RM Annual Contracts - up in price again

[AlanD]

Our Support contracts are up 6.7% this year. Did your salary go up by that amount? Did the salaries of the guys who do the support go up that amount? Did the school income go up at all? Who gets this money? Bosses at RM no doubt.....Always thought RM was expensive....very expensive....indeed perhaps too expensive now.

[elsiegee40]

I expect their costs have been hit by the falling pound. The same applies to many businesses

[HTCPCP]

and a rising pension deficit...

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/13/job_cuts_falling_sales_and_now_a_mega_pension_deficit_at_rm/

[synaesthesia]

Catch 22 which will end in a downward spiral either way. Prices go up, custom gets pushed away. Prices go down/remain and they still have financial difficulties. They either need something new and exciting to push into the market, push into other markets, or they'll be dead in the water before/if we even leave the EU.

Personally don't believe they're likely to be able to continue like that, and can see a fair few more of their long standing customers going like rats from a sinking ship.

Doom and gloom; it could have been so different with some decent choices made. They could have done so much making the right acquisitions. For instance, what could they have if they swallowed Impero? I imagine Impero (just an example) are easily in a position to swallow RM now; not that they'd want to!

[jertsy]

I spoke to 2 long term employees just before Christmas, both have now been made redundant.

[James_RM]

Hello, my name is James Browning and I’ve recently taken up the post of Head of Infrastructure at RM with accountability for our Networks, Cloud and Connectivity business areas. Prior to that I worked with Schools across London delivering Managed Services. I hope you don’t mind me chipping in.

 

Firstly from a general proposition perspective, we’re working on some exciting new propositions that will help Schools to save money, save time and improve standards. In particular we’re harnessing our relationship with Microsoft, Google and other tech partners alongside development of our own IP to bring competitive cloud based offerings in the areas of Backup, Mobile Device Management, Infrastructure as a Service, Security and Safeguarding. That’s at the same time as recognising that today the majority of Schools are working in a largely on-premise world, so having the support to enable them get there is key. I’d be more than happy to personally visit any of those that have commented to talk you through this in a bit more detail and to be really open, see if you feel the same after we have chatted. Just PM me if you're up for that. Alternatively we will be presenting on a lot of these things at the upcoming RM Seminars, and I’ll be at the majority of these too.

 

As for the annual support contract in particular, we’re continuing to invest in maintaining and widening our supported technologies list to ensure it covers all of the main technologies a School is likely to have today and in the future. I’d encourage anybody that feels their support is not offering them good value for money to get in touch. I do appreciate just how tight budgets are right now, making it more important than ever to get return on your investments.

 

Thanks,

James

[AlanD]

First, a thank you to James, for sticking his head above the parapet, and secondly for his recognition that budgets are tight...indeed almost non existent in some schools.

 

It is true that Cloud Computing has the potential to offer schools a way of delivering ICT at a budget price. The problem is that while it might deliver 80% - when for example using chromebooks, there is 10% (such as technology with CAD and CAM stuff, or music notation programs, MIDI editing etc and accounting software if not MIS systems) which are probably not going migrate. Maybe with 5G networks straight into google we won't require wireless and other network infrastructure - and I suspect the need for on site ICT staff will (albeit slowly) evaporate. But as you say, we are not there yet - and right now we still have to maintain if not install a lot of kit.

 

My concern is that RM seems to be moving to extort larger and larger annual fees from its customers to make up for the inevitable fall in capital costs made by schools rather than trim their costs to match. It seems like you have your existing server customers over a barrel on this. It seems a bit like an airline flying you away - only to decide they are going to charge an increased fuel charge to bring you back....even though the fuel costs the same. I don't think this will win you many friends.

 

I've always found it difficult to purchase stuff though RM - not because of the process, but because prices are often significantly higher than competitors. I have never understood why RM pursues this strategy. Perhaps there are lots of schools that don't get competitive quotes. Take for example recently. I need 4 new replacement SAS drives for a server. RM's price for an engineer to do this on site is almost £1000 for day - which is probably the going rate - and almost certainly provides a nice profit margin. BUT - the cost of the disk themselves - which apparently I have to get from RM are £400+vat each when nearly every other supplier I have looked at sell them for £200 each. Even for loyal customer, this is a bitter pill....especially when there are above inflation support costs too.

