Direct Marketing Association, The v. Huber

Filing 50

RESPONSE to 15 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction with Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Defendant Roxy Huber. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, Part 1, # 8 Exhibit 7, Part 2, # 9 Exhibit 7, Part 3, # 10 Exhibit 7, Part 4, # 11 Exhibit 7, Part 5, # 12 Exhibit 7, Part 6, # 13 Exhibit 7, Part 7, # 14 Exhibit 8, # 15 Exhibit 9, # 16 Exhibit 10, # 17 Exhibit 11, # 18 Exhibit 12, # 19 Exhibit 13, # 20 Exhibit 14, # 21 Exhibit 15, # 22 Exhibit 16, # 23 Exhibit 17)(Scoville, Stephanie)

Exh.6

Exh.6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 1O-CV-01546-REB-CBS

The Direct Marketing Association,
Plaintiff,
V.

Roxy Huber, in her capacity as Executive Director,
Colorado Department of Revenue
Defendant.

EXPERT REPORT OF DIETER G. GABLE

I am Dieter G. Gable, CEO of TB Consulting, LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company with
principal offices at 4455 E. Camelback Road, Suite A-240, Phoenix, AZ 85018. I have been retained by
the State of Colorado, Department of Law, Office of the Attorney General, counsel to the Colorado
Department of Revenue, to offer my expert opinion regarding the compliance efforts and costs
necessary for affected retailers who do not collect Colorado State sales tax to comply with Colorado
Statue (House Bill 10-1193) and related Department of Revenue Regulation (39-21-112.3.5), hereinafter
referred to collectively as “Requirements.”

lip age

Exh.6, Exh.1

STATEMENT OF OPINIONS

After reviewing the materials outlined in Section II and utilizing the Methodology outlined in
Section III, offer the following opinions:
A.

Based on the minimum threshold of $100,000 in gross annual Colorado sales, a relatively
small number of retailers are subject to the Requirements.

B.

Requirements provide sufficient leeway for variances in approaches for compliance to allow
affected retailers to comply with reasonable efforts.

C.

Retailers subject to the Requirements would possess automation supporting the efforts
required to meet all of the Requirements.

D. Commercially viable commerce platforms can support changes required to meet the
minimum levels required for compliance with Requirements.
E.

Larger Retailers will be able to meet the Requirements with nominal incremental costs as
part of on-going system enhancements and regular legal/tax compliance efforts.

F.

Smaller Retailers would be able to rely on the provider of their packaged or hosted
eCommerce solution provider to support compliance with Requirements.

G. Compliance with requirements should be considered an incremental effort to regular
business activity by retailers rather than a discrete effort.
H. The Requirements will require additional efforts by affected retailers resulting in onetime,
non-recurring first year, costs that range from $2,571 to $6,000 (0.043%

-

0.100% as a

percent of sales) plus the cost of the Annual Notices to Consumers estimated at $589 to
$1,000 (0.010% to 0.017% as a percent of sales).

[Note: the costs are estimated for the

compliance efforts for the smallest of the affected retailers.

The costs for compliance by

larger affected retailers is ignored as the impact, when normalized on a percentage of sales
basis, is expected to be lower or even inconsequential]

2Pag

Exh.6, Exh.1

I.

Some of the above referenced costs for the Retailer could be further reduced if
incorporated as part of their on-going customer experience and annual tax preparation
efforts.

J.

The incremental cost of mailing Annual Notices can be mitigated by including other
information and materials for the consumer.

K.

Retailers can provide the requested data without any affect on PCI compliance or change to
existing privacy policies.

L.

Requirements will not materially impact the call volume for customer inquiries regarding
Transactional Notice.

M. Requirements will not materially impact any existing rate of shopping cart abandonment.
N. Annual Purchase Disclosure to Department of Revenue Requirement provides secure
transmission options protecting customer data.

II.

DATA AND INFORMATION CONSIDERED IN FORMING OPINION
The following data and information was considered by me in forming my opinion:
A.

Documentation related to the Legal Requirements
1.
2.

B.

Colorado House Bill 10-1193
Colorado Department of Revenue Regulation 39-21-112.3.5

Documentation related to the issues raised by the Plaintiff
1.
2.

Expert Report of F. Curtis Barry

3.
C.

Complaint for Civil Action No. 10-CV-01546-REB-CBS

Deposition of F. Curtis Barry (19 October 2010)

Documentation related to DOR implementation of regulation and retailer compliance
(www. Colorado.gov/CS/Satellite/Revenue/REVX/1251581935261)

Exh.6, Exh.1

1.

