers?? Should we abuse the lack of knowledge our customers have or should we help to train them with the return of having the customer trust us?? "Us" This industry collectively.

Could not agree more Luis.

The article does mention debarment. And it is an option I hope is pursued.

West Virgina statute for debarment:

Grounds for debarment are: ....

(E) Any other cause of a serious and compelling nature amounting to knowing and willful misconduct of the vendor that demonstrates a wanton indifference to the interests of the public and that caused, or that had a substantial likelihood of causing, serious harm to the public.

I for one believe Cisco's actions to rise to the level of "wanton indifference", and that the opportunity cost of the huge over expenditure is a "serious harm to the public." Getting a court to come to the same conclusions I have are likely far more difficult.

Since it appears federal dollars were used, I would think debarment could be pursued at the national level. This would have an enormous impact on Cisco.

James, I am pretty sure Cisco falls into the 'too big to fail' bucket. I don't mean this literally, of course, but they are the networking equivalent of Bank of America.

Maybe nothing comes out of this legally but the sheer weight of public opinion and awareness this case brings will help buyers overall.

John,

You are undoubtedly right, and I'm sure Cisco knows it too. Unfortuneately, I doubt the "weight of public opinion" will adequately disincentivize similar behavior from Cisco going forward.

Personally, I just swapped out a Cisco SF 302-08P in a bid I've got going out tomorrow. So I just dinged them for $240. TAKE THAT!

I don't know how much it will disincentivize such behavior. However, it will make many customers think twice, either about using Cisco or, at least, carefully checking quotes. If you are the purchasing manager for networking equipment in Florida, Virginia, etc. I have to imagine you are taking notice of this.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts reporting, tutorials and software funded by subscriber's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.
Loading Related Reports