You will find that any place time I state something as a fact, I also state what paragraph and in what document I got the fact from . This is so that you can verify the facts. This, however, is not what you do. If you had said, I believe they..... then I wouldn't ask you for a reference because it is a supposition or opinion and not a statement of fact. I might still argue your supposition, if it did not make sense to me.
In your preceding posts you stated that there were only 2 customers in 13 days. You are stating that as a fact. Then when I pointed out there were actually 6 customers each getting 13 days consulting and pointed to the document where the fact was held, you stated in the next post "read my post and you’ll see I say it doesn’t matter how many customers are installed because they were all installed in the same 13 day period between may and June 2018.That’s 96 consultants working for the same 13 days to deliver $2.9m in revenue. It will be a difficult conversation"
I have asked you to confirm where you found this information. This is fair. If you could confirm that this IS what ISX said, then adjust my argument accordingly, or concede if it then made sense. But you haven't and I haven't.
Additionally, your argument is not rational, no matter how I slice it. Do you really actually think that there is no difference in implying that it doesn't make sense to say "96 consultants working for the same 13 days to deliver $2.9m in revenue" for 2 customers has the same weight as saying it doesn't make sense to say "96 consultants working for the same 13 days to deliver $2.9m in revenue." for 6 customers?
Are you assuming that ISX would use the same number of consultants for the same13 days whether there were 2 environments to set up or 6? If so, this is simply preposterous. Or are you saying simply that even with 6 customers, the revenue still doesn't make sense? You really need to be more clear. Sorry, I am really trying to understand the significance of "the same 13 days".
Lets think about it. What if, your supposition is right, they did do all 6 customers in the same 13 day period. There are six customers needing, 6 different environments set up to do the following - see answer 9 in the 18/Nov/2019 Answer to ASX query:
• establish and configure a secure cloud environment consistent with ISX’s PCI DSS and ISO27001 requirements;
• acquire a licence of off-the-shelf trading software on behalf of the customer in the customer’s name;
• deploy the off-the-shelf trading software to the cloud environment;
• modify ISX’s data input and outputs to accept and transmit data to the trading software;
• test and put into production, with data shared between the Paydentity™ platform and the “Trading Platform”; and
• at the customer’s request, process payments, undertake identity verification and electronically share data with the trading platform.
In my estimate for the job, based on personal experience, I actually did project 102 consultants working on the 6 jobs, based on the complexity of the task and the varying technical knowledge. The only person I could cut the time/price down on if it was in the same 13 day period is the program manager, and if I did cut him/her time, then I couldn't cut that down to a strict 13 days as the person would still be overseeing 6 different jobs, and writing the 6 different reports to management.
Again, if you are going to state facts, expect to get a question of where you got your fact so we can verify. And please be clearer in your argument, so that we can better examine the worth of your argument. If it is rational, it may convince.
Expand