[HTCPCP]

Also, just found out that CC4 licenses are no longer an outright purchase, but a yearly subscription model costing far more than it would have done under the previous system. Considering CC4 is still the bedrock of the RM offerings IMHO, this seems a backwards step, and also one that will make schools move away even more into non RM Networks!

[supawat1]

I am sure that the cost of your RM support contract can be paid for you and your team to attend Microsoft SCCM training

[synaesthesia]

Also, just found out that CC4 licenses are no longer an outright purchase, but a yearly subscription model costing far more than it would have done under the previous system. Considering CC4 is still the bedrock of the RM offerings IMHO, this seems a backwards step, and also one that will make schools move away even more into non RM Networks!

@James_RM - any comment on that please?

[ITGURU]

All sounds a bit like BT - lets invest in new technology and faster broadband speeds but the poor people who are stuck on the slowest connections possible still have to pay the increased line rental costs , so unfair.

 

Companies may be introducing new features into their products and inflating the price to cover this but if it's not used or needed its pushing people to pay the continued cost.

 

So glad everything is done in house for support, only costs I have to worry about are web/email filtering and AV along with general maintenance hardware.

[ITGURU]

First, a thank you to James, for sticking his head above the parapet, and secondly for his recognition that budgets are tight...indeed almost non existent in some schools.

 

It is true that Cloud Computing has the potential to offer schools a way of delivering ICT at a budget price. The problem is that while it might deliver 80% - when for example using chromebooks, there is 10% (such as technology with CAD and CAM stuff, or music notation programs, MIDI editing etc and accounting software if not MIS systems) which are probably not going migrate. Maybe with 5G networks straight into google we won't require wireless and other network infrastructure - and I suspect the need for on site ICT staff will (albeit slowly) evaporate. But as you say, we are not there yet - and right now we still have to maintain if not install a lot of kit.

 

My concern is that RM seems to be moving to extort larger and larger annual fees from its customers to make up for the inevitable fall in capital costs made by schools rather than trim their costs to match. It seems like you have your existing server customers over a barrel on this. It seems a bit like an airline flying you away - only to decide they are going to charge an increased fuel charge to bring you back....even though the fuel costs the same. I don't think this will win you many friends.

 

I've always found it difficult to purchase stuff though RM - not because of the process, but because prices are often significantly higher than competitors. I have never understood why RM pursues this strategy. Perhaps there are lots of schools that don't get competitive quotes. Take for example recently. I need 4 new replacement SAS drives for a server. RM's price for an engineer to do this on site is almost £1000 for day - which is probably the going rate - and almost certainly provides a nice profit margin. BUT - the cost of the disk themselves - which apparently I have to get from RM are £400+vat each when nearly every other supplier I have looked at sell them for £200 each. Even for loyal customer, this is a bitter pill....especially when there are above inflation support costs too.

 

I discovered a school who was on RM and they couldn't use our computers because the RM software didn't include the drivers? Sounds like a way to force people buying PCs from RM!!

[foofighterjim]

I discovered a school who was on RM and they couldn't use our computers because the RM software didn't include the drivers? Sounds like a way to force people buying PCs from RM!!

 

RM must have misplaced their crystal ball to know exactly what hardware you were expecting to run . Although you do have the ability to import all the drivers you require into the RMMC so that they are installed when you build them to the network.

[AlanD]

I am sure that the cost of your RM support contract can be paid for you and your team to attend Microsoft SCCM training

I, for one, have never said that RM CC4/support is not worth anything...far from it. I think its very simplistic to simply take the view that its cheaper to go "vanilla". Fine, perhaps if you find and ICT manager with all the right Microsoft boxes ticked (although...that doesn't always prove anything it does give some indication of likely competence) but I am guessing any ICT manger will negotiate a deal which includes continued his ongoing training costs which should be taken into account when assessing the value of RM's CC4.

 

My beef is that progressive and disproportionate increases in support costs are unjustifiable and shouldn't be used to make up for loss of sales and shrinking markets. In 2008 they cost £3740. Today they are over £5000. That's an increase of 2 or 3 times the rate of inflation...at a time when wage inflation has been completely flat - and most if not nearly all support costs are surely labour costs. Its beginning to feel like...now RM has us as a customer and are probably tied into them for the life time of the server RM can extort ever increasing support charges from us at will.

 

And I'm not sure about RM's subscription charging either. I suspect this is an attempt to help school mitigate against periodic capital costs that they are essentially unprepared for.