Submission Guidelines for Colorado Use Tax Annual Filing; Annual Disclosure to DOR

2.

File Format; Sample Excel template data for Annual Disclosure to DOR

3.

Colorado Use Tax Template; Excel template

4.

Use Tax Template Instructions; Instructions for Template for Annual Disclosure to DOR

5.

Template for Transactional Notice; sample of Transactional Notice wording

6.

Sample Annual Customer Notice; sample of Annual Customer Notice wording

7.

FYI Sales 79: Sales of Taxable Items Over the Internet

/ layout for Annual Disclosure to DOR

D. Industry Information and Research related to eCommerce platforms and capabilities as it
relates to retailers’ ability to meet Requirements
1.
2.

:
TM
Forrester Research. The Forrester Wave B2C eCommerce Platforms, Qi 2009 (27 Jan
2009)

3.

Internet Retailer® Research. “Top 500 Guide” (2009 Sales Data for North America’s 500
largest e-retailers based on annual web sales)

4.

Forrester Research. Market Overview: Full-Service eCommerce Solutions (31 Oct 2008)

5.

E.

Gartner® Research. “Magic Quadrant for E-Commerce” (18 May 2010)

Forrester Research. The Impact of the Economic Crisis on eCommerce Technology
Investment (7 Nov 2008)

Industry Information and Research related to eCommerce platforms and capabilities as it
relates to retailers’ ability to meet Requirements
1.

2.

American Marketing Association. How to Attract, Engage and Convert Online Visitors
(21 June 2010)

3.

F.

ATG, Inc. Supercharge Your Shopping Cart! 11 Ways to Close More Online Sales (19 July
2010)

Payment Card Industry! Security Standards Council. Data Security Standard,
Requirements and Security Assessment Procedures version 2.0 (October 2010)

Public information related to the estimation of labor costs
1.

US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation June 2010 (8 Sept. 2010)
—

2.

Parker & Lynch. 2010 Salary Guide for Accounting and Finance Professionals

4IPage

Exh.6, Exh.1

Technology Resources.

3.
4.

Ill.

Robert Half® Technology. Salary Guide 2011

Robert Half® Company / OfficeTeam®. Salary Guide 2011

—

—

Administrative Resources.

METHODOLOGY USED IN FORMING OPINION
A.

Based on the minimum threshold of $100,000 in annual Colorado sales, a relatively small
number of retailers are subject to the Requirements.

1.

Most recent US Census Bureau data suggests that Colorado’s population is slightly more
than one point six percent (1.6%) of the United States population.

For purposes of

approximation, this ratio would suggest that a national retailer with no presence within
the State of Colorado would have to have sales in excess of six million dollars
($6,000,000) to be subject to the requirements.
2.

The most recent data on internet sales (Il.D.3) indicates that a retailer has to have
approximately ten million dollars ($10,000,000) in sales to break into the top 500
retailers nationwide.

I

25
100
200
300

400
500

3.

Annual Sales

Company

Ranking

Amazon.com

HSN Inc.
Art.com
Furniture.com

AC Lens
American Power Conversion
Costume Craze, LLC

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

24,510,000,000
1,015,000,000

158,401,212
58,948,824
29,100,000

17,600,000
10,028,204

While data on sales for retailers below the top 500 is not readily available, nothing
suggests that the sales vs. rankings relationship would degrade abnormally below ten
million dollars ($10,000,000) in sales suggesting that the number of affected retailers

51 Page
Exh.6, Exh.1

should be in the low thousands compared to hundreds of thousands of merchants in
total.
a.

The total number of merchants selling product nationally or specifically into
Colorado is not available.

b.

When sampling eCommerce vendors’ utilization (merchants using certain software
or service), the universe of merchants appears to be at least in the hundreds of
thousands.
I.

Retailer count for two leading eCommerce providers: Magento with over sixty
thousand (60,000) and Volusion with over one hundred thousand (100,000).

B. Requirements provide sufficient leeway for variances in approaches for compliance to
allow affected retailers to comply with reasonable efforts.
1.

Transactional Notice
a.

The Requirements allow for a generalized tax statement in the event the retailer is
subject to a number of taxing authorities or jurisdictions (Il.A.2

b.

—

2(d)).

Alternatively, the notice may placed on the invoice or as a package insert when no
indication is given that “no sales tax is due” (ll.A.2

2.

2(e)).

