On Sun, 7 Jul 2002, der.hans wrote:

> Didn't make that, did I?

No worries, though I do have to finish relatively soon.

> > Competition Pricing
> > Dependancy Spiral
>
> Similar to the previous question. Combine the points leading up to the
> question?

I see these as distinct - Competitive Pricing is how
it's hurting them today, Dependancy Spiral is how it
is going to hurt them more tomorrow. The solution is
the same, but that's the solution I tried to fit
in everywhere.

> > RFP?
>
> What companies are elligible now and which ones were elligible when Maricopa
> County decided to create a policy that unified on a single vendor?

I think this angle made some sense with this
question at the end of the list. Now that I've
moved it to the beginning, where we're still hoping
for collaboration, I think the risk is too high.
If I were Allsing, I would take this as in implication
that I broke the rules 5 years ago and get offended.
As I see it, the outcomes are:

1. Maricopa was honest in 1997 - they resent the implication
   and go on the defensive, and we've gained nothing.

2. Maricopa scammed in 1997 - they resent the implication
   and get really angry that we're on the trail. The rest
   of the meeting is soured - zero chance of collaboration.
   Maybe we discover some unethical practices, but there
   will be future opportunities for that if the meeting
   doesn't go well.

IMO, the slim chance of a little benefit from a little
detective work is outweighed by the virtual guarantee
that it will piss them off.