Simplivity - anyone use them?
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
All are sold as appliances, but we have a rather unique performance guarantee, so we like to work with our customer to come up with a design based on actual performance data, then we look to get a design that fits the workload and scales appropriately.
This is the crap ass statement that turned me off at the meet up. I do not care what you like to do and how you want to play safe with some guarantee on a piece of tech that I may or may not even damn buy. I am not going to waste my time doing the discovery you want in order to decide I do not want to pay for your damned product. FFS give me a price.
@dafyre Not really, honestly there are about 50 SKUs based on 4 basic concepts.
ROBO (extra small) Starts at a single 6-8 core and 96gb-256 ram with 3TB raw useable (not counting dedupe and compression)
Small 1-2 cpus of 8c to 22c ,128gb - 1.4tb ram, 7.2TB
Medium 1-2 cpus 8c -22c, 256gb-1.4tb ram, and 14TB
Large 1-2 cpus 8c-22c, 256-1.4tb ram, and 20TB low latency storage
This right here completely counters your statement. You have standard hardware spec'd out. list the price or get out. You have SKUs, this means that you have prices for them.
Example: Cisco based Small Starts at $XX,XXX with 1x 8core, 128GB RAM, 7.2TB HDD
We do not say that we want every detail of every configuration.
We are not even saying we want to know partner pricing.
We want MSRP pre discount.
We know that partners have better pricing. -
Including the price range as part of your sales pitches at group presentations (like the Spicecorps stuff) should be a must.
Bonus points if the price tags make it onto your web site! 8-)
-
@JaredBusch OK Jared, point taken, however, other that relaying upwards that some prospective customers REALLY HATE not knowing a price range, there isn't a lot I can do to change the overall operations in the industry.
There is a reason we like to size the solution and its boils down, that if I tell you the smallest node price to avoid any sticker shock, you may take that and cut a po immediately, we still wouldn't know how many you need to meet IO, CPU, RAM, etc.
If everyone rattles off the largest node, you'll think wow that's really expensive, and its likely you don't need it. This isn't just ESXi hosts where we can size based on ram. It is a holistic building block for a datacenter. We are sizing servers, storage, backups, dr, and offsite recovery all in one exercise. So data collection is mandatory from an engineering perspective.
Frankly, I haven't seen anyone say they don't want the product after seeing whet we do and understanding the architecture. I was a customer a year and a half ago, and I get what your saying, if a vendor dodges the price we automatically assume its too expensive, and in some cases were right. you now our ballpark range, from my previous post, you be the judge.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
There is a reason we like to size the solution and its boils down, that if I tell you the smallest node price to avoid any sticker shock, you may take that and cut a po immediately, we still wouldn't know how many you need to meet IO, CPU, RAM, etc.
But that's not a viable customer anyway. Don't hurt good, real possible customers in order to protect someone too stupid to operate in IT anyway. That's not sound logic. You are protecting the wrong people... punishing the qualified buyers to assist the unqualified ones.
That means that that customer can't do things like order food in restaurants, buy a car, buy a house, etc. This is a level of incompetence that is so bad, that there is no way that they could be an operational company.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
There is a reason we like to size the solution and its boils down, that if I tell you the smallest node price to avoid any sticker shock, you may take that and cut a po immediately, we still wouldn't know how many you need to meet IO, CPU, RAM, etc.
But that's not a viable customer anyway. Don't hurt good, real possible customers in order to protect someone too stupid to operate in IT anyway. That's not sound logic. You are protecting the wrong people... punishing the qualified buyers to assist the unqualified ones.
That means that that customer can't do things like order food in restaurants, buy a car, buy a house, etc. This is a level of incompetence that is so bad, that there is no way that they could be an operational company.
But at the same time, a perfectly Good, Viable, and Half-Decent, With a Brain customer will know whether or not they should continue pursuing the Simplivity products after hearing the price tag.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
Frankly, I haven't seen anyone say they don't want the product after seeing whet we do and understanding the architecture.
