progress report
Memo
TO: Karen Klein, CSR, Co-Owner/Head of Technology
FROM: Valerie J. Eames, CSR, CCRR, Freelance Court Reporter
DATE: December 13, 2009
SUBJECT: Recommendation Report for Research on Implementing In-House Videoconferencing
______________________________________________________________________
I have attached my recommendation report with regards to the research I conducted as to the costs and benefits to Ludwig Klein Reporters & Video by purchasing videoconferencing equipment to be utilized for conducting depositions in-house instead of through a third party. I have completed the tasks outlined in my proposal that was submitted to you on November 1, 2009. They included the research of equipment costs interviews with court reporter. This work was performed in order to help me ascertain the advantages and/or disadvantages to purchasing the equipment and any ROI (return on investment) realized.
My first task included submitting a questionnaire to two court reporting agencies that offer videoconferencing services. The results were an initial investment cost of $10,000 for videoconferencing equipment and $900 to install the ISDN phone lines. There is a $150 to $175 charge per month for phone service only, and that does not include the videoconferencing charge which is inevitably passed on to the client. In the questionnaire, Lisa Michaels stated her ROI was 200 percent in three years. In addition, Toni Pulone provided a recent proposal by InConference that was submitted to Pulone & Stromberg, showing a bottom-line cost of $8,176.39 for equipment, before a trade-in rebate for their old equipment. The purchase would also include the necessary extraneous services like setup, tech support, and networking leads. Further information was obtained about Courtroom Connect, a competitor in the market, and they provide similar services at a slightly lower cost. Then I did an on-site inspection of the facilities in order Memo to Karen Klein
Page
TO: Karen Klein, CSR, Co-Owner/Head of Technology
FROM: Valerie J. Eames, CSR, CCRR, Freelance Court Reporter
DATE: December 13, 2009
SUBJECT: Recommendation Report for Research on Implementing In-House Videoconferencing
______________________________________________________________________
I have attached my recommendation report with regards to the research I conducted as to the costs and benefits to Ludwig Klein Reporters & Video by purchasing videoconferencing equipment to be utilized for conducting depositions in-house instead of through a third party. I have completed the tasks outlined in my proposal that was submitted to you on November 1, 2009. They included the research of equipment costs interviews with court reporter. This work was performed in order to help me ascertain the advantages and/or disadvantages to purchasing the equipment and any ROI (return on investment) realized.
My first task included submitting a questionnaire to two court reporting agencies that offer videoconferencing services. The results were an initial investment cost of $10,000 for videoconferencing equipment and $900 to install the ISDN phone lines. There is a $150 to $175 charge per month for phone service only, and that does not include the videoconferencing charge which is inevitably passed on to the client. In the questionnaire, Lisa Michaels stated her ROI was 200 percent in three years. In addition, Toni Pulone provided a recent proposal by InConference that was submitted to Pulone & Stromberg, showing a bottom-line cost of $8,176.39 for equipment, before a trade-in rebate for their old equipment. The purchase would also include the necessary extraneous services like setup, tech support, and networking leads. Further information was obtained about Courtroom Connect, a competitor in the market, and they provide similar services at a slightly lower cost. Then I did an on-site inspection of the facilities in order Memo to Karen Klein
Page