Customer Credit and Late Payment Fees

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 5:18:37 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 09/10/2021 01:35, Clifford Heath wrote: 
> > On 9/10/21 5:25 am, Rick C wrote: 
> >> A customer who is a pain in the ass (a very large company, so they 
> >> think they can toss around my small company) assured me during 
> >> negotiations they would be paying the net 30 invoices in 30 days. 
> >> Because of the large manufacturing costs the float on the funds is 
> >> significant. 
> >> 
> >> The first of many invoices was not paid in 30 days, but closer to 45 
> >> days.  On investigation I found they pay late by design.  They cut 
> >> payments twice a month, 15th and 30th (or 31st I assume)
> That is very common. Figure out when their accounting cycle is and make 
> sure you invoice so that you hit a payment window. If those dates are 
> right then you can try invoicing 5 business days prior at a guess. 

You don't seem to understand.  The timing of the payment has nothing to do with when I send the invoice.  They do not pay any invoice prior to the DUE date, the end of the 30 day credit window.  They pay at the first payment date AFTER the 30 days expire.  


> Don't cut it too fine or "delayed" invoice approval will mean it goes 
> into the next cycle. If they were anything like the lot I used to work 
> for that would happen anyway (by design). IOW 45 days is when *they* 
> intend to pay you irrespective of what it says on the invoice.

I send the invoice when shipment is made. 


> > 30 day payment terms means payment within 30 days, not "after" 30 days. 
> > If they have a built-in delay of up to 15 days, you need to be 
> > specifying 15 day terms so you get paid within 30 days.
> I don't know what it is like in the USA, but the aggressive large UK 
> corporate I first worked for would only pay larger bills on 60 day terms 
> after at least 120 days or when the bailiffs turned up to take away the 
> fax machine. They prevented them taking the photocopier by leasing it. 
> 
> They had a substantial department to handle debt chasers! I presume it 
> must have been cost effective or they would not have done it. 
> 
> The CFO was paid a quadratic bonus on the number of days free credit 
> balance they extracted from suppliers. Typically they were on the stop 
> list of two out three equivalent generic component suppliers. The 
> volumes involved meant the suppliers put up with this abuse. ISTR this 
> has now been made illegal in the UK but I wouldn't like to bet that it 
> still doesn't happen with some of the aggressive accounting practices. 
> 
> Things improved a bit after some enterprising debt collectors hit upon 
> the idea of sending a tramp soaked in something like skunk oil to sit in 
> the swanky reception of their London corporate HQ waiting for payment.
> > 
> > You won't get them to change their accounting practices, so I'd notify 
> > them that I'll waive the late fee *this time* if they agree to 15 day 
> > terms in future. That way you get paid in 30 days, and they can use 
> > their established practices.
> I always followed the rule that they would get no further work done or 
> support with any of their problems until I got paid for the previous 
> month. Once their customers started screaming at them I got paid. 
> 
> You need to work out what their weakest point is and then use your 
> leverage on that to get paid in a timely fashion. 

Their weakest point is not getting the units that I won't ship.  This is for a product by a major networking company.  They contract out their production (mostly the rack and stack portion) and my board is integrated into these systems by my customer (their CM).  Because of the long negotiation period the delivery stretched into next year which is awkward for them because the CM's contract is ending Dec 31.  With more delays more deliveries are pushed into next year and at some point this overflow becomes a huge headache for everyone (except me of course).  

I don't feel good about the hassles this gives my counterpart at the CM.  When I called the other day to discuss it, she expected me to simply acquiesce this absurdity.  When I stood my ground and called her on the various issues she eventually got upset and said she didn't want to deal with this when she's having a party for her 40th anniversary with the company.  We had similar issues during the negotiations so I'm not her favorite vendor to put it mildly.  

They actually had the networking company contact me about this as if they had anything to do with it.  When that guy tried to explain things to me I kept pointing out that their payments are late by design and he kept trying to say it's not "by design"... but it clearly IS! 

-- 

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 10/9/2021 2:18 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> I always followed the rule that they would get no further work done or support 
> with any of their problems until I got paid for the previous month. Once their 
> customers started screaming at them I got paid.
> 
> You need to work out what their weakest point is and then use your leverage on 
> that to get paid in a timely fashion.

