- This topic has 17 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Okay, here’s a little something for you to think on.
If I can get some financing to do it, Repairs@ could be expanded to include logging and passing calls for warranty and insurance purposes as well. Here’s the “but”…
We’d have to have some form of income guaranteed to recoup that investment, the timescale doesn’t bother me so much right now.
Think about it first.
K.
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
Are we talking about a cut down version of ACH here. Because as we are all well aware there is already a heafty admin charge levied on this work by the w.p.’s already and unless the work provider is willing to stump up the cost of using the system then I think there is very little left in the cost of a completed job for us poor sods to pay for it.
If it is your intention to ask the W.P.’s for the cost of running it. they will be very suspicious as they will much prefer using their own individual systems as they have total control, no matter how good a new system might or might not be be.
as ever just an opinion
Sean
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
kwatt wrote:the timescale doesn’t bother me so much right now.
…….phone call required 😉
Dave.Re: Repairs@ Expansion
hi del,
on this subject…..
I think Del is correct reffering to the control aspect.
I know that CDSL have a good call centre structure set up. And they are already doing 24/7 facilities directly for some manufacturers. So they would be a direct competitor to this idea, careful what you say.
I have an open invite to CDSL to visit the call centre for the day(with Bridie) and will activate that visit to go on a spying mission.
CDSL also offer weekend management to manufacturers who have in the past closed on a Friday. This is allowing them to collate info from the telephone traffic for their own use…….Kevin.
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
Would we not be better to launch E-jobs and make sure it is stable with no bugs and get some positive feedback in the forums before we bolt on extra bells and whistles.
Sean
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
Sean, I’m only at the thinking about it stage at this point and also tying it up with some other stuff.
There is a link already with e-jobs/ACH, that was planned from the start. 😉
Hence the statement to think about it.
K.
You’ve probably thought of this already but why not miss the work providers out altogether and go direct to the source. Just start small with the likes of say Lofra, I got excellent contract there. The problem my be the these people already have their own agents and getting them to move systems may be a problem or getting the supplier to move agents may be as much as a problem. But if you go after people who are looking at moving you then need national coverage. It has been done before and I’ m sure you have much of that information already but….just rambling at present but the ideas are there
Yeah Jason, that’s really the part of the point of ACH which would allow us to do that without any staff. And do it faster and better.
K.
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
slow down….
lets get the funding inplace 1st, Del and Jason are not up to speed on everything and whilst this is the board room we should also go one step at a time.
ACH will need around £200,000 investment to bring it to the table, lets carry on with raising the funds for now and debate how we spend it once we have secured it.
So many things have to drop into place, at the right time, its premature to sort of talk of national coverage and stuff.
We are able to do that easily with the experience we have and with the plans already in place, what we must be mindfull of is….
If we ever become a work provider we also become competition to those who read our pages now. We have plans to extract funding out of our supporters, not frighten them away by taking their business.
So, no mention of work provider status to any of your contacts, we have plenty on our agenda for the moment.
Kevin
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
The very second any UKW member recieves work from an e-job request
we have then already become a work provider.It’s just at this stage we are not stepping on anyones toes, in so much that it is directed for the present at the general public.
Obviously Ken has more technical information on the capabilities of what the e-job module is capable of as opposed to the full ACH module.
So just for our information and to give us somthing to think about can we allow Ken to tell us the full capabilities of the e-jobs module.
We already know that some of the smaller manufacturers are trying to break away from their respective existing service provider managment partners. And they may not need the full blown capabilities of ACH.
Just for the record I personally dont want to see the day that CDSL are the only game in town.
The second a manafacturer goes with them they know that they loose control of thier spares and this might give some of these smaller manufacturers an alternative.So just as a brainstormin exercise I would like to ask Ken to fire away and tell us the full capabilities of the e-jobs module.
Fire away Ken.
Sean
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
First off understand that e-Jobs is a “dumb” module on it’s own really. Okay so it can be made to be smart, but we need money to do that.
ACH is the clever part.
e-Jobs can (and will) report back to ACH and log any work directly to that system and update the customer in real time with no intervention on the part of the repairer. So the customer gets updates as quickly as the system is updated at no cost to you and with no admin work either. But that’s the point of ACH, to remove the admin burden and increase our profitability as well as add valued services in terms of information that we can then sell, thereby increasing the repairers renumeration, plus reduce their costs at the same time. So we increase the profit levels and then fight to maintain them using UKW.
What the intent of the -Jobs module is is twofold.
