[Fiware-testbed] reaction to costs cut v2

[Sandfuchs, Thorsten]

Hi Stefano and colleagues,
please find possible addition to the 10.1 statements (4.5) below for a separate discussion and not inline in the document - comments to the document will follow.

It emphasizes more on the part that we invested all effort for 10.1.1 and that basically no effort was left to even spend on this deliverable. Additionally the percentages to distribute cost-reductions evenly among the partners is somehow fraud if a set of partners didn't even consider contribution at all or only with limited amount of PM. 

Best,
				/Thorsten

Old statement:
                The D10.1.2 deliverable was not submitted due to the fact that as explained during M24 review and reported in d.1.2.4 and d.1.2.5 the overall testbed architecture did not change. As a consequence no effort  was accounted to this task.

New proposed statement:
	For D10.1.2 deliverable not all WP10 partners contributed equally distributed to D10.1.2. Instead - as written in the DoW (B1.3.8 summary of staff effort) - the following partners have no contributions expected for task D10.1: IBM-CH, THALES, FT, .., XX, XY (group A). The following partners have less committed effort than the cost-cuttings would imply (e.g. 2 PM committed effort but cost-cutting-sheet calculated >2PM of cost-reduction): TID, SAP, IBM-IL, . (group B)

	Therefore we would like to highlight that effort reductions for these partners cannot be understood since partners of group A are not expected to spend effort on this deliverable and group B the cost-cuttings applied would cut more costs than the partner would have been able to claim (and in fact did not claim to this task). Additionally most of the effort spend in 10.1 was consumed in the first reporting period, where the deliverable 10.1.1 was successfully produced and rated within the Review Report R2 	"The reviewers applaud the quality of the testbed design as documented in deliverable D10.1a."
	The recent cost cutting statements for D10.1.2 for partners in Group A who are not expected to contribute to D10.1.2 per DoW must therefore be reduced to 0 EUR reduction.
	The recent cost cutting statements for D10.1.2 for partners in Group B who are not expected to contribute to D10.1.2 per DoW must therefore be reduced to the maximum amount of EUR that was in fact claimed on this task in the related time frame.

	Additionally the D10.1.2 deliverable was not submitted due to the fact that as explained during M24 review and reported in d.1.2.4 and d.1.2.5 the overall testbed architecture did not change. As a consequence no effort  was accounted to this task.

-----Original Message-----
From: fiware-testbed-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-testbed-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of stefano de panfilis
Sent: Montag, 3. März 2014 22:01
To: fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu
Subject: [Fiware-testbed] reaction to costs cut v2

dear all,

please find attached the reaction to costs v2 document. for your
convenience please find also attached the document with the notes i
took during our last phc.

concerning tomorrow, unfortunately i cannot manage the meeting as i
will be ta the company yearly managers kick-off meeting which i
thougth i could have escaped, but in fact not ......

so my suggestion is to have the meeting wednesday morning same time
(10:00), i hope you can. if better time for the majority of you please
let me know and i'll adjust the slot.

anyway, you have more time for comments ... ;-) please send circulate
them :-) before the meeting on wednesday.

ciao,
stefano

-- 
Stefano De Panfilis
Chief Innovation Officer
Engineering Ingegneria Informatica S.p.A.
via Riccardo Morandi 32
00148 Roma
Italy

tel (direct): +39-068307-4295
tel (secr.): +39-068307-4513
fax: +39-068307-4200
cell: +39-335-7542-567