penelope

I wonder about other people's experiences if they have ever dealt with Cisco in an RFP. I am really trying to not be biased towards Avaya but it's getting harder to do that.

We have an excellent RFP response from an Avaya partner, several inches thick, every single question or statement in the RFP was answered or acknowledged, they described in depth their functionality, options, redundancy, network diagrams... everything we asked for.

The Cisco partner submitted a 1 inch thick response. Out of 6 sections, the 1st an introduction and what we are hoping to accomplish, the 2nd about how to submit a response, etc. The 3rd about financial and contractural and legal, the 4th about responsibilites, 5th is existing environment and 6th is our requirements.... Cisco had NO response to ANYTHING in sections 1,2,3,4. No "Read and understood", no "complies", nothing.

A REQUIREMENT is full redundancy between our Data Center and HQ. Cisco's response to that statement was "Redundancy is available at an additional cost." That's it. Didn't quote the cost or explain their architecture, NOTHING.

On E911/ CAMA and the question of how it is administered and maintained they replied, "Show port". WTF is that? Are they stupid or something? Avaya answered it IN FULL with 5 pages explaining their solution.

We have 71 digital polycoms which were not accounted for. We asked why? They said they included analog adapters. For 1, no they didn't. For 2, they are DIGITAL which is clearly stated on the existing equipment. Their response? Ooops... that's another $45k.

We have 56 expansion modules mainly used by AAs who monitor multiple peoples' lines. They didn't include them. Why not? "The Cisco phone is capable of 99 speed dials so it was unclear if you really needed the additional expense of line appearances."

I could go on and on like them saying that Personal Communicator was the solution for IP Console. Huh? And in any case they quoted that as optional. When pressed they reverted to IP Console as being part of the system and doesn't need the additional application/server.

The last meeting we had with them to clear up the last of our questions was just fine but a Cisco exec called my director and complained that we were hostile! I am floored. We were not hostile in any way and who the f#%k is he to be putting the telecom staff in a bad light (which I think the purpose was). It was a very calm meeting and discussion about their systems. We were harder on some others. We engaged a VoIP consultant to help us wade through everything and his opinion is that we WERE NOT. Also, one of the Cisco reps used to be our Avaya rep (we all know why she was added to the team when she wasn't originally). She knows the consultant and she had the balls to call him personally after the meeting. Unethical to say the least.

__________________
Penelope

martinyoung

As you can tell from my avatar I am biased, but I will try not to be. When Cisco was first getting into telecom, I heard from many people that Cisco didn't get it. Their sales staff assumed that selling phone systems was like selling routers. It took them a while to figure out that phones are different and have different requirements and that everybody could have a completely unique arrangement for their phone. They also had to learn that different companies use their phones differently.

It sounds like your Cisco sales team has not learned this yet. You have a number of holes in your Cisco RFP and if management prefers Cisco, you are going to need to fill those gaps or your cutover could be unhappy.

If you can, explain to your director the concerns you have and that you apparently do not have a viable response from Cisco yet.

I have heard from people lately that Cisco does do a good job now selling their phone systems so there is hope.

But I still favor Avaya.

__________________
Marty
Retired Avaya DSIC tech

PBXtech.info

 

Phone dude

I'll give it to Cisco, their sales guys can land a contract hands down. They are already high on a pedestal for their data reputation, and rightfully so. So for that reason, the IT guys listen Cisco. If Cisco says they can do X-Y-Z, they beleive it is the word of god.

But, the problem starts when they go to implement the system, and dont understand traditional telecom language.

About 4 years ago, a title company with 50 locations nationwide went to Cisco. I had to come in on a Saturday, when they were getting the IP system up and running. Corp was smart enough to know they needed a "legend" tech there in case A) The solution wouldnt come up, and would need to go back to the Legend AND B). Tell the Cisco tech how the current system was set up and translate the telecom "lingo" for them.