Many firms have boilerplate language on their purchase orders.
Unless you've explicitly modified those terms, they can point
to that language and note your implicit agreement to them
when you accepted the PO.

Its easier to just raise prices above what you want and offer a
discount for early payment.  This gives the customer an incentive
to figure out how to get payment to you quicker.  And, if they
don't, you've charged them for the lateness -- without calling it
a "late fee".

Of course, both are required lest they abuse your "patience".

People, surprisingly (or, perhaps NOT surprisingly!) have very
different attitudes when money is involved.  E.g., peer pressure
often is a better motivator (or the equivalent in the business
sense -- like being a bit less cooperative with their future
"needs") than financial DISincentives.

E.g., "fine" someone for a practice and they can perform a simple
calculation as to the value (to them) for engaging in it,
despite what its value to YOU might be.

"I'll just pay the penalty and not worry about it..."

[I vaguely recall some studies to that effect.  I'll have to search
my literature.]

It's important because if YOU think a fine/penalty will encourage the
behavior you seek, you may find yourself operating under very different
assumptions than the parties whose behavior you are trying to modify!

On 10/9/2021 6:56 AM, Don Y wrote:

> "I'll just pay the penalty and not worry about it..."
> 
> [I vaguely recall some studies to that effect.  I'll have to search
> my literature.]
> 
> It's important because if YOU think a fine/penalty will encourage the
> behavior you seek, you may find yourself operating under very different
> assumptions than the parties whose behavior you are trying to modify!

One quick hit.  I suspect more there as well:

<https://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2008/07/04/daycare_late_fees_no_deterrent_study_finds.html>

On 09/10/2021 14:34, Rick C wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 5:18:37 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
> wrote:
>> On 09/10/2021 01:35, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>> On 9/10/21 5:25 am, Rick C wrote:
>>>> A customer who is a pain in the ass (a very large company, so
>>>> they think they can toss around my small company) assured me
>>>> during negotiations they would be paying the net 30 invoices in
>>>> 30 days. Because of the large manufacturing costs the float on
>>>> the funds is significant.
>>>> 
>>>> The first of many invoices was not paid in 30 days, but closer
>>>> to 45 days.  On investigation I found they pay late by design.
>>>> They cut payments twice a month, 15th and 30th (or 31st I
>>>> assume)
>> That is very common. Figure out when their accounting cycle is and
>> make sure you invoice so that you hit a payment window. If those
>> dates are right then you can try invoicing 5 business days prior at
>> a guess.
> 
> You don't seem to understand.  The timing of the payment has nothing
> to do with when I send the invoice.  They do not pay any invoice
> prior to the DUE date, the end of the 30 day credit window.  They pay
> at the first payment date AFTER the 30 days expire.

Once you know their rules it is up to you to minimise your wait. Many 
companies only do a "cheque" run once or twice a month (which these days 
is ludicrous since payments are mostly by electronic funds transfer).

I pay in about two cheques a year these days and write almost none.

>> Don't cut it too fine or "delayed" invoice approval will mean it
>> goes into the next cycle. If they were anything like the lot I used
>> to work for that would happen anyway (by design). IOW 45 days is
>> when *they* intend to pay you irrespective of what it says on the
>> invoice.
> 
> I send the invoice when shipment is made.

So you aim to only ship stuff in the two weeks of the month where the 
latency is at most 7 days. I suspect they are playing usual corporate
accountancy tricks where someone is on a bonus for getting in the debts 
as fast as possible and paying their suppliers as slowly as possible.

>>> You won't get them to change their accounting practices, so I'd
>>> notify them that I'll waive the late fee *this time* if they
>>> agree to 15 day terms in future. That way you get paid in 30
>>> days, and they can use their established practices.

>> I always followed the rule that they would get no further work done
>> or support with any of their problems until I got paid for the
>> previous month. Once their customers started screaming at them I
>> got paid.
>> 
>> You need to work out what their weakest point is and then use your 
>> leverage on that to get paid in a timely fashion.
> 
> Their weakest point is not getting the units that I won't ship.  This

If you know that they will pay then shipping and invoicing for it ASAP 
may still be the least worst option given where you are now.