This is a major, and common, sales mistake. You don't see them. Right, of course you don't. Most of us have talked about this at length before... you don't see them because the moment that you don't have pricing info many of them are already gone and you never get their contact info or ever realize that they might have been customers.
I've seen HR do this with new hires - tell people things so bad about a company via anonymous "pre-contact" information that the company never gets metrics on how many people they've turned away that never moved past the anonymous phase because the candidate turns them down for the job before they even have an interview.
Think about the presentation in Chicago. Every single person had the same concern. Only ONE of them put something online to complain, the others... walked away. You just got lucky that someone cared enough to inform you... and only because another vendor asked a question about you. If Nic hadn't wondered if anyone was using Simplivity, this would never have come up in a public channel (we'd already heard complaints in private ones days before this, and live during the presentation there were messages going around about how pricing was being refused) you would never have had this conversation.
So sure, you don't see the people you are turning away. That's how bad the situation is, you aren't even aware that it is happening.
And it's FAR more than you think. Before this thread, at least a dozen market influencers had a private conversation, none of whom had been at the Chicago event, about what a waste of time talking to Simplivity would be because pricing was being held back. You didn't just risk turning away a room full of people that you talked to directly - but that those people were then actively telling other people that there was no pricing info so to avoid you. You have no idea the degree to which you got the word out that you didn't have pricing.
You never see the people who turn your product down immediately. Never use that as a metric.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
Frankly, I haven't seen anyone say they don't want the product after seeing whet we do and understanding the architecture.
This is a major, and common, sales mistake. You don't see them. Right, of course you don't. Most of us have talked about this at length before... you don't see them because the moment that you don't have pricing info many of them are already gone and you never get their contact info or ever realize that they might have been customers.
I've seen HR do this with new hires - tell people things so bad about a company via anonymous "pre-contact" information that the company never gets metrics on how many people they've turned away that never moved past the anonymous phase because the candidate turns them down for the job before they even have an interview.
Think about the presentation in Chicago. Every single person had the same concern. Only ONE of them put something online to complain, the others... walked away. You just got lucky that someone cared enough to inform you... and only because another vendor asked a question about you. If Nic hadn't wondered if anyone was using Simplivity, this would never have come up in a public channel (we'd already heard complaints in private ones days before this, and live during the presentation there were messages going around about how pricing was being refused) you would never have had this conversation.
So sure, you don't see the people you are turning away. That's how bad the situation is, you aren't even aware that it is happening.
And it's FAR more than you think. Before this thread, at least a dozen market influencers had a private conversation, none of whom had been at the Chicago event, about what a waste of time talking to Simplivity would be because pricing was being held back. You didn't just risk turning away a room full of people that you talked to directly - but that those people were then actively telling other people that there was no pricing info so to avoid you. You have no idea the degree to which you got the word out that you didn't have pricing.
You never see the people who turn your product down immediately. Never use that as a metric.
I completely agree with you, and I'm a CTO based in Italy (so, I suppose, no cultural background involved). I wouldn't even CONSIDER a company that isn't clear in THAT way, in a time where the cloud providers offer bill-explorer tools.
-
@Francesco-Provino in doing product discovery, it's often where we start, rather than where we finish. We need to know what solutions are within a price range or how we should be thinking about a product when looking at the technology. And what keeps just from looking at products that are a total waste of time. You need pricing up front to know which products to include in the list of things to research.
-
@scottalanmiller I cannot argue, ill simply excuse myself, with you being the victor, Ill up vote your post, but keep in mind I gave pricing in my first interaction with you. I'm the engineer, not the sales rep. This is an issue and you are right on every point.
However, being dismissive of a technology due to a non-negotiated price, without conversation is a questionable practice from my perspective. Are you doing your business a favor?