1. It lets manufacturers et all see we’re not fucking about and we’re serious.
2. It gets the guys used to using email and IT to recieve work from.
Okay, so it gives it away for free to the repairers, but there’s no point trying to get money from them as they don’t have any, the big boys do so let’s take their money instead. And anyway, we’d make a few grand a year from it, really is it worth the hassle and is it not better spent on the fantastic PR that giving it away for free generates? That is of course if you want to look at it in a callous businesslike manner which I choose not to do. The point of UKW is to aid the repairers, let’s not lose sight of that goal.
ACH’s capabilities are massive if I get my way and it will deliver a system not only to rival the big boys but to beat the bastards at their own game. We will trounce the likes of British Gas in terms of information reporting which is the primary area where the independents can improve. Get past theat hurdle and remove the workload from us and we instantly will be back in the lead in terms of service delivery and reporting therefore we become a far more viable bet for the manufacturers service.
But and here’s the “BUT”… we have to realise that we need to capitalise on the fact that we will be better and that we can then command the rates that WE want to be paid! As I think you’ll find them coming to us for a change, not the other way around.
As it stands e-jobs is merely a means to an end, it provides an easy route for customers and adds a bit of value to UKW for the guys as well as what I outlined previously. The reason I asked is to get views based on the notion that someone may well at some point ask if they can use the system to log calls, if that happens I need to know what the opinions on it are.
Personally, for now, I have been telling those that have enquired about this (and there’s been a few) about the ACH concept and that it will be at least later this year before that sees the light of day. But in steering them that way I introduce an entirely new way of thinking to them straight up and one that they can afford, especially the smaller manufacturers. But with the likes of MFI, ISDAL, DAG and a few others very interested we could quickly find ACH being the defacto standard and with the link to the chargeable work from UKW it’s surely got to be a winner.
K.
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
Sorry Sean, I forgot to answer the point I set out to. 😳
We’re never going to be a WP in the traditional sense, but then I don’t look at things in a traditional light. Whilst we may handle the DATA we are not handling the actual call, merely providing a route for the data to take.
We do not need to handle all the work for any one provider, we have no requirement for security on postcodes or any of that old nonsense as that’s down to the repairers and their clients to negogiate between them. Where we come in is handling the data between the two effectively making life easier for both.
This also means that UKW remains neutral in it all. We will not have the cpability to “spy” on rates as it will be encrypted the only thing we’ll be able to see is call volumes by contract or repairer etc. merely for reporting stats to them all and billing it. Again it’s open yet secure.
The other point of ACH that I would make clear is that because the manufacturer (or whoever) has the information as fast as we will have then it’s up to them to manage that data, not us. I want neither the hassles or costs of doing that, they want the information so let them have it and pay us all for it properly.
They will be able to import the data directly to their own systems, in real time if they can handle it or at scheduled intervals, their call. They will also be able to see the info live on a secure web server for thier stuff only obviously. So they don’t need to pick the fecking phone up and call us for updates or send silly faxes/emails of calls they want updates on, we can tell tehm to feck off and do it themselves. Let’s see how they like having the tables turned on them. 😉
K.
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
thats all ok Ken, however we still can not go down the route of “work provider” as it stands now.
The comparison is perhaps JTM who do fuck all for their admin fee…..we want to do the opposite with ACH.
As far as who has the work to dish out I’m afraid that is out of our hands, I know several manufacturers who are trying to gear their networks to other makes, Electrolux already and Whirlpool are trying to, CDSL will never be the only kids on the block as D&G are going nowhere.
We are a long way from ACH yet and its premature to talk it up so soon. We are even further away from being in a position to handle “contract” spares ect….
Its ok to have vision, however we need to deliver other things first, b4 ACH becomes the next chapter. As for “aiding the repairers” we have to crack the 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} problem first, to be in a position where the repairers help themselves.
Kevin
Re: Repairs@ Expansion
I have no intention of going down the WP route, I abhor the very notion of an admin fee, especially where it is for doing fuck all like JTM etc. and it’s usually a silly number anyway IMO. Yes, we will have to charge for the use of ACH, primarily to the manufacturer etc., but as I said if they want the advanced reporting features then they would have to pay for it in some way anyway. My way, the repairers win as our costs are very low and it requires little staff to run, not a call centre with over 100 employees.
Yep, we are miles away from this being a reality in the sense that you are looking at it from, not so far away from being able to handle the data and get a lot of shit sorted that needs sorting.
Handling spares etc. just isn’t on my radar at all, I really don’t want to go there if I can avoid it. It means massive investment and up front costs when there are others more geared towards that arena that will do it for a fraction of the cost.
You are totally correct though in that we have to get past this 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} problem and that’s only another reason to let e-Jobs be a free ride. But I’m a patient bugger with some things and I think we’ll win if we can show that we can deliver the benefits but we’ll have to show it and prove it first.
K.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.