HP-EDS: the failed CRM project that cost it £200m ...and counting | Hacker News Reader

HP-EDS: the failed CRM project that cost it £200m ...and counting

computerworlduk.com

23 pointsmonkeygrinder13 comments

The case is unique because Sky claimed EDS was fraudulent, and had dishonestly exaggerated its abilities and resources when bidding for the contract.

This case result shows two things: IT suppliers’ sales teams must be more careful about their claims when they are trying to sell a system. Gone are the days when there was a disparity between what is sold and what is delivered.

Second, the liability cap is immaterial in fraud cases. EDS had a cap that it would not be liable for more than £30m worth of damages. But because Sky sued for fraud, the liability cap was rendered irrelevant.

What do you think?

"Gone are the days when there was a disparity between what is sold and what is delivered."

lol

It's a clever way of suing your provider. Accenture was sued using the same strategy: http://blog.obiefernandez.com/content/2008/03/sap-sued-for-t... But Does Sky need to demonstrate EDS sales team was acting in bad faith?

These kind of sales processes are so long and complex that badly selling the solution does not imply bad faith. I'm completely sure that the sales team had not all the information of how things were going to be delivered and for sure they took some optimistic assumptions, but I'm sure they're not trying to swindle sky.

Just for laughs, I recommend this scribd presentation: http://www.scribd.com/doc/2304178/Confessions-of-an-Ex-Enter...

caveat emptor

Reminds me of the recent news on http://bit.ly/Sydney-Water-CRM

"expected to cost $55 million, more than double original budget of $21 million and one-and-a-half years behind schedule"

It absolutely blows my mind how these things can be so complicated. There's a pipe and a meter. The meter is read n times a year. Invoice. Done.

I can see how asset management can be complicated for a utility, but what exactly is keeping Sidney Water from using an off-the-shelf product for friggin' CRM?

If you can sign off $55 million you must be a very powerful person. Anyone can sign off buying a software box.

Same reason why in Japan there are bridges that link 2 places no one needs to go to.

Same thing in Scotland, with the Edinburgh Parliament building. Started out as costing £40m, ended up costing more than £400m.

In this case, the architect died before it was finished. Noone to sue.

I love this part (from your Sidney/Water CRM link):

"Once implemented, the project, which also has a second phase, bringing expenditure up to $68.9 million, is expected to reduce operating costs by $1.9 million a year."

So they should recoup their costs in about 35 years. Priceless (well, not really).

I worked for EDS for 9 years... they were barely able to keep their own internal CRM running. It was a nightmare. I sometimes wondered how the sales staff were able to hide the internal dysfunction so well. Practice I guess.

The judge noted in his judgment of the case that the Entire Agreement Clause failed to explicitly cover EDS from claims of negligent misrepresentation.

I guess I'm not really cut out to be a lawyer; I can't really imagine having the gall necessary to demand a clause in a contract protecting me from "negligent misrepresentation" ...

That's what I thought as well. Putting a clause like that in contract says to me, "It's possible we'll do this so badly you will sue us." I'm not sure I'd want to do business with a company like that.

It's like those Halliburton contracts which apparently force you to give up your rights to complain if you're raped.

It's like .. right, does this happen often? What exactly inspired this clause's inclusion?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com