 

I'd be tempted to think about giving away CC4 for free - because supporting school systems with CC4 is probably much easier and cheaper, and there must be a very nice profit margin on the support costs given the record levels they have now reached.

[HarryMonkey]

I discovered a school who was on RM and they couldn't use our computers because the RM software didn't include the drivers? Sounds like a way to force people buying PCs from RM!!

 

We stopped buying PCs from RM when they stopped making them yet all of our PCs and laptops (Stone, Viglen, Dell, Toshiba etc etc) build straight onto our network.

[ITGURU]

Not sure why it wouldn't work for them then! But that's what I was told!

[HTCPCP]

I discovered a school who was on RM and they couldn't use our computers because the RM software didn't include the drivers? Sounds like a way to force people buying PCs from RM!!

 

That just sounds like the right driver hadn't been imported into the management console. Only bought 5 machines from dell in the last 6 years - and they were all Lenovo M700s that beat the prices from all the suppliers I have used before by quite some way!

[HTCPCP]

I discovered a school who was on RM and they couldn't use our computers because the RM software didn't include the drivers? Sounds like a way to force people buying PCs from RM!!

 

That just sounds like the right driver hadn't been imported into the management console. Only bought 5 machines from dell in the last 6 years - and they were all Lenovo M700s that beat the prices from all the suppliers I have used before by quite some way!

[AlanD]

Its nearly always possible to build any "standard" PC into RM CC4. Yes, you have to add the drivers (as you would on any automated build) - although CC4 has its won way of doing this. Sometimes - particularly if you can't get the drivers in the normal ".inf" format (graphics drivers can be a case in point) then it gets a bit messy - but you can extract the drivers from a PC which already has drivers installed and there are free tools to do this (drivergrabber or something like that). I always buy a single PC first and test its going to work before buying 50 of them - just in case. Never bought PCs directly from RM of course - far too expensive.

[AlanD]

Its nearly always possible to build any "standard" PC into RM CC4. Yes, you have to add the drivers (as you would on any automated build) - although CC4 has its won way of doing this. Sometimes - particularly if you can't get the drivers in the normal ".inf" format (graphics drivers can be a case in point) then it gets a bit messy - but you can extract the drivers from a PC which already has drivers installed and there are free tools to do this (drivergrabber or something like that). I always buy a single PC first and test its going to work before buying 50 of them - just in case. Never bought PCs directly from RM of course - far too expensive.

[James_RM]

@James_RM - any comment on that please?

Hi there again. I'm more than happy to share a comment on moving CC4 to a subscription service.

 

Firstly, whilst as I mentioned we are actively looking at options for Cloud based network management that can chime in with that trend I mentioned of our propositions helping Schools to save money, CC4 is still a core part of our network management offering.

 

To this end we continue to invest in it to keep it stable, up to date, and to add new features in response to customer and market demand. Many of these new features relate to helping Schools start or continue on their journey to the Cloud; recent additions such as OneDrive mapper and upcoming features such as MIS Sync are evidence of this. We've recently made our high level roadmap networks roadmap public to evidence this.

 

This directly links to our decision to move to a subscription based service. By buying a CC4 subscription you are buying in to commitment to ongoing development and the latest version in line with what we have come to expect of any Software as a Service. We're confident that this can save Schools money too, helping them to avoid spikes in spend and choose the right option for them year on year without being tied down by the burden of huge capital investments. As before though, I appreciate that every case is different and I genuinely urge anybody that feels they are not being offered value for money to get in touch.

 

It would be wrong of me not to mention that we also work with a huge number of customers that have taken the vanilla on-premise route, with experience of supporting them in a general support and managed service environment. I've personally seen RM's capability in this area grow tremendously over the last few years, which is reflective of our acknowledgement that to be a true partner we need to be prepared to support a wide ranging set of tech.

 

Thanks again,

James

[James_RM]

@James_RM - any comment on that please?

Hi there again. I'm more than happy to share a comment on moving CC4 to a subscription service.

 

Firstly, whilst as I mentioned we are actively looking at options for Cloud based network management that can chime in with that trend I mentioned of our propositions helping Schools to save money, CC4 is still a core part of our network management offering.

 

To this end we continue to invest in it to keep it stable, up to date, and to add new features in response to customer and market demand. Many of these new features relate to helping Schools start or continue on their journey to the Cloud; recent additions such as OneDrive mapper and upcoming features such as MIS Sync are evidence of this. We've recently made our high level roadmap networks roadmap public to evidence this.

