A channel can still add a lot of value here particularly when competing against other market players who mainly sell through channel partners. Direct is clearly doing a great job but a quality set of partners (numbers are not really the issue I don’t think as around 90% of “partners” who sign up never perform in cases like this) can still deliver a competitive edge when dealing with SMBs at the upper end where their needs are more complex and they want more personal attention.

I had a very productive meeting today with Tom Miller and Dennis Frahmann from Sage. They were kind enough to share additional details associated with their current proposed rebranding strategy. Several of my concerns were addressed by this updated information. I confirmed our mutual desire to have a strong Sage brand. I expanded on my concerns with the previously shared plan. I also shared my thoughts on how the naming convention and numbering scheme could be modified to address my concerns. They listened, we had positive and constructive dialog and they liked several of my ideas and are taking them back to the internal Sage branding team. I appreciate that Sage is committed to understand our concerns and that they announced this early enough to allow input and they are willing discuss ways to refine the branding strategy to enhance the overall Sage brand while reducing impact on partners and our customers. I understand Sage is holding similar sessions and soliciting additional feedback from other partners as well, which is a good thing. I will share my thoughts in a future post.

I purchased stock within the last year to follow the company for fun. When I reviewed these salary increases, I checked my unrealized gain and received a larger raise than Brad Smith. However, I haven't sold my holdings and I didn't receive a bonus!

I know my customers will be clammering to buy Sage 1425.