Archives of the TeradataForum

Message Posted: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 @ 16:58:33 GMT

	<Prev	Next>		<<First	<Prev	Next>	Last>>

<-- Anonymously Posted: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 09:32 -->

Having only just viewed this thread, I want to add my views re the questions posed;

1) A service-based fee implies a whole bunch of other things; service suppliers competency/experience, definition of service/certainty/value of outcomes. For a service based approach to work, it's got to be cost-effective and as others have shown, quantifying the true value of any compression exercise can be complex and not always clear. And after all, why shouldn't we as professionals be able to do the MV compression ourselves?

2) Low-fee non-results based. Well, I guess if you can run a business off this being charged at $25/hour...8-)

3) See point 1 above, I think this could be VERY subjective and I'd actually be looking to some of my junior staff to be able to do this sort of thing. Trying to quantify deferred Cap Ex value on an already foggy set of calculations/valuations is going to be a very tough sell to our shop.

Generally also, a tool of the sort you seem to be proposing has an extremely niche usage point, and surely would be better used in conjunction with other tools that look at other additional different aspects of the system? Even better, combine the capability with other pre-existing tools (that also have the capability for high pay-back) and then you have a rather more compelling offer.

There are already several well-established tools out there with excellent track-records, and given the complexity of managing a Teradata system already, it would seem sensible to me to have my people use a proven suite of tools, of which MV Comp is but a part, and avoid multi-vendor issues in the same space etc? We're trying to reduce the number of parties we deal with not vice versa.

Just my view of course...

	<Prev	Next>		<<First	<Prev	Next>	Last>>