My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 2000 04 17
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
2000
>
AG 2000 04 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 4:57:12 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:47:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
4/17/2000
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
213
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Cabarrus County Findings and Recommendations Report <br /> <br /> SECTION III <br /> <br />CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />We believe there are many different variables that Cabarms County should consider in the <br />selection of a new telephone system. In the following decision matrix, we have outlined many of <br />these variables. Following is a chart that ranks each vendor on specific criteria. The weight for <br />each criterion is calculated by assigning it a weight factor. Each vendor is then rated on a scale <br />fi.om one-to-ten for each item. This score is then multiplied by the criteria's weight. These <br />figures are then added together for each vendor to get a final total. The vendor with the highest <br />total is the best choice for your new system. <br /> <br />CRITERIA Weights CTC ALT Sprint <br />Total Purchase Cost 30 30 20 10 <br />Maintenance Cost 20 20 5 10 <br />System Operation 10 10 10 10 <br />Mfg Market Share 20 10 5 20 <br />Technicians and 10 2 5 10 <br />Technical Support <br />Vendor Experience 10 10 10 10 <br />TOTAL 100 82 55 70 <br /> <br />Total Purchase Cost: This represents the revised purchase price for the completely installed <br />systems. These prices were shown earlier. CTC proposed the lowest cost system, followed by <br />ALT and Sprint. The latter two vendors proposed systems were much higher than CTC's. <br /> <br />Maintenance Cost: CTC is the least expensive followed by Sprint and ALT. ALT's maintenance <br />pricing was considerably higher. <br /> <br />System Operation: This represents the standardization of the proposed voice network and <br />potential points of failure and interoperability issues. All of the systems proposed represent a <br />truly single system functional design. Some utilize remote shelves for remote locations, while <br />others used small PBXs, or combinations of both. These all will provide the County with a <br />uniform function between locations. <br /> <br />Market Share: The life of any system selected by Cabarrus County should be seven to ten years. <br />One important criteria in the selection of systems is the evaluation of the prospects for the system <br />to be maintained and upgraded over the expected life of the system. This is important in <br />determining future support of the product. Of these manufacturers, Nortel proposed by Sprint has <br />the highest market share (estimated to be 25%) followed by Mitel proposed by CTC (estimated to <br />be 7%) and Tadaran proposed by ALT (estimated to be 1%). <br /> <br />© 2000, RSM McGladrey, Inc. i~_~ ] ~ Page 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.