Guys!! Rather than comment on anyone else (I mean the ones who have the
same goal as us), why not we raise our main concern to Cisco, this is a more
positive way than just critize others. Maybe I am too subjective to your
comments, but I personally think criticism on people is not the main point
of our discussion.
"Nathan Casassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I certainly agree with all the points Chuck made. One thing that Cisco
could do is
> change the requirements to take the lab besides just passing the written
exam. I am not
> saying by any account that the written is easy, but I know people that
have passed it by
> pure luck and really don't know a darn thing. I know a person right now
that has passed
> the written by getting the passing score on the dime, and he is taking the
lab soon. I
> wish good luck to him, however he is walking in blindly with out EVER
actually
> configured a router. He has no internetworking design or troubleshooting
experience in
> the real world, however he is going to go and take the lab exam just to
"see what it is
> like"....
>
> I don't think Chuck's ideas are cruel and unusual. I think they really
need to make this
> tougher then it already is. Who wants to put "CCIE #102,000" after their
name? If they
> just open more racks it may get to that point. I believe the written exam
should be
> scratched with a new format with a higher passing score. Truly the money
issue sometimes
> makes little difference. If someone has 30,000 grand to spend on
equipment, classes,
> books etc., a few more grand can't hurt. And if their company is paying
then who cares
> right? I know a company that has spent countless dollars actually flying
a guy to
> Canada, putting him up in a hotel...and paying for his lab....they did
this 5 times
> before he passed his lab. Those slots could have been used for someone
that actually
> knew what they were doing and had a chance to pass. It would be nice if
they had a 4
> hour lab prequal after taking the written. Something that would not
require a proctor to
> pass. You would be given many different scenarios at Sylvan and require to
configure
> them with a virtual IOS. The configs would be sent to an evaluator at
Cisco and then you
> would be contacted a week later concerning scheduling your real lab date.
This could
> weed out some of the flunkies.
>
> If Cisco ruins the value of this exam, they are not going to have any
future revenue
> from it.
>
> Nate
>
> Chuck Larrieu wrote:
>
> > >> I was told Cisco was trying to reduce the problem, but not how they
were
> > going to achieve their goal. (I wish them luck)<<
> >
> > some cruel and unusual thoughts come to mind.
> >
> > 1) Set some arbitrary standard such that people who fail day one by more
> > than so many points have a 90 day wait for retest, rather than 30 days.
Or
> > you have to at least made it into day 2 to be able to retest within 30
days.
> > Some such thing
> >
> > 2) Limit the number of times one may attempt the lab in any 12 month
period.
> >
> > 3) Increase the price charged for each lab attempt. E.g. 1K for first
> > attempt, 2K for 2nd, 5K for third
> >
> > I say this half jokingly, but half seriously. I talk to a lot of people
who
> > take the lab, both those who have passed and those who have not.
> > The old rule of economics holds true - people act according to their
> > perceived best interest. If someone else is footing the bill, and there
is
> > no disincentive for failure, then people will act accordingly. They will
> > book themselves and make attempts even when they know they have no hope
of
> > passing. They will schedule attempt after attempt because there is no
reason
> > not to, especially if someone else pays, and especially if there is no
> > penalty for failure.
> >
> > To be frank, I don't see any incentive for Cisco to do anything to
change
> > things on the demand side. They might add more racks, or more lab
locations.
> > But do the numbers some time. Cisco is booking something like 25 - 30
people
> > a week in San Jose alone. That's 25-30 K per week in revenue, or at
least
> > 1.3 million a year. So they pay a couple of lab proctors 150K each. The
rest
> > is pure profit. ( yes, I know from an accounting standpoint there are
> > several other cost factors ) So the incentive from Cisco's standpoint is
do
> > figure out ways to add revenue, rather than limit testing attempts.
> >
> > I look for Cisco to announce a bit more capacity, either in terms of
adding
> > another location or adding more racks at existing locations. Or both.
There
> > is a ton of money to be made in the certification game, and as the
entity
> > that controls the rules and the market, Cisco certainly enjoys the
lion's
> > share of that revenue.
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2000 9:04 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Backlog for CCIE Lab (RTP at least)
> >
> > I am a little behind on my mail, so please forgive me if this has been
> > answered.
> >
> > I called to schedule my lab on Dec 21. The next date available was June
> > 11-12 at RTP. SIX MONTH BACKLOG...WOW!!!
> >
> > I did not ask about other test centers, but would imagine similar
bookings.
> > I was told Cisco was trying to reduce the problem, but not how they were
> > going to achieve their goal. (I wish them luck)
> >
> > Jon Burns
> > CCNP, CCDP, Lab Candidate
> > Now, I just need to get a job! ;-)
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
