Travis > Maybe you call it that, but some of us call it extortion.
I agree. That's why I like to know who's extorting whom. I think that other EDI-L subscribers would also like to know how some of these 'open' 'standards' are being abused. > We have partners that require a specific VAN as well. Yes, but most of them allow interconnects. They really have no way to force you to use a specific VAN, if interconnects are allowed. The only way that they can make it difficult, is to force a partner to pay 100%. Then you need some kind of relationship with both VANS in order to pay them their 'pound of flesh' ;-) Gottschalks tried to do that a few years ago with QRS/Advantis. from a Gottschalks letter dated Nov 17,2000: "Gottschalks has recently selected QRS Corporation as our sole solution provider." and "All vendor based EDI communications must utilize the QRS network. Interconnecting between VANS will need to be eliminated". Of course, it was completely unenforceable. When I asked them what they would do if one of our clients used an interconnect, they backpedalled and admitted that interconnects were still allowed, but that any charges due to interconnect problems would be sent to the client. ...then, 3 years later they switched to GXS. sigh. Earl Wertheimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.spe-edi.com . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