> is for a product by a major networking company.  They contract out
> their production (mostly the rack and stack portion) and my board is
> integrated into these systems by my customer (their CM).  Because of
> the long negotiation period the delivery stretched into next year
> which is awkward for them because the CM's contract is ending Dec 31.
> With more delays more deliveries are pushed into next year and at
> some point this overflow becomes a huge headache for everyone (except
> me of course).

So be it then. You ideally want their customer to be shouting at them 
for the product that you want to ship and get paid for. Somehow you seem 
to have allowed them to claim the high ground and have their customer 
blame you for them not paying you on time.

> I don't feel good about the hassles this gives my counterpart at the
> CM.  When I called the other day to discuss it, she expected me to
> simply acquiesce this absurdity.  When I stood my ground and called
> her on the various issues she eventually got upset and said she
> didn't want to deal with this when she's having a party for her 40th
> anniversary with the company.  We had similar issues during the
> negotiations so I'm not her favorite vendor to put it mildly.

At some point you have to decide if they are a sufficiently valuable 
customer to continue to do business with. If their late payments are 
really messing up your cash flow then something has to give.

> They actually had the networking company contact me about this as if
> they had anything to do with it.  When that guy tried to explain
> things to me I kept pointing out that their payments are late by
> design and he kept trying to say it's not "by design"... but it
> clearly IS!

I'm amazed that you haven't been able to persuade their customer that 
unless and until you get paid they are not getting any more product or 
help with integrating it. I found that usually focussed minds once they 
had a difficult support issue with their customer(s) shouting at them.

As I said earlier the large corporate I once worked for took great pride 
in extracting nearly 120 days free credit from most of its suppliers (at 
least for the ones where there were three or more alternatives).

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:57:17 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 10/9/2021 2:18 AM, Martin Brown wrote: 
> > I always followed the rule that they would get no further work done or support 
> > with any of their problems until I got paid for the previous month. Once their 
> > customers started screaming at them I got paid. 
> > 
> > You need to work out what their weakest point is and then use your leverage on 
> > that to get paid in a timely fashion.
> Many firms have boilerplate language on their purchase orders. 
> Unless you've explicitly modified those terms, they can point 
> to that language and note your implicit agreement to them 
> when you accepted the PO. 

Yes, we have an agreement that supersedes the PO language.  


> Its easier to just raise prices above what you want and offer a 
> discount for early payment. This gives the customer an incentive 
> to figure out how to get payment to you quicker. And, if they 
> don't, you've charged them for the lateness -- without calling it 
> a "late fee". 

Not when the price and terms were negotiated in advance.  Did you read any of the posts I made? 


> Of course, both are required lest they abuse your "patience". 
> 
> People, surprisingly (or, perhaps NOT surprisingly!) have very 
> different attitudes when money is involved. E.g., peer pressure 
> often is a better motivator (or the equivalent in the business 
> sense -- like being a bit less cooperative with their future 
> "needs") than financial DISincentives. 
> 
> E.g., "fine" someone for a practice and they can perform a simple 
> calculation as to the value (to them) for engaging in it, 
> despite what its value to YOU might be. 
> 
> "I'll just pay the penalty and not worry about it..." 

That would suit me fine, but they don't want to pay the fee.  Read my previous posts. 


> [I vaguely recall some studies to that effect. I'll have to search 
> my literature.] 
> 
> It's important because if YOU think a fine/penalty will encourage the 
> behavior you seek, you may find yourself operating under very different 
> assumptions than the parties whose behavior you are trying to modify!

I'm not worried about their behavior other than paying the late fee. 

-- 

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 09/10/2021 14:34, Rick C wrote: 
> > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 5:18:37 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown 
> > wrote: 
> >> On 09/10/2021 01:35, Clifford Heath wrote: 
> >>> On 9/10/21 5:25 am, Rick C wrote: 
> >>>> A customer who is a pain in the ass (a very large company, so 
> >>>> they think they can toss around my small company) assured me 
> >>>> during negotiations they would be paying the net 30 invoices in 
> >>>> 30 days. Because of the large manufacturing costs the float on 
> >>>> the funds is significant. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> The first of many invoices was not paid in 30 days, but closer 
> >>>> to 45 days. On investigation I found they pay late by design. 
> >>>> They cut payments twice a month, 15th and 30th (or 31st I 
> >>>> assume) 
> >> That is very common. Figure out when their accounting cycle is and 
> >> make sure you invoice so that you hit a payment window. If those 
> >> dates are right then you can try invoicing 5 business days prior at 
> >> a guess. 
> > 
> > You don't seem to understand. The timing of the payment has nothing 
> > to do with when I send the invoice. They do not pay any invoice 
> > prior to the DUE date, the end of the 30 day credit window. They pay 
> > at the first payment date AFTER the 30 days expire.
> Once you know their rules it is up to you to minimise your wait. Many 
> companies only do a "cheque" run once or twice a month (which these days 
> is ludicrous since payments are mostly by electronic funds transfer). 