The notice placement is also flexible and must be reasonably prominent and in close
proximity to the total price (ll.A.2

c.

—

—

2(a)(ii) and ll.C.4).

Annual Notice to Consumer
a.

The Annual Notice to the Consumer allows for retailer customization of the notice
and, while providing required content, does not require any specific form/format
providing flexibility in how these notices can be produced (ll.A.2

—

3(a)).

GIPage
Exh.6, Exh.1

b.

The Annual Notice to Consumers may be generalized if a retailer is subject to similar
notice requirements and must only contain substantially the information required
by the Requirements (ILA.2

c,

—

3(b)).

If the retailer knows that the goods are not subject to Colorado use tax, the retailer
is not required to send the Annual Notice (ll.A.2

3.

—

3(c)(ii)).

Annual Disclosure to DOR
a.

The Colorado Department of Revenue (DOR) has provided detailed instructions for
the submission of the data and allows for the submission by either the DOR website
or by DVD/CD (ll.C.3)

b.

The format is a simple, well described, file that can be produced with information
readily available within any viable eCommerce platform using widely used Microsoft
product Excel or an equivalent application available for free (ll.C.1, Il.C.2).

C.

Retailers subject to the Requirements would possess automation supporting the efforts
required to meet all of the Requirements.
1.

Given the estimated size and gross annual retail sales volume required for a retailer to
be subject to the Requirements, the affected retailers are expected to be using
automation.
a,

These retailers are likely to be leveraging third party eCommerce solutions that
support capabilities required to meet the Requirements (Industry research as far
back as 2008 (Forester, published Jan 2009) shows that retailers cannot justify
custom systems development or costs and will rely on packaged solutions that are
functionally rich and highly affordable).

7IPage
Exh.6, Exh.1

b.

The retailers that rely on in-house custom built commerce systems are generally
market leaders with an IT staff for which the work required to meet the
Requirements is incremental and hardly measurable.

D. Commercially viable commerce platforms can support changes required to meet the
minimum levels required for compliance with Requirements.
1.

Third party vendor solutions providing eCommerce capabilities support varying levels of
customization and extraction of data (Exhibit B.1) to address retailer needs including
customer/purchase analysis, mailing list sort/creation, etc.

2.

Third party vendor solutions provide the support needed to comply with the
Requirements.
a.

Retailers who do not already have a generic multi-state compliant tax statement on
their website will have to include such notice in compliance with the Requirements.
i.

Handling of sales tax is a core component of any package as retailers are all
required to comply with tax jurisdiction requirements based on their unique
situation (store locations, affiliations, etc.).

ii.

All of the eCommerce solutions include the ability to amend an existing tax
related disclosure statement or to change the terms and conditions wording in
compliance with the Requirements.

b.

Retailers who do not already extract customer and sales data will have to extract
required data on an annual basis to create the Annual Notices and Annual
Disclosure to DOR in compliance with the Requirements (See section F.1.b).

E.

Larger Retailers will be able to meet the Requirements with nominal incremental costs as
part of on-going efforts, system enhancements and regular legal/tax compliance efforts.

8IPage

Exh.6, Exh.1

1.

Large retailers employ sophisticated processes to work with their customer data for
measuring customer behavior, buying patterns and generating direct marketing targets.
These same processes could be leveraged to extract the data necessary to determine if
a retailer needs to comply with the Requirements (meets threshold minimums> and, if
subject to the Requirements, to extract the necessary data.

2.

Large retailers continually enhance their shopping experience and make system
changes. The level of changes required to meet the Transactional Notice part of the
Requirements, if not already compliant given potential for generalized notice, is a core
part of the shopping experience and would be expected to be an easy change to
incorporate in a broader on-going system enhancement effort.

3,

Large retailers generally review tax/compliance on at least an annual basis, as either a
standalone process or as part of tax or audit preparation.

F.

Smaller Retailers would be able to rely on the provider of their packaged or hosted
eCommerce solution provider to support compliance with Requirements.
1.

Smaller retailers are less likely to have in-house systems (either “home-grown” or
purchased/licensed packages), instead relying on third party vendor ‘Hosted Solutions’
or ‘Solutions as a Service’ (SaaS) eCommerce capabilities.

These vendor solutions

address a very broad range of eCommerce needs resulting in functionally and technically
rich solutions.
a.

