90p Admin

For 2012 I think we should set our fee schedule based on the Sage tier level of the member. This could be set for both OASIS and for 90 Minds We should consider having two fees: 1. Original (first year) fee 2. Renewal fee If a member wants to join - and they're a subsidiary of a bigger company such as Blytheco or DSD - and the parent doesn't want to join we charge the member 50 or 60% (I'd lean toward 60 %). We can also have higher fees for non-Sage partners though for now I think our requirements should continue that members be partners in good standing of Sage.

At this point, I am not in favor of basing it on tier level. Why penalize the lower tier partner (me) because I decided not to join forces with a larger reseller like DSD or Blytheco? And how is tier level determined? Regarding affiliation with with a larger reseller, if the person is a W-2 employee of the larger reseller, then they would qualify for the DSD or Blytheco group rate. Othewise, I think they should be viewed as an independent for fee schedule purposes. Membership renewal should also be based on participation. If you aren't participating at some designated level, you don't belong in the group.

Where did you read about lower tier partners paying more? Membership renewal will be based on participation -- if you don't participate you won't be able to renew. You'll be dropped and if you want to come back you will have to pay the full first year fee (not the lower discounted renewal). The issue I am trying to solve is not the small VAR or existing members -- it's the larger multi-office companies who may look to join and who in my opinion derive the greatest benefit from this group and should be charged accordingly. We already saw with our present fee structure that it was almost impossible to stagger the fee based on # of consultants because in my opinion most people lied or wanted only to count a small subset. The only really fair way I can see to do it is: 1. What is your tier level with Sage? 2. Higher tier pays more 3. If you are Schulz Consulting (affiliated with DSD) and DSD doesn't join at the higher member fee you can't ""game"" the system and ask to come in as a sole proprietor -- rather Schulz has to come in at say 60% of the fee that DSD would have been subject to. If we don't price it that way then all the big groups are going to claim that their little local yokels should be subject to the little guy rate -- yet the big firm will then have access to all our resources.

Oh, I misunderstood your post. I read it that the higher the tier, the less you paid. The opposite of your intent.

Exactly - the larger firms will derive more value -- no matter what the story is that ""well only one or two people will use it"" .... (which is what we hear from some of our larger OASIS members ) ... I want to close the loophole that the larger firms try to tap dance through by claiming they are ""not so big