LOL!  This is not about their "rules", this is about the agreement signed by all parties.  I won't call it a contract because that's a legal term and I don't know all of the requirements for it to be a "contract".  I do know a contract requires "consideration" for both parties which is another legal term for lawyers to debate. 


> I pay in about two cheques a year these days and write almost none.
> >> Don't cut it too fine or "delayed" invoice approval will mean it 
> >> goes into the next cycle. If they were anything like the lot I used 
> >> to work for that would happen anyway (by design). IOW 45 days is 
> >> when *they* intend to pay you irrespective of what it says on the 
> >> invoice. 
> > 
> > I send the invoice when shipment is made.
> So you aim to only ship stuff in the two weeks of the month where the 
> latency is at most 7 days. I suspect they are playing usual corporate 
> accountancy tricks where someone is on a bonus for getting in the debts 
> as fast as possible and paying their suppliers as slowly as possible. 

There is no time when the "latency" is only 7 days. Go back and read again how they pay.  


> >>> You won't get them to change their accounting practices, so I'd 
> >>> notify them that I'll waive the late fee *this time* if they 
> >>> agree to 15 day terms in future. That way you get paid in 30 
> >>> days, and they can use their established practices. 
> 
> >> I always followed the rule that they would get no further work done 
> >> or support with any of their problems until I got paid for the 
> >> previous month. Once their customers started screaming at them I 
> >> got paid. 
> >> 
> >> You need to work out what their weakest point is and then use your 
> >> leverage on that to get paid in a timely fashion. 
> > 
> > Their weakest point is not getting the units that I won't ship. This
> If you know that they will pay then shipping and invoicing for it ASAP 
> may still be the least worst option given where you are now.

Only if they pay the late fees.  Right now they are saying they *won't* pay the late fees and only want to try to get approval for paying late fees calculated on a daily rate rather than 2% per month. 


> > is for a product by a major networking company. They contract out 
> > their production (mostly the rack and stack portion) and my board is 
> > integrated into these systems by my customer (their CM). Because of 
> > the long negotiation period the delivery stretched into next year 
> > which is awkward for them because the CM's contract is ending Dec 31. 
> > With more delays more deliveries are pushed into next year and at 
> > some point this overflow becomes a huge headache for everyone (except 
> > me of course).
> So be it then. You ideally want their customer to be shouting at them 
> for the product that you want to ship and get paid for. Somehow you seem 
> to have allowed them to claim the high ground and have their customer 
> blame you for them not paying you on time. 

WTF are you talking about???  They have no high ground.  The guy who called me was simply trying to "explain" my customer's system which I already understood better than he did.  After repeating several times the system was not *designed* to pay invoices late, I asked him to explain to me under what conditions would the invoices not be paid late.  He didn't have an answer. 


> > I don't feel good about the hassles this gives my counterpart at the 
> > CM. When I called the other day to discuss it, she expected me to 
> > simply acquiesce this absurdity. When I stood my ground and called 
> > her on the various issues she eventually got upset and said she 
> > didn't want to deal with this when she's having a party for her 40th 
> > anniversary with the company. We had similar issues during the 
> > negotiations so I'm not her favorite vendor to put it mildly.
> At some point you have to decide if they are a sufficiently valuable 
> customer to continue to do business with. If their late payments are 
> really messing up your cash flow then something has to give.

Another point you have missed.   The CM's relationship with the company selling these products ends when this purchase is complete.  I will never deal with this CM again.  There will be a new CM, but they don't handle anything that's not RoHS, so they won't build the systems these boards go into.  In effect this is the last order for these boards forever. 