Sales Tax handling is a core component of every viable eCommerce solution
providing the ability to provide a retailer customized tax related statement or a
terms and conditions statement meeting the minimum Transaction Notice
Requirements (Exhibit B.1).

gIPage
Exh.6, Exh.1

The ability to extract and manipulate the data is another core capability provided by

b.

every viable eCommerce solution (Exhibit B.1).
i.

Some packages provide for reporting package interfaces like Crystal Reports
that provide enhanced data reporting within the third party solution.

ii.

If data manipulation capabilities are not imbedded in the third party software,
all appear to support the extraction of data into Excel or similar format.

iii.

Either ability will allow a retailer to obtain, manipulate and use the data
required to meet the Annual Notice and Annual DOR Reporting Requirements.

c.

All viable eCommerce solutions provide support either in the form of user/technical
guides and/or live call-in help to address potential retailer questions about the
details related to implementing the Transaction Notification or extraction of data
(Exhibit B.1).

G. Compliance with requirements should be considered an incremental effort to regular
business activity by retailers rather than a discrete effort.
1.

As outlined above and based on professional experience, efforts related to the
compliance with the Requirements should be an incremental effort to a retailers on
going efforts that are annual or more frequent in nature.
a.

Transactional Notice Requirements can be incorporated into efforts related to
overall tax compliance and reporting (developing approach/wording) and the efforts
related

to

refining

the

shopping

experience

(upgrading

check-out

processes/shopping cart handling).
b.

Annual Notice Requirement can be incorporated into efforts related to customer
communication and customer retention efforts (wording, form and content of

10 I

P a g e

Exh.6, Exh.1

Annual Notice) and on-going data analysis, data extraction and customer analysis
activities (data extraction identifying targets of Annual Notice).
c.

Annual Reporting to DOR is primarily a data extraction activity and can be
incorporated into on-going data analysis, data extraction and customer analysis
activities.

H. The Requirements will require additional efforts by affected retailers resulting in onetime,
non-recurring first year, costs that range from $2,571 to $6,000 (0.043%

-

0.100% as a

percent of sales) plus annual recurring costs estimated at $589 to $1,000 (0.010% to
0.017% as a percentage of gross annual sales).

[Note: the costs are estimated for the

compliance efforts for the smallest of the affected retailers.

The costs for compliance by

larger affected retailers is ignored as the impact, when normalized on a percentage of sales
basis, is expected to be lower or even inconsequential]
1.

Transactional Notice
a.

Retailers may have to create/add new wording, or modify existing tax disclosure
wording, to a form that will meet the Transactional Notice Requirement.

b.

The cost for compliance with the Transactional Notice Requirement, if any,
would range from $263 (low end for retailer modifying existing Transactional
Notice to comply with Requirements) to $1,038 (high end for retailer having to
create a new Transactional Notice to comply with Requirements).

c.

The range in G.1.b excludes retailers who already have generic notices meeting
the Transactional Notice Requirement and hence have no cost for implementing
this part of the Requirements.

Exh.6, Exh.1

2. Customer Service Inquiries.
a. Retailers may have to amend or add to their Customer Service call or web-chat
scripts to address inquIries from customers related to the compliance with the
Requirements.
b. The estimated cost of this one tIme change will range from $735 to $1,470.
3. Annual Notice to Consumer
a. The Annual Notice preparation and distribution requires an effort with
variability only in the size of the retailer and number of notices requiring to be
sent The following costs are assumed for production and distribution for what
would be statistically one of the smallest retailers subject to the Requirements
(approximately $6,000,000 in gross annuai sales) reflecting the worst case
scenario on a percentage of sales standpoint.
b. i Year For these retailers, the total Initial one time or first-year cost would be
-

between $1,601 and $3,023 or 0.027% and 0.050% as a percentage of gross
annual sales.
I.

Retailers who already have a generic notice to consumers meeting the
Annual Notice requirement would not incur a “lYear” expense but would
Immediately fall Into the “On-going” cost estimate reflected in G.3.c.

c. On-going For these retailers, the on-going yearly cost would be between $354
-

and $530 or 0.006% and 0.009% as a percentage of gross annual sales.
d. The followIng retailers are exduded as they would have costs that nominally or
absolutely lower than what is estimated above:
I.

Retailers who are subject to the Requirements but have few or no
customers meeting the Annual Notice threshold,

12Page
Exh.6, Exh.1

ii.

Retailers who can exclude some are all customers are being exempt from
use tax by virtue of what they sell or who they sell to, and

iii.

Retailers who are more significant in size and may have better economies
of scale

4.

Annual Disclosure to DOR
a.

