Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ns-mx!umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu!amthor From: amthor@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Geoffrey Amthor) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Who will buy the NeXT Summary: There are better solutions than screwing university people Keywords: Educational discounts, undercutting dealers Message-ID: <235@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> Date: 2 Dec 89 15:38:57 GMT References: <964@abvax.UUCP> <246300069@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> <1989Dec1.232137.11584@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Sender: news@ns-mx.uiowa.edu Reply-To: amthor@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu.UUCP (Geoffrey Amthor) Organization: U of Iowa, Iowa City, IA Lines: 139 In article <1989Dec1.232137.11584@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: >In article <246300069@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> jpd00964@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: >> >>/* Written 10:05 am Nov 29, 1989 by jaz@abvax.UUCP in uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.sys.next */ >>>When comparing price, everyone keeps >>>mentioning the educational price of $6500. Note that most people must pay >>>$10,000 for the machine. I personally feel that Businessland may have a hard >>>time selling a machine to a personal user who has the knowledge that his >>>buddy can get a NeXT computer and printer for $5000.00 less than he can. >> >>The same is true for Macintosh, IBM, and Zenith though. Education discounts do >>provide a very large incentive for young soon-to-be professionals to learn a >>machine. Taking the machine with them to their future places of business. > >>On this line, though, I have heard rumors of upcomming legislation to prevent >>educational discounts. > >It's about time the law was changed on this. > >One of the things that REALLY pisses off a dealer is when the local college >sells 3,000 machines BELOW THE DEALER'S COST to students -- and the dealer >gets stuck supporting those units. Some of those, inevitably, find their >way into the grey market and outside of the university. > >The result of this? Ask the dealers in Ann Arbor, MI. More than a couple >have gone out of business in the last couple of years due to the U of M's >"Truckload sales". Happens every year. > >This is not good folks. Remember, this isn't like signing a dealer on -- the >universities are literally opening up the backs of Semi Trailers and selling >the machines off the loading docks! Support and service? That's for the >local dealers to provide (free, of course, since the system does come with a >warranty!) > >The law is rather explicit in this regard. If I sell you 500 systems for >resale at $4,000 each, and someone else with identical service, support and >sales expertise in the same geographic area comes to me and wants to buy 500 >systems for resale, I better not charge him $5,000 each -- or I may end up >in court. Sure, the burden of proof is on the (screwed) purchaser. But more >and more, the dealers are obtaining that proof, and pressing their points home. > >I've no complaint with a manufacturer selling a university systems at a >great discount for >internal use<. What gets to me and others is when >manufacturers sell direct to the students of that college, through some >under-the-table agreement with a college, systems for their own personal >use -- below the cost at which any other dealer or distributor could obtain >them. IBM, Zenith, Apple and others have been doing this for years. In >fact, some people argue that these companies are selling to the students >>below cost >What the companies are trying to do is build brand loyalty while the kids >are in school -- so they'll take that loyalty with them when they graduate, >and hopefully populate businesses with those same machines. > >-- >Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, !ddsw1!karl) >Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 566-8911], Voice: [+1 708 566-8910] >Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price" Well, let's all throw out the baby with the bathwater. Clearly the situation is not ideal; universities should not be able to sell truckloads of computers and then expect local dealers to handle support and service. But your solution of banning discounted sales to students and faculty is far more damaging than the problem. Students now pay up to $20,000 a year for some of the better private universities. Students now entering those schools can expect to lay out as much as $100,000, including expenses, for a Bachelor's degree. Sure, some of the poorest kids get financial aid, but most families are savaged. And the situation's getting worse. One of the best ways a university can prepare a student for the world is by making sure that he/she is computer literate. That's more than just typing in term papers on the campus VAX. That's having a computer of their own, and learning all possible applications and learning how to program. You're never going to get that kind of commitment out of students unless they get some kind personal link to their machines. Witness what the Mac did to personal computing. But where are they going to find the money? There's a similar situation with faculty. Sure, computer science Ph.D.'s know what a computer can do for them, but how are you going to convince the humanities faculty that they can get a lot out of computers? Most faculty I know aren't rolling in money, and a NeXT at $10,000 is a pretty staggering investment. A NeXT at $6,500-$7,000 is also a pretty staggering investment, but you're lowering the risk and making it a lot more accessible. Furthermore, once a university makes a commitment to promoting personal computer use, you can get the benefits of volume. You get network faculty offices, libraries, and dorm rooms. For a machine like the NeXT, the potential benefits are tremendous. That fancy electronic voice mail is useless without a lot of NeXTs around. That "world on a disk" concept doesn't get you far without a lot of machines around campus to plug into. A good university computer policy doesn't just open up semi-trucks and send the users scurrying to dealers for support. It should have the following components: 1. Significant discounts below retail. 2. Finanical aid available for the truly poor students, so that you don't get a situation where only the rich kids get the boxes. 3. Interest-free loans available to anybody who needs them, so that students or faculty can pay off their machines over several years (but before graduation). 4. Strict limitation of discounts to students and faculty. 5. Strict "one machine per student/faculty" policy; if a student or faculty member wants a new machine, he/she must sell the old one back to the university for fair market value--and that machine will be sold again used. 6. Large enough margins added to the vendors' wholesale price so that the university can handle service and support. That means no $6500 NeXT machines; $7,000 sounds about reasonable. Students should be directed to go to the *university* for both support and service. Yes, that means the university has to hire technicians, but that's the price of privilege. If service is given during the warranty period, the university should be reimbursed by the computer vendor just as any dealer would be. 7. Direct mailings to student families and to faculty, explaining the university's computer policies and endorsing the use of computers. A lot of parents may see a potential computer purchase as an expensive whim cooked up by their son or daughter. This misconception needs to be cleared up. 8. Monthly trade shows offered at the expense of computer vendors. These shows help to drum up interest and makes vendors accessible to students and faculty. 9. Network installed all across campus. Students should be able to plug in from their dorm rooms, faculty from their office, and anybody with a disk should be able to plug into a variety of machines at public access areas. In sum, universities should make it as easy as possible for students and faculty to obtain computers, without offloading service and support to dealers. I don't buy the argument that dealers have a *right* to university sales; however, I do accept that dealers shouldn't be expected to pick up the shit work. Perhaps this could be legislated: in order to be eligible for a discounting program, any given university would have to put in place adequate support and service. But to deny all discounts would be taking a sledgehammer to the the problem, doing a disservice to students, faculty, and to the country as a whole. As the gap between skilled job vacancies and qualified applicants widens, it is suicidal to deny tools to the very people who need them to improve themselves.