> > They actually had the networking company contact me about this as if 
> > they had anything to do with it. When that guy tried to explain 
> > things to me I kept pointing out that their payments are late by 
> > design and he kept trying to say it's not "by design"... but it 
> > clearly IS!
> I'm amazed that you haven't been able to persuade their customer that 
> unless and until you get paid they are not getting any more product or 
> help with integrating it. I found that usually focussed minds once they 
> had a difficult support issue with their customer(s) shouting at them. 

You are assuming there is some deadline for procuring these systems.  They are stocking up a product that will be EOL.  


> As I said earlier the large corporate I once worked for took great pride 
> in extracting nearly 120 days free credit from most of its suppliers (at 
> least for the ones where there were three or more alternatives). 

I know how that works.  The government is very good at it.  You never get the late fees either.  Common practice in business in general.  I have no reason to lend money beyond 30 days.  This was discussed extensively in the negotiations and I was assured they would pay in 30 days.  This company has always been very good about that in the past.  Now I'm holding them to the terms and conditions of sale. 

-- 

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 10/9/2021 8:51 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> "I'll just pay the penalty and not worry about it..."
>>
>> [I vaguely recall some studies to that effect.  I'll have to search
>> my literature.]
>>
>> It's important because if YOU think a fine/penalty will encourage the
>> behavior you seek, you may find yourself operating under very different
>> assumptions than the parties whose behavior you are trying to modify!
> 
> Feelings matter as much as money. As my old mentor Melvin Goldstein
> used to say "The easiest thing in the world is not to sell."

It is not that they feel "hurt"/offended by your act.  Rather,
they are now *empowered*... you have set a price for that behavior
and they can simply decide if it is worth it, to them (because THEY
are teh ones who make the ultimate decision).

Fine me for being tardy returning a library book and I may
decide it's "worth" 25c for me NOT to bring it back, *today*.
And, I may make that same calculation tomorrow.

OTOH, if I feel like I am depriving someone else of having access
to that book, I may make an extra effort to return it "on time".

Note the daycare reference in my followup post.  How much
would you be willing to pay for the privilege of NOT picking up
your child at the agreed upon time?  How much would the daycare
providers who are thus forced to remain at work to ensure your
kid is not left unattended be willing to accept for that
"service"?

Keep in mind that the provider has no limits on how long they may
be inconvenienced by your tardiness.  When does the compensation
fall short of YOUR inconvenience?

On Saturday, 9 October 2021 at 02:18:37 UTC-7, Martin Brown wrote:
...
> I don't know what it is like in the USA, but the aggressive large UK 
> corporate I first worked for would only pay larger bills on 60 day terms 
> after at least 120 days or when the bailiffs turned up to take away the 
> fax machine. They prevented them taking the photocopier by leasing it. 
...
That sounds like GEC when I worked for them (the Marconi-Elliott subsidiary).

It made working with some suppliers difficult as they would only take orders if we paid in advance, we had to do all sorts of tricks like breaking up orders into small amounts to get what we needed.

kw

On Saturday, 9 October 2021 at 16:08:26 UTC+1, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote: 
> > On 09/10/2021 14:34, Rick C wrote: 
> > > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 5:18:37 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown 
> > > wrote: 
> > >> On 09/10/2021 01:35, Clifford Heath wrote: 
> > >>> On 9/10/21 5:25 am, Rick C wrote: 

> LOL! This is not about their "rules", this is about the agreement signed by all parties. I won't call it a contract because that's a legal term and I don't know all of the requirements for it to be a "contract". I do know a contract requires "consideration" for both parties which is another legal term for lawyers to debate.

Woah. This is an area that's /essential/ to company survival. You don't know the basics so put it in the hands of someone that does.

We don't know what's best because we haven't seen your contract with them. But as generalisations:

