Sage 100

Client received the attached email from what appears as someone in the R&D department at SAGE. Client is asking if it's a legit inquiry and should they respond. How can I confirm that the email is real?

Laura Dy is legit - so long as they respond to the Sage domain and do not provide any banking info there is no problem.

Would seem as if they are thinking of expanding the bank code field and maybe need to know if they should also expand the number of direct deposit accounts allowed. (My vote would be yes).

Just had a customer email me with the same concern. Not a very good communication in my mind.

I agree with @ThereseLogeais. This is the type of E-mail used by security consultants to test user response rates, because it is a type of phishing. In looking at the screen shot, the signature is different from other Sage E-mail, which is a sign. Sage needs to do a better job with this.

I emailed to ask

Sage will also get a bad response rate, because many will just delete as suspicious.

It's legit via Diane Coffman

It probably went out to all PR module owners based on the message and that so many users have seen it. Any resellers?? Probably not. Another missed opportunity to advocate for them.

One of my clients also got a phone call about their use of the payroll module, so they are calling, as well.

Just took a call from a payroll user about this

I've had several emails about it.

Hi Wayne, I apologize for causing concern within our community. My email is legit. We are gathering information so that we can design the enhanced direct deposit function to adequately meet the customers' needs. We currently offer 36 possible bank codes. We need to determine how many customers use more than one to fund their direct deposit transfers so that we can ensure we don't put anyone in a bind. Thanks, Laura X342044

Maybe now that the rest of the legacies are coming to the BF, they might open up the bank codes to more than 36....

Payroll itself may not be coming across as is. Sage has not formally stated this, but it has been implied (starting at Summit) that this may be integrated Sage Payroll Services. And, voila, it becomes another revenue stream for Sage!

Very perceptive @JohnHoyt - This from a Sage employee today - ""We are hoping that the 2016 release will have an option to do DD vis Sage Payroll Services which would provide users with a slightly more automated solution"" When I asked what a slightly more automated solution meant, the response was - ""it will send the file for you"" Yikes - now THAT is a major improvement for the recurring revenue stream......

Laura Dy (""Dee"") has been a Sage employee out of Toronto area in QA for a long time. It sounds like she's a Usability Analyst now. Her intentions were good. However most people fresh out of QA (a subset of Engineering depts) will act and communicate like they are still in the dregs where there is little to no public exposure and communication. So it's not surprising this communication turned out the way it did, all abrupt and un-official like. I'm glad she responded to clarify. I know she would respond to constructive feedback on how to improve it. She will get better.

I'm not sure someone like Laura should be communicating with customers directly. Sage should formalize all customer communications through a central group using standard procedures. Of course, that might cost money and eat into the bonuses.

I'm thinking that payroll 2.0 may be more like @JohnHoyt is thinking -- some type of integration from Sage Payroll. The biggest downside to that plan is I think many Sage payroll users are only doing it themselves because it is cheaper than using a service. I'm not sure that many would transition to a Sage payroll service if that were their only option. Personally I think payroll is growing more complex each year. It is one application which seems to be able to reap the benefits of a central cloud computing infrastructure though the downside to that is again you pay per employee. If I were Sage and trying to make a decision I would lean toward a payroll service integration and begin writing my ""it's because that's what customers asked for , it's better for the customer experience"" speech.

I have a client who is dropping their annual maintenance, running the rest of their business on their current version of Sage forever, and will be implementing Quick Books for their payroll since it's so much less expensive. They can't see paying 4K just to keep payroll up to date, but they are adamant about keeping it in-house.

QuickBooks is cheaper but for payroll you still have to upgrade QuickBooks every (two?) years (about $400) as QB stops supporting the old version and you pay about $400/year (starting) for mandatory payroll TTU.

If they are no longer your customer, it is a certainty that you make zero dollars. Sage fails to understand this concept.

400<4000