RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Blake Richardson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:13:50 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
In regards to I'm pricing I met with our regional rep on Thursday and was informed that I'm is moving towards list pricing for all future contracts that will take exclusively into consideration volume.  Although this is not a new revelation, they currently have contracts in place with clients who have significant volume who are paying more than clients with lesser volumes.  They will start with a baseline price and work backwards with discounts in an attempt to bring price/cost in line with volume.
Blake Richardson
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Device


----- Original Message -----
From: Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Fri Mar 06 13:00:36 2009
Subject: Re: Iron Mountain - Minimum Service Charge Per Order

The pricing is very dependent upon the contract, but Iron Mountain sometimes (and often much to the chagrin of the local Iron Mountain representatives) makes decisions out of Boston that don't conform to the non-standard language residing in many corporate custom contracts. My experience is that Iron Mountain is making an effort to standardize their contracts and stay away from non-standard terms and conditions. Companies with large volumes of records (and multiple lines of relationships) generally have more leverage. Some of the pricing changes are also contingent upon how they are positioned. When gas and diesel prices went through the roof, most vendors were able to push across a fuel surcharge to all or most customers, outside of the contract terms because it was a business necessity. I would not consider reduced profits due to exchange rate challenges to be something driving increased services charges.

I have always take the position that pricing is fixed to the contract for the term of the contract. If someone decides that a new charge is in order, it has to be negotiated either on a project basis or as a contract addendum. If it isn't in the pricing shown in the contract, we don't pay it (assuming that I had anything to do with writing the contract in the first place). This tends to give vendor lawyers heartburn.

As far as "captive to their whims" goes, I'd invite you to search the List Archives for "hostage fees" and that will pretty much tell you the answer to that question. Hostage fees or not, picking up and moving thousands of boxes is a major undertaking and often does not serve to benefit the organization. Explaing to management that you need a check for a million dollars to move your stuff "but the new vendor will give us a million dollars credit over the next five years", is generally a career-limiting business case in these (or most other) economic times. That said, there are times when you have to change offsite storage vendors, but this is not like changing janitorial services. There are physical items that have to be moved and no matter what, that is going to be costly and disruptive. And few companies do a very good job of negotiating the divorce before negotiating the marriage to an offsite storage vendor.

Most of these service contracts will have a term, then they become either month to month or annual, subject to change with appropriate notice.

I would caution folks to not disclose specific contract language or pricing terms from any vendor. In general, you will find clauses in your contract that make the contract, terms, conditions, and pricing confidential.
 Patrick Cunningham, CRM
[log in to unmask] 


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]


"Email Firewall" made the following annotations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warning: 
All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the recipient.  This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s).  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately.   
 
 =============================================================================

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2