[Asterisk-biz] Asterisk for small businesses.

[Sergey Kuznetsov]

I can program any complicated AGI on Perl in very short time.
Way faster than it takes time to proprietary expert to tune up his/her 
system.

My extensions.conf will look like:

[default]
exten => XX.,1,AGI(jack-of-all-trades.agi)

Probably sip.conf and iax.conf will be overcrowded, but this is still 
Okay for me.

The rest will be done in Perl and Postgres.

Jim Van Meggelen wrote:

>Alex Pui wrote:
>  
>
>>Jim,
>>
>>I totally agree with what you said here. I guess we need to
>>find out what are Asterisk problems at this point of time and
>>we can work together to solve it. In my experience it is not
>>much a "product" problem, it is a "productization" problem.
>>    
>>
>
>Actually, there are already too many telecom "products" on the market.
>Trying to turn Asterisk into yet another one strikes me as a tactical
>error. Asterisk changes the rules; disguising it as another legacy
>system doesn't strike me as serving any purpose.
>
>  
>
>>To learn how to install Asterisk is fun, but to use Asterisk
>>to make money it is difficult, problems are : 1. There is no
>>perceived value as a total solution or package at the right
>>size. Unless we can build such value perception for the
>>customers in the mass market, that is people can easily
>>compare a Cisco model with Asterisk and then they can compare
>>how much they will have to pay for Cisco and now how "Less"
>>they need to pay for Asterisk consultant and also the
>>benefits, we will have no point to say we charge $60 or $100
>>per hour as nobody can link the cost and the value together.
>>    
>>
>
>For my customers, the fact that it is _not_ a Cisco or Nortel and is a
>Linux-based open source technology has huge value. They completely
>understand the fact that Linux doesn't come encumbered with vendor-lock
>in. I had thought there would be more resistance, but the only
>resistance I've seen comes from the old-school telecom folks, who seem
>to think that a revolution happens when you don't change anything.
>
>Asterisk _does_ require a more complicated sales cycle, but where I
>think we may make a mistake is when we position it as "cheaper". Sure,
>we can be extremely competitive due to the commodity hardware and
>software we use, but some of that cost difference needs to go into the
>custom development required.
>
>Putting Asterisk into a box and then selling that box is a mistake.
>Asterisk needs to be sold as a service. That means that the
>hardware/software is irrelevant. What is sold is the fact that whatever
>the customer wants can be delivered (what seems so self evident is
>actually huge - no other telecom system can make this claim). The value
>comes from outstanding customer service. Asterisk solutions need to be
>priced high enough that there is money available to provide superior
>service. Customer service is sadly lacking in the telecom industry, and
>is therefore a huge opportunity (it always was, in any business).
>
>Asterisk should not be sold as a cheap system; it should be sold as a
>technically superior way to engineer telecom systems. It is not "free"
>and I would argue that it is not necessarily a compelling sales strategy
>to tell customers that it is (I'm not talking about hiding the fact that
>it's GPL, I'm talking about focusing on the value of the solution, not
>the price of the components).
>
>Let's look at a hypothetical $20,000 VoIP-enabled legacy key system
>with, say 20 sets.
>
>Each character represents $500
># represents hardware cost
>+ represents licensing of "extra" features (including voicemail)
>^ represents sets
>! represents labour
>
>The Legacy, proprietary "solution"
>##########+++++++^^^^^^^^^^!!!=========
>
>The Asterisk solution
>####^^^^^^^^^^^^^!!!!!!======
>
>With twice as much labour in the job, and more expensive sets, there is
>a similar margin, and yet you can go as much as 25% lower (and I
>wouldn't start $5000 cheaper either - especially if the Asterisk solves
>problems the proprietary system cannot - a 10% difference might be
>compelling enough). If your competition matches your price, they lose
>money.
>
>This is very raw, but what I'm hoping to demonstrate is the concept that
>the savings due to the commodity hardware and software allow for more
>labour to go into the customized development. This is service!
>
>Having worked with many different kinds of PBXs, I do not find the
>configuration process in Asterisk to be complicated at all. A skilled
>craftsperson should be able to program an Asterisk system in roughly the
>same time as it takes to build an equivalent proprietary system. 
>
>
>  
>
>>2. The education process to customers are killing. Yes, open