As an architect and customer I would shop features first, based on business objectives, then if the bill is too high, start having the conversation with the business to set expectations, and discuss alternatives. Not fighting you, just my personal perspective.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@scottalanmiller I cannot argue, ill simply excuse myself, with you being the victor, Ill up vote your post, but keep in mind I gave pricing in my first interaction with you. I'm the engineer, not the sales rep. This is an issue and you are right on every point.
However, being dismissive of a technology due to a non-negotiated price, without conversation is a questionable practice from my perspective. Are you doing your business a favor?
As an architect and customer I would shop features first, based on business objectives, then if the bill is too high, start having the conversation with the business to set expectations, and discuss alternatives. Not fighting you, just my personal perspective.
When you're shopping for a mid-range new car do you go test drive a Rolls Royce or a Lamborghini? No, because you know they are way out of your price range and there's no point wasting your time or setting your expectations too high. All we're asking for is a general indication of what price category we're looking at. Are you a Yugo, a Corolla or a Rolls Royce solution?
-
@Nic Well said.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@scottalanmiller I cannot argue, ill simply excuse myself, with you being the victor, Ill up vote your post, but keep in mind I gave pricing in my first interaction with you. I'm the engineer, not the sales rep. This is an issue and you are right on every point.
However, being dismissive of a technology due to a non-negotiated price, without conversation is a questionable practice from my perspective. Are you doing your business a favor?
As an architect and customer I would shop features first, based on business objectives, then if the bill is too high, start having the conversation with the business to set expectations, and discuss alternatives. Not fighting you, just my personal perspective.
Most IT folk don't want to fight a sales dick for pricing just to see if their solution is in the ballpark. What @scottalanmiller said about instantly dismissing your product/company over you not providing pricing is spot on. That's how we do things. For me no pricing = no sale. Suggesting that technique isn't "doing our business a favor" makes you sound like you're actually in sales and doesn't make your company/product/etc. any more appealing (kinda has the opposite effect when you try to attack the methodology of the solution seeker).
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
However, being dismissive of a technology due to a non-negotiated price, without conversation is a questionable practice from my perspective. Are you doing your business a favor?
Yup, I'm protecting them from...
- Costly and pointless technology discovery for technologies that are non-applicable or unaffordable. If someone can't afford a product, they certainly can't afford to waste resources researching it.
- Spending time being woo'd by sales people who are using the opportunity to bypass engineering to talk to management and talk them into products and services that they cannot afford or may fail to compare wisely.
This is exactly what every IT decision maker's job is and entertaining products that are non-applicable or unaffordable would be very bad for the business. So yes, doing them a huge favour.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
As an architect and customer I would shop features first, based on business objectives, then if the bill is too high, start having the conversation with the business to set expectations, and discuss alternatives. Not fighting you, just my personal perspective.
That seems like a costly and wasteful process. Why shop for features you can't afford, why look at products you can't consider? It only takes a second to know who can be considered by price, it takes a lot of education and often a lot of discovery to know what features would be applicable.
One process is costly and reckless, one is cheap and safe. My business and customers don't want to pay me to waste their time. So doing things that get them to useful answers quickly is critical.
Did this just last week. Customer insisting on shopping features first. It cost them a week of discovery, tons of wasted labour because they through in vendors that were totally off the table price wise, ten times the price of other options.
We had this exact conversation with that vendor. Except they were more forceful and were willing to call the engineer a liar on the conference call for not knowing the ballpark price. Eventually the engineer admitted it was ten times the competition and totally out of the price range that was being considered. Call ended. Time was wasted. Vendor won't be considered next time, I assume, even though the features and such were great.
They asked for the price info up front but it was refused. We should have stopped the conversation right there, but went ahead and found out why it was refused.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
. Not fighting you, just my personal perspective.
Sure, that's the enterprise experience that @nic was talking about. SMBs don't work that way. Enterprises do. If you come from the enterprise space I totally agree. When I worked in the Fortune 100 we totally worked that way - partially because we could press for whatever price we needed. Partially because features could pay for themselves over time if they were good enough. SMB can't do that. The best product or the worst are not so dramatically far apart in value. They don't have the leverage to change the prices (and if they did, the vendor would lead with the good price, so it's all the same) and they don't have the time to waste talking to everyone about their solutions, they have to weed through the field extremely quickly.
