General Consultant Discussion

Looks like Mr. Rosengarden has resurfaced.

Just saw and posted - asking Sage if these folks are really Master Developers. It boggles my mind that someone can close abruptly -- presumably owing money -- and Sage re-authorizes them (which I think happened with some of the MIS Group crew). I took a screen shot of the email - see link below. BTW - Jeff Roth said they are using these guys for some development work. I asked if this was ""friendly"" and he seemed taken aback I'd suggest it was anything but. Email still out to Sage and Nordin asking for clarification on whether these guys are in fact authorized or if they are using SWK authorization? I am totally missing the boat on how someone folds up shop and just re-appears under a new name -- with authorizations -- if in fact that is what happened. http://erplife.com/2012/07/31/hightower-principals-back-in-business/

Nordin say's they are a licensed Sage Master Developer

Yea, I saw that today. I didn't see the Jeff Rosengarden part at the bottom

Is part of the deal that Rosengarden stays in the background? He isn't listed http://erpdevelopers.net/about/people/ or http://erpdevelopers.net/about/company/.

He was on the bottom of the email.

I noticed that but it seemed peculiar that he wasn't mentioned at all on the website.

I agree. It seems they there should be some type of non-compete as well.

Yea, but it sounds like they are pushing niches that SWK isn't interested in, in that geography. Custom program, EBM (dead end) etc. I don't see anything about selling software or supporting and implementing. I'm guessing he cut a deal so that he could keep a roof over his head

I thought authorizations were specific to the individual, not the company. If this is still the case, then it would appear to be on the up and up. Just because a person runs a company into the ground doesn't mean they don't have the chops to be a coder.

I still want my 4K.

@JeffSchwenk These folks were principals in an organization that may have left more than a few (Beth appears to be one) with unpaid invoices. My question -- what responsibility does a publisher have to police these types of shutdowns? I realize that Sage cannot manage the shutdown process but it seems to me that they should be able to manage the re-authorization. If customers and partners where left short - should Sage re-authorize?

Well, I think we all know what the response SHOULD be, but this isn't a perfect world and Sage is FAR from being a perfect company. To put this in a slightly different light, what should Sage do about END USERS that declare banktrupcy, stiff the reseller for $1,500 and continue using MAS? Should they refuse to renew the end user's client care?

You have a good point Jeff. The issue with HTI is that it's more of a One to Many whereas the End User is more of a One to One.

Sure, in HTI's case, Sage does have a bit more clout but this is not a can that they want to open. I can only see a slippery slope ahead of them. Yes, HTI should do the right thing, but I don't see it happening.