 

This directly links to our decision to move to a subscription based service. By buying a CC4 subscription you are buying in to commitment to ongoing development and the latest version in line with what we have come to expect of any Software as a Service. We're confident that this can save Schools money too, helping them to avoid spikes in spend and choose the right option for them year on year without being tied down by the burden of huge capital investments. As before though, I appreciate that every case is different and I genuinely urge anybody that feels they are not being offered value for money to get in touch.

 

It would be wrong of me not to mention that we also work with a huge number of customers that have taken the vanilla on-premise route, with experience of supporting them in a general support and managed service environment. I've personally seen RM's capability in this area grow tremendously over the last few years, which is reflective of our acknowledgement that to be a true partner we need to be prepared to support a wide ranging set of tech.

 

Thanks again,

James

[synaesthesia]

Hi there again. I'm more than happy to share a comment on moving CC4 to a subscription service.

 

Firstly, whilst as I mentioned we are actively looking at options for Cloud based network management that can chime in with that trend I mentioned of our propositions helping Schools to save money, CC4 is still a core part of our network management offering.

 

To this end we continue to invest in it to keep it stable, up to date, and to add new features in response to customer and market demand. Many of these new features relate to helping Schools start or continue on their journey to the Cloud; recent additions such as OneDrive mapper and upcoming features such as MIS Sync are evidence of this. We've recently made our high level roadmap networks roadmap public to evidence this.

 

This directly links to our decision to move to a subscription based service. By buying a CC4 subscription you are buying in to commitment to ongoing development and the latest version in line with what we have come to expect of any Software as a Service. We're confident that this can save Schools money too, helping them to avoid spikes in spend and choose the right option for them year on year without being tied down by the burden of huge capital investments. As before though, I appreciate that every case is different and I genuinely urge anybody that feels they are not being offered value for money to get in touch.

 

It would be wrong of me not to mention that we also work with a huge number of customers that have taken the vanilla on-premise route, with experience of supporting them in a general support and managed service environment. I've personally seen RM's capability in this area grow tremendously over the last few years, which is reflective of our acknowledgement that to be a true partner we need to be prepared to support a wide ranging set of tech.

 

Thanks again,

James

 

So to clarify, it will no longer be possible to buy a single perpetual license to add a machine to an existing CC4 network? If that's the case, it's time to move away.

[synaesthesia]

Hi there again. I'm more than happy to share a comment on moving CC4 to a subscription service.

 

Firstly, whilst as I mentioned we are actively looking at options for Cloud based network management that can chime in with that trend I mentioned of our propositions helping Schools to save money, CC4 is still a core part of our network management offering.

 

To this end we continue to invest in it to keep it stable, up to date, and to add new features in response to customer and market demand. Many of these new features relate to helping Schools start or continue on their journey to the Cloud; recent additions such as OneDrive mapper and upcoming features such as MIS Sync are evidence of this. We've recently made our high level roadmap networks roadmap public to evidence this.

 

This directly links to our decision to move to a subscription based service. By buying a CC4 subscription you are buying in to commitment to ongoing development and the latest version in line with what we have come to expect of any Software as a Service. We're confident that this can save Schools money too, helping them to avoid spikes in spend and choose the right option for them year on year without being tied down by the burden of huge capital investments. As before though, I appreciate that every case is different and I genuinely urge anybody that feels they are not being offered value for money to get in touch.

 

It would be wrong of me not to mention that we also work with a huge number of customers that have taken the vanilla on-premise route, with experience of supporting them in a general support and managed service environment. I've personally seen RM's capability in this area grow tremendously over the last few years, which is reflective of our acknowledgement that to be a true partner we need to be prepared to support a wide ranging set of tech.

 

Thanks again,

James

 

So to clarify, it will no longer be possible to buy a single perpetual license to add a machine to an existing CC4 network? If that's the case, it's time to move away.

[James_RM]

So to clarify, it will no longer be possible to buy a single perpetual license to add a machine to an existing CC4 network? If that's the case, it's time to move away.

Thank you for highlighting this. To clarify, adding machines to an existing network is definitely possible. The subscription service becomes relevant when a School chooses to upgrade, or indeed if they are installing a new network altogether.

 

I hope this helps.

James