The biggest question hanging over the sudden shutdown this week of Sage’s largest partner, MIS Group of Dallas, is: Who is the mysterious senior secured lender that is taking control of the company’s assets?
It’s an important question given that the company’s death has left what is a significant portion of Sage’s software sales up for grabs, being picked over by competitors who are using Twitter and paid Google search links to try to pick up clients.
If a bank owns those assets, then their failure to step up and make a deal to get some value out of what is by some accounts a $30 million business bears looking into. Why wouldn’t the bank have put together a deal to at least recoup some of its monies?
It makes sense that Sage was owed a significant amount of monies. Why didn’t Sage work hand in hand with the bank and other creditors to ensure a smooth transition for customers?
Right now, the customer base of Sage Software’s No. 1 reseller in 2007 and 2008 in sales volume is being picked clean by competitors and ex-MIS Group employees looking to start up their own businesses.
What the hell is going on behind the scenes with this so-called senior secured lender? It begs the question so many solution providers have been asking: Why didn’t MIS Group file for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy organization?
If the company was shut down by the senior secured lender without any regard for the assets, then you’ve got to ask yourself: Did the senior secured lender feel that the assets were for all practical purposes effectively worthless? What does this say about the solution provider business and the value of those businesses?
Right now the value of a $30 million business is evaporating right before every creditors' eyes. That means those creditors are left holding the bag while the company’s top executives walk away--free to go out and start a technology consulting business or staffing firm that could go in and grab some of those old accounts. How could this have happened? What does it say about our bankruptcy laws?
Just a thought on the proposed question about the "value of those businesses." Perhaps the "value" comes from the employees who work there. This is a knowledge worker industry. Sure, the clients are probably worth something (maybe one or two times their annual receivables), but the true value comes from the relationships between the employees and the customers and the knowledge or value they help to create at the customer's business. If that is the case, I am not sure if employees can be "seized." Just a thought.