EDITED: I agree...that's what the tweet seems to
Post# of 22940
Posted On: 05/23/2016 4:36:09 PM
Re: cowboyinvestor #8565
EDITED: I agree...that's what the tweet seems to indicate, but I'd love to hear how you "convert" an entity you've already acquired to a potential SLA.
It may just be bad English again. They may have meant "negotiated with the acquired entity." This would make more sense. However, I DO see the possibility that Billion was never actually acquired... and if so, I understand the SLA arrangement better. I have had it in my head that Billion was already acquired, but I may have that wrong.
Some info on SLA's; bolding is mine for emphasis:
From Wikipedia: A service-level agreement is an agreement between two or more parties, where one is the customer and the others are service providers. This can be a legally binding formal or an informal "contract" (for example, internal department relationships). The agreement may involve separate organizations, or different teams within one organization. Contracts between the service provider and other third parties are often (incorrectly) called SLAs – because the level of service has been set by the (principal) customer, there can be no "agreement" between third parties; these agreements are simply "contracts." Operational-level agreements or OLAs, however, may be used by internal groups to support SLAs. If some aspect of a service has not been agreed with the customer, it is not an "SLA".
It may just be bad English again. They may have meant "negotiated with the acquired entity." This would make more sense. However, I DO see the possibility that Billion was never actually acquired... and if so, I understand the SLA arrangement better. I have had it in my head that Billion was already acquired, but I may have that wrong.
Some info on SLA's; bolding is mine for emphasis:
From Wikipedia: A service-level agreement is an agreement between two or more parties, where one is the customer and the others are service providers. This can be a legally binding formal or an informal "contract" (for example, internal department relationships). The agreement may involve separate organizations, or different teams within one organization. Contracts between the service provider and other third parties are often (incorrectly) called SLAs – because the level of service has been set by the (principal) customer, there can be no "agreement" between third parties; these agreements are simply "contracts." Operational-level agreements or OLAs, however, may be used by internal groups to support SLAs. If some aspect of a service has not been agreed with the customer, it is not an "SLA".
(2)
(0)