>>source is free, knowledge to set up the system is not, and
>>the cost of education to the customer about this knowledge
>>will kill most of our business.
>>    
>>
>
>If you do not base your price on your costs, then yes. But yhy are you
>trying to teach your customer about Asterisk? They probably don't care.
>Sell them on how you can solve their problems.
>
>  
>
>>Therefore we need to work together to solve these problems
>>(or some other problems if you want to share) then we can
>>fly. There are not much successful cases we are hiding,
>>Asterisk business is a lot of fun and attractive but not that
>>profitable unless someone wants to correct me.
>>    
>>
>
>Asterisk is going to be enormously profitable. But it will never be
>easy, or straightforward.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jim.
>
>
>
>  
>
>>asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com wrote:
>>asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>I'm looking in to the possibility of starting to sell a small
>>>Asterisk installation in to one or two small businesses to test the
>>>waters in my area, north west UK.
>>>
>>>Are others doing similar things on a small scale? I currently do not
>>>have a lot of investment to  plough in to this business at the moment
>>>so things would have to be done within my current financial
>>>constraints. I have a full time job at present which I plan to leave
>>>in 8 months time if all goes to plan.
>>>
>>>Now I realise people are not going to disclose their business winning
>>>secrets but I'd welcome any friendly advise from others who have done
>>>this or are doing it at present.
>>>
>>>(I have linux/unix experience going back to 1992 but only about 3
>>>months * experience, with a server at home running 2 analogue lines
>>>and 4 extensions.)
>>>      
>>>
>>As far as I'm concerned, open-source telephony is going to
>>turn the world of enterprise telecom on it's ear. I've worked
>>in that business for over 15 years, on equipment and networks
>>of all shapes and sizes, and I've never seen anything like Asterisk.
>>
>>This is extremely disruptive technology, in the same way the
>>IBM PC was in the early 80s, or Linux through the 90s.
>>
>>Check out this article for some thought-provoking ideas on the future:
>>
>>http://tim.oreilly.com/articles/paradigmshift_0504.html
>>
>>When I talk to customers, the amount of hate they have for
>>the likes of Cisco, Nortel, Avaya and such is shocking. The
>>horrible service they have come to expect from their telecom
>>providers is hard to believe. The problem, as I see it, is
>>that the technology that exists simply does not allow service
>>providers to truly solve their customers' communication
>>challenges. It's too closed. Too proprietary. Too inflexible.
>>
>>Asterisk in and of itself does nothing. But the service that
>>can be provided to one's customers, using Asterisk, is
>>approaching miraculous. Even as raw as it is, Asterisk is
>>amazing. This is so much like the evolution of the web. We
>>started with text-based browsers, then Mosaic made it all
>>graphical. Now, we have a billion different ways of making
>>websites, and each site is a total custom job. This is the
>>potential of open-source telephony. Will Asterisk still be
>>the dominant engine in ten years? We just don't know. but
>>rest assured that whatever succeeds it will be better, not
>>worse. And the chances of it coming out of the labs at any of
>>the telecom giants is zero. It's going to take them a few
>>years just to get it, never mind provide a response. Some
>>will go bankrupt, those that survive will embrace the new
>>paradigm (the idea of IBM, Novell and the like embracing
>>Linux even five years ago was ridiculous).
>>
>>Just don't expect it to be easy. This is a revolution! (a
>>real one this time). The industry will begin to attack
>>Asterisk soon. Expect to see much FUD coming from the big
>>boys, just as soon as they perceive the threat, 'cause FUD is
>>all they've got.
>>
>>To parapharse Ghandi: "First they laugh at you, then they
>>fight you, then you win"
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Jim.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Jim Van Meggelen
>>jim at vanmeggelen.ca
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


-- 
All the Best!
Sergey.
=========================
Sergey Kuznetsov
President/CEO
         High Intellectual Technologies, Inc.

           Web: http://www.hitcalls.com
        E-mail: sergey.kuznetsov at highintellect.com
Business phone: (416) 548-9700
  Mobile phone: (647) 287-8448

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20050217/7ceb30ba/attachment.htm