I do like the statement from Ian Moyse, "We are seeing the same swathe of change as we have seen in other industries with providers who ignored the changes in customer buying choices (take Kodak, Blockbuster Video and the big record shop chains such as Tower Records and HMV). This change will be a contributor but not the only cause to the start of a new re-shaping and re-sizing of the channel with resellers facing new competition from Telco's, Xsp's and a new breed of reseller and potentially vendors themselves."

I also find it interesting that after VZ re-boot sits channel, Verizon's Executive Director Cloud and IT Services Product Managment and Product Engineering (big title) is quoted on twitter at an expo: "Joe Crawford confirms that SMEs are not self provisioning. Sales channel critical #telcocloud"

In the Wall Street infused pressure cooker that is the C-Suite at many vendors, the channel is tolerated today because they have to increase sales any way that they can. The CEO's stock options depend on it. (I am only being a little witty there.) The debt load that many vendors carry is heavy. It is dependent on sales revenues since the debt is tied in some ways to the stock price. The stock price is tied to revenue and dividend. So the channel is looked at as a tool - a sales tool.

Unfortunately, right now, agents, VARs, inter-connects and even MSPs are worried about getting their own ship in order as the changes occurring around them are affecting their business models. So while they try to keep their own plates spinning in the air, the last thing they can handle is another desperate vendor who doesn't understand the channel nor truly wants to support the way it needs to in order to be successful.

When a company sells direct, the messaging is aimed at the end user. The sales channel is pursuing customers. The company owns the customer - as much as a company can possibly own a customer. [Read this article about it!]

When you sell through a sales channel (like agents or VARs), your messaging is to the channel partner. The company is pursuing partners and making it stupid easy for the partners to sell and acquire customers for the both of you.

Obviously, there are companies with both direct and indirect sales forces.

I run into this all the time. Companies think a channel is the fastest and cheapest way to get feet on the street. It can be, but often, due to misconceptions, it isn't. And then the company has to re-boot its channel program.

The two primary differences between VARs and Agents are that Agents just sell, that's their business model. Get ink, get paid, move on. VARs have an existing business model, usually tied up around one or two hardware/software vendors. Everything else is ancillary -- including your awesome services that you think they should drop everything and sell. Most VARs are not a sales machine; Agents are, but Agents won't install or do support.

You kind of need both working together, which is the whole CompTIA Telecom group's plan.

It is very difficult to sell through the Channel if you have never sold the same products direct. You don't know the triggers, friction points, etc. You are letting the channel figure it out as you go. That's an expensive mistake.

Final point: there isn't a button to push to turbo charge the indirect channel. There are many factors involved in why channel partners sell one service or one vendor over another. Unless you have some exclusive service, the channel partner has many choices.

The best channel managers understand that when a partner quotes and sells your service, the partner is lending his reputation to you and he is depending on you for his paycheck. It's a risk. And it is amazing how many people don't get it.

Funny that one master agent who fired their VP at Channel Partners and is famous for press releases didn't announce that. Or a hosted provider who pumps out PR like it was printing money didn't announce any of its personnel changes either.

VZ overhauled their channel program. Again. And people will still sign up for the temporary cash and the continued uncertainty.

AT&T launched a Partner Exchange.

Lots of cloud service providers announcing expanded channel resources. well, going from 1 to 2 is a huge expansion.

But seriously, I think most executives have under-estimated how much support the Channel would need to quote and sell cloud services, especially UC.

Solera got into the channel. I remember when they were pitching CALEA boxes.

One big problem for VARs is that not only is selling hardware easier and more comfortable for them, it allows them to cash flow. Sure a VAR may have $2M in revenue but $1.7M of that goes to Tech Data for goods. However, they need the upfront money to continue their business model. It isn't always feasible to shift to a recurring revenue model. The only way to change that is to finance the contract and pay all the commission up-front -- but there is a lot of risk there.

Another problem is channel conflict. NoJitter has a good read about it. Channel Conflict is just one more reason that VARs worry about telecom.

All the moves and changes in the channel means a couple of things - (1) It isn't as easy as anyone thought; (2) a lot of executives think that going channel is a way to get a free sales force (WRONG!); (3) reality hasn't sank in yet.

I am always available for consulting on channel strategy, just give me a call at 813-963-5884.

