Alan (not his real name) and his wife were long-standing clients of one of our competitors. They came to us because they didn't like the way they'd been treated. Unlike Katherine, who likes us (even if she's frustrated), we haven't earned anything from Alan and his wife except a chance to win their business. Alan's customers really like our Duos, which of course they couldn't get before, but he finds designing and ordering them difficult. Alan designs them on paper and his wife recreates them in Remix. Alan's designs are reasonably complex, his wife is a fan of her old software (which can't handle Duos) and she's very reluctant to make the switch to PJ, which is "over-complicated". They also have issues with some of our more "ponderous procedures" (my words, because I agree - more on that later). In a nutshell, if our competitor had Duos, and had treated Alan better, chances are we'd never have seen him. Put differently, my feeling is Alan would like us to be like his previous supplier, only better. Even if I'm wrong, that's a very common reason for changing suppliers. "I want you to do what Brand X does but better, or cheaper, or faster." My opinion is less important than our clients', but for what it's worth, I don't see how switching suppliers can ever be all pros and no cons. There's too much to learn and re-learn for there to be no difficulty. The up-side is always on the far side of a learning curve, and your comfort zone. Where Alan and his wife see complexity in Photojunction, for example, I see opportunities, and our team's challenge is to help them take advantage of them.

Duos, for example A more efficient work flow A sales tool Differentiation in the market.

And not least, an end to those "ponderous procedures" when finally PJ delivers "a clear, complete and unambiguous order direct into production". That's our end game, and we're closer with every release. We can't expect everyone to come along for the ride, but we hope Alan will. Cheers, Ian