Committee Education

Sage Live Panel - need your feedback Emailed Ed Kless to ask for clarification on the purpose and direction for the Sage Live panel. Recall we had a conflict between what we'd first agreed to, a brain storming panel, to Ed wanting to recruit resellers to work with CPAs on Sage Live implementation. His email reply: The panel can be both - he's open to all conversations.

We can discuss this at tomorrow's meeting. I think John Hoyt's opinion would be helpful. I still think ""recruiting"" is premature. That comes after interest-generation, which IMO has not yet happened. There are other opportunities for expansion, and I don't think many want to go down market without a compelling reason. 1. What is the true consulting opportunity here? Why should we not assume that the real customer relationship doesn't stay between the CPA and customer? In that situation, we have NO leverage or opportunity build a sense of value; we are the merely the plumber in to get the water turned on. Worse, we are essentially turning on the water in plumbing designed by the CPA-customer discussions which we don't really know. If customer doesn't like the end result guess who gets blamed? We don't even get a referral. 2. What is the clear distinction between Sage Live now and the alternatives? How is this different from FinancialForce? Why should we not expect implementation to be closer to the FF experience, or any other QB upgrade experience? So, yes. ""Recruiting"" from Sage 100 partners is premature. It looks to me like all risk and no $$ upside. If this is different, it will take much more than a single panel to move the dial.

Our meeting is Friday. :) We have a special opportunity as the group 90 Minds to influence a Sage program. This is historic. It is something that we have been and continue to strive for, recognition of 90 Minds as a group of experts. I would like to find a way to meet their objectives and ours. I was very pleased that Ed is open to all conversations. Any collaboration now or in the future will be influenced by our response to this specific event. Just as we do not want Sage controlling our conversation, in the same respect they do not want us controlling theirs. Let the objective stand; to share ideas and develop a meaningful dialog, for both sides.

I think more information is the place to start. More information on the product and Sage's vision for this product. And Sage's commitment to it. (And unfortunately that changes with management).

Recall that the panel has a pre-requisite to join, viewing a Sage produced video on the Sage Live product. From what Ed described, he and Pete (Sage Live tech?) recorded/are recording a piece that is like an interview about the product and its features. If we add the marketing/product placement info (I think that is what you meant by vision) would that satisfy it @JaneCavanaugh?

I think so.

I do think this subject should be of wide interest to 90 Minders. And I think a very heavy dose of education about the product and market - especially the competitive experience - is needed. That should be followed by a discussion - a smaller dose - of the partner strategy Sage has chosen to go after that opportunity, followed by an even smaller dose of recruiting. Reverse that order or the relative emphasis of the 3 segments, and I fear that we will lose credibility and authority within our membership. THIS is the fear that drove my earlier post.

A small dose of recruitment, agreed. Ed can figure out who attended the panel and contact them directly, so not really worried about it. Beef-up the upfront pre-requisite with marketing and positioning info. of the product, agree. The competitive information, while near and dear to your heart Jerry, may not be as readily available. To me the main point is the brain-storming session and I hope it will be helpful to everyone.

Moira, I think we're on the same page. FWIW, a realistic understanding of the competitive environment serves as proof that a vendor knows what's doing. We'll see.