Channel Managers are the whole conduit to the partner channel - and vice versa. Channel Managers are the conduit to the company for the partner.

Channel Managers have quota (boy, do they have quota). However, they can only indirectly meet that quotas through their partners (unless they are going to sell FOR their partners, which isn't best practices*.)

Goal Setting is one topic that I think not enough people take seriously. But to attain anything beyond a mediocre life, you need to set goals.

The steps after the Goal is set is just as important. As Keith Rosen has taught me, "Exactly how they are going to attain their goals; that is, the strategy as well as the message that needs to be executed..... The structure they need to put in place regarding how they will manage their daily activity that will move them towards attaining their goals."

People forget that it is daily activity that gets them to their goals. Little steps each day. Daily activity becomes habits. Habits produce results.

What does your calendar look like?

*Teach them to fish; don't fish for them.

Tech Data already has a direct relationship with XO. I mentioned that it isn't going stellar - and I want to elaborate. Tech Data, like any hardware VAD, has a unique model built around distributing hardware and software (licensing) for partners like Cisco, Microsoft, HP and IBM. The VAD works on slim margins - like grocery chains - counting on co-marketing dollars and other incentives from its partners to bring in revenue. Those co-marketing dollars (and associated quotas) dictate the attention that a partner gets, the same way the P&G pays to get perfect placement for Tide on the laundry aisle.

Smaller partners are relegated to the corners of the website or among the millions of SKU's in the catalog.

The VAD has tens of thousands of VAR's as customers, but hardly any are exclusive. When I was working for a VAR we had accounts with SYNNEX, TD and Ingram. A purchase comes down to pricing, stock and location. A battery backup from APC is very heavy. You want it to be available (in-stock) in a warehouse as close to the end user as possible to cut down on shipping costs (and delivery times). That - more than anything - determines a transaction.

Now as we move from inventory to services (cloud or telecom), things change. VAR's will not want to have to log into numerous systems to place orders or check status, so one VAD will win the majority of the business from a VAR. No longer will a VAd have tens of thousands of (shared) VARs. Once a VAR chooses a VAD for a servcie - whether that is Office 365, backup, or cellular - it is very likely that the VAR will stick with that VAD for all future similar transactions. A very different model for the VADs to deal with.

What else changes? All that warehouse space and inventory will shrink as the shift occurs from hardware to services.

Now in the telecom space, while TDMobility may have a handle on the paperwork for a cellular sale - a very transactional sale - the move to voice, Hosted PBX, MPLS and SIP Trunking will be very different!

The VAR's won't know which carrier to ask for quotes from at first, so there will be a lot of channel manager intervention (or a crap ton of useless quoting).

Telecom orders require a lot of paperwork - agreements, surveys, LOA, etc. Clean paperwork hand-off results in a happy customer, an accurate order and usually timely compensation. There isn't any online ordering. The missing link here is twofold: (1) back office; and (2) access to VAR's.

Telecom doesn't have a back office system. There aren't any API calls that can be added to improve efficiency. There is just a mess of manual systems that will have to be pushed, poked and jeered.

Imagine if you will, a VAR putting in a quote request for a cable broadband circuit, getting a site survey form (that resembles a service agreement more than a little), submitting it, waiting, getting an okay, and then ten days from the start told that it is a no-go.

Or an order for a 10MB DIA circuit languishing on someone's desk at a CLEC office for an extra month or so before frantic calls get it moved up the supply chain line. You think I make this stuff up? In 2012, telecom is more broken and antiquated than it was in 1996. How you can talk about cloud services and not build one cloud service from the ground up to act as ordering-billing-ticketing is beyond me.

Access to the VAR's is another hurdle. There isn't a gate to get at the advertised "60,000 resellers". TD's own people don't know the event schedule. Only a handful of the VAR's attend the show - like the Agent shows as well. This adds even more shows to the schedule for both Microcorp and its carrier partners. Despite this time and monetary expense for an additional show schedule, will you touch enough VAR's to make the process (and partnership) worthwhile? We will see.

I'd like to know how the commission situation is going at TDMobility in cellular. I know of authorized agents who have filed lawsuits for carrier-wide abuse of charge-backs from cell providers. Commissions are the reason we are in this - and those commission numbers will be sparse in comparison to Ingram's $36B in annual revenue and TD's $26B.