So I totally see why you feel that way, but understand that in saying so, you are agreeing with @nic's assessment (to us) that the product is gauged for the enterprise and working its way to the SMB, at least in mindset.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@scottalanmiller I cannot argue, ill simply excuse myself, with you being the victor, Ill up vote your post, but keep in mind I gave pricing in my first interaction with you. I'm the engineer, not the sales rep. This is an issue and you are right on every point.
Yup, and I totally appreciate that. For me, I got the pricing straight away. At least the big ballpark numbers. Although I agree that more details would be good, it's a decent ballpark.
-
JUst giving you guys the information that you need to go back to management and explain that to the IT community, this is a conversation that has been had over and over again and we expect all vendors to have done their homework and totally accept that not having pricing up front and clear as day is the same as snubbing the SMB market. That's nothing to do with any specific vendor and is years old discussions. But it is really important for anyone working at a vendor to understand that that is public information and they should take it to heart before opening any SMB conversation. Use this thread as a means of going to management and pressuring them to rethink their approach to the SMB.
-
Part of the issue with private pricing is that we have to assume that we are the ones paying full price and bigger shops are negotiating 50% discounts. So if the pricing isn't public, as the SMB, we simply assume that we can't get the average pricing deals. Nor can we afford to put in the time to fight for good deals. And it makes it impossible to compare solutions when we have to spend a fortune (of our time) to get every vendor to tell us a price. If it takes, say twenty hours with a vendor just to get a price, how do you do that with, say, ten vendors? That's a month of IT time. In the enterprise, that's nothing. For the SMB, that's enough to shut down the company or make a project take so long that the pricing will change and the process will start over.
-
@scottalanmiller I cannot help but feel a bit like I'm being attacked. {salesdick?}
I will assure you the conversation will be moved to our leadership around pricing disclosure to end users. Was here being friendly, I think I'm better off to leave this to the bloggers/marketing folks, but I feel responsible as I should have done the event. Sorry all. Didn't mean to stir up the hornets.
-
@virtualrick said in Simplivity - anyone use them?:
@scottalanmiller I cannot help but feel a bit like I'm being attacked. {salesdick?}
I will assure you the conversation will be moved to our leadership around pricing disclosure to end users. Was here being friendly, I think I'm better off to leave this to the bloggers/marketing folks, but I feel responsible as I should have done the event. Sorry all. Didn't mean to stir up the hornets.
Don't take it as being attacked, take it as getting informed. This is an enormous issue in the SMB space, which is why it is discussed so often and why it is made so public and why SMB IT expects all vendors to take the time to understand this before engaging the market. But this is how you learn.
Keep in mind that had you guys not come into the community, the only interaction with Simplivity would have been the Chicago meeting and lots and lots of people upset about how they were treated there. You are coming in from a position of having kind of offended a lot of people at that Chicago meeting. So of course, it feels a little like an uphill battle. That meeting went so poorly that scores of companies took you off the "to consider or even talk to" list, including companies that you had no idea your message had reached.
So turning that around is important. In this thread, you guys have done pretty well. But there is still a defense of the private pricing tactics, that means that your team doesn't understand the issue. They might provide the pricing now, and that's great. But we are trying to help you guys understand what kind of message you have been sending and why it's not just necessary to give pricing when we press for it, but why it needs to be public. Clearly your team understands and wants to help get us the info that we need, but we are trying to help you not need to have conversations like this in the future to get that info to other people.
Does that make sense? We are not just trying to help you fix one misstep in Chicago, but to help Simplivity fix what to us is a totally snub of the SMB market. That you found out about it because one community made it public enough for you to notice means that 99% of people are disregarding your company and product without providing you the deep feedback as to why.