I would (almost) never ship anything while a customer is behind.
2% late fee is way too small, I normally run with 8-10%, with some negotiation room. Customers count on not paying late, and seldom do. With a large charge, the minute they're late you know they intend to never pay. 
I don't call it a late fee, just give 2 prices for payment within this time and after.
I would not normally call a customer to discuss late payments. Communications on this stuff need to be in writing, and they need to all help build up a picture that leads the coming court case in your direction.
I never discuss the customer's internal financial processes, it demonstrates a real lack of understanding of this whole area. 
But I'll listen, and if someone wants excessive credit times, if they're worth it I can wait. But the price goes up and the late fees do too. Being strapped for cashflow will cost you such deals.
If they have any history of late payment, that becomes part of your expectations for future business. I let them have what they want, and charge accordingly, if it's something I can realistically do.
ALWAYS retain legal ownership of product until paid for in full, including any late fees, extra charges etc.
If you don't even know what your contract is, it's time to panic. You're way outside of anywhere you should be. That's like looking out the windscreen at 70mph and seeing only grass.
Finally, I always look to make such matters nonpersonal, you should be planned ahead of time how you'll deal with each & every one, and it should always come out in your interest.
If it's clear they won't pay, lose no time in extracting it from them. You should have multiple ways in mind to do this ahead of time. Eg court, taking their goods on account, remotely deactivating goods supplied, recovering goods delivered, winding up order, etc. You should never land yourself in an even game with a company 10+ times your size.

On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 2:25:33 PM UTC-4, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> A customer who is a pain in the ass (a very large company, so they think they can toss around my small company) assured me during negotiations they would be paying the net 30 invoices in 30 days. Because of the large manufacturing costs the float on the funds is significant. 
> 
> The first of many invoices was not paid in 30 days, but closer to 45 days. On investigation I found they pay late by design. They cut payments twice a month, 15th and 30th (or 31st I assume). If the 30 days is in the first part of the month the payment is made on the 15, likewise with the second half and the last day of the month. So by design they are paying up to 2 weeks late and *never* by the due date. 
> 
> A customer did this before and they threw a fit when I applied the 2% late payment penalty, but they paid because I wouldn't ship further product. I have threatened to do this with this company and have sent them the invoice for the 2% late fee. 
> 
> They are, of course, throwing a fit. They literally think they ARE paying on time and have indicated they can fix the problem by putting payment on a weekly cycle which would only be up to a week late... without acknowledging that it is still LATE! I've suggested they enter into their payment system the invoices are 15 day credit terms which would be paid in 30 days and they say they can't because it would pay BEFORE the 30 days are up as if they are to be assured of floating the money for 30 days. 
> 
> They responded by saying they would not pay the late fee, then saying they might pay it if it is calculated on a daily basis. Woot! I said that is not happening. I'm told she (the director) is sending this to the lawyers (I'm invoicing $973.50 which she wants cut to $400 something and how much do they pay lawyers?) 
> 
> So far I'm standing my ground. They are champing at the bit to get product so not shipping is a good lever. I'm not telling them I can't ship at the moment anyway because some of the parts are on a container ship outside LA. My CM is not very good at dealing with this sort of thing, so it's hard to get info from them on exactly how many units they *can* build and some sort of a schedule. But that's ok really. 
> 
> I'm wondering how much leverage my customer has against me in this situation. They've paid the original invoice, but not the 2% late payment fee. Am I on solid ground by holding the shipments? 
> 
> On a government job once a vendor did a "ship in place" with the government's approval. This meant they listed it as shipped but the maker kept the unit to use in whatever they were doing with it. I'm wondering if I can resume building units and "ship in place" so I can send invoices. Or maybe prepare shipments to the customer but not hand them to the shipper. If I start shipping them invoices that should rattle some cages and get a response... or not. The machinery seems to be pretty slow to respond to anything. 
> 
Do you know why HBO spent over a million dollars to have Videocipher II developed? Time-Warner paid all of their bills over 180 days late. With Videocipher II, all it took was a few keystrokes to shut down any cable system that was late by a single day. All of a sudden, Time -Warner was paying a few days before their payments were due.
Time-Warner also put a lot of small companies out of business, by not paying on time. They had declared that they were going t own thee entire industry.
I installed one of the first descramblers, at our headend, in Cincinnati, Ohio for Ma-Com's field testing. It was serial number 16.They hadn't announced the system at that time, but 30 days later they announced that within 60 days, every site that carried HBO would receive the equipment, and that their accounts had to be up to date before it would be activated.
Wikipedia stats the first units were seperate desk top style units. They  weren't. They were rack mounted, and the had fail through designed in, so a second unit could take over. This was never implemented by HBO when they realized that MSOs would take the spare to another site to avoid paying for the service. It was useful for private networks, like PBS to feed their affiliated TV stations.
Don't push too hard, they may have someone design a replacement and stop buying from you.