Every affected retailer will have to submit a file complying with the Colorado
Department of Revenue (DOR) file layout.

b.

For these retailers, the cost for compliance with the Annual Disclosure to DOR
Requirement would range from $235 to

$

470 or 0.004% and 0.008% as a

percentage of gross annual sales.
Some of the above referenced costs for the Retailer could be further reduced if
incorporated as part of their on-going customer experience and annual tax preparation
efforts.
1.

A great number of the retailers subject to the Requirements are expected to have a
reasonable level of sophistication given estimated $6,000,000 in gross annual sales.

2.

These retailers are likely to have on-going monitoring, process improvement and
enhancements of their customer experiences with specific on-going focus and changes
to the order process and shopping cart. The nominal changes required to meet the
Transactional Notice Requirement could be easily incorporated into these types of
changes.

3.

As part of customer analysis or annual tax preparation efforts, these retailers will likely
prepare data similar to, or with content substantially the same as, that required for the
Annual Notice or Annual Disclosure to DOR Requirements. Any effort(s) related to this

13

I

P a g a

Exh.6, Exh.1

work could be leveraged to meet, or assist, with the compliance of the Annual Notice or
Annual Disclosure to DOR Requirements.
The incremental cost of mailing Annual Notices can be mitigated by including other
information and materials for the consumer.
1.

The Requirements do not preclude the inclusion of materials with the Annual Notices
(ll.A.1). More sophisticated retailers could mitigate the absolute incremental cost of the
production and mailing of the Annual Notice by including marketing materials,
promotions or other reasonably limited information.
a.

Given the requirement to send the notice by First Class US Post, the cost of the
postage would allow for inclusion of additional material without any increase in the
postage.

b.

Inserts are a regular aspect of customer communication and are regularly included
with mailings.

c.

The specific savings could result in a reduction of the costs of the Annual Notices to
little more than the production of the actual Annual Notice.

K.

Retailers can provide the requested data without any affect on PCI compliance or change
to existing privacy policies.
1.

PCI compliance deals primarily with the protection of payment related information
including the protection of the process and the consumer’s financial data (ll.E.3). None
of the data required to be extracted, used, interrogated or manipulated to meet the
Requirements is subject to PCI compliance.

2.

14

I

Privacy Policies are not regulated nor does a strict standard exist.

P a g e

Exh.6, Exh.1

a.

The Federal Trade Commission generally seeks to enforce privacy issues but does
not

provide

strict

requirements

as

part

of

their

Privacy

Initiatives

(TC.ovrivac.
b.

The need for a Privacy Policy is not mandated by the Requirements but rather by
industry guidance or consumer demand so the cost for development of a Privacy
Policy, if none exists, cannot be attributed to the Requirements. In the event of no
privacy policy existing, the retailer effort to implement a privacy policy would not be
measurably impacted by wording required to meet the Requirements.

c.

A review of existing Privacy Policies on retail websites we referenced in our research
all appear to cover the disclosure of the minimal data required for a retailer to
comply with the Requirements.

1.

Requirements will not materially impact the call volume for customer inquiries regarding
Transactional Notice.
1.

As reported by the American Marketing Association (ll.E.2), surveyed consumers
reported engaging into a ‘live chat’ (electronic text based interaction with customer
service function) regarding Check Out (9.0%) and Other (16.8%). Other major reasons
cited included questions about Product Information (36.3%), Finding a Product (22.0%),
Order Status (10.8%), Shipping Information (13.6%).

2.

There is no industry research indicating that a ‘live call’ (traditional call center and live
voice) would have a materially different set of reasons for customer interaction.

3.

No data would indicate that a Transactional Notice meeting the minimum requirements
would impact the shopping experience or therefore the known reasons for consumers
to engage the retailer.

15 I P a g e
Exh.6, Exh.1

4.

The capability of the ‘live chat’ functions continue to increase and a number of
sophisticated retailers are now using automated response systems to handle questions
cutting down overall customer service interaction costs. It would be expected that an
inquiry related to the Requirements could be handled by an automated or canned
response for most consumers.

M. Requirements will not materially impact any existing rate of shopping cart abandonment.

1.

Shopping cart abandonment is a prevalent and well documented issue in eCommerce.
Because of the rapidly shifting eCommerce marketplace, what is not as well understood
are the exact causes. Research by Forrester Research in early 2010 shows the top five
stated reasons by customers to be:
-

-

-

-

-

2.

Cost of shipping (44%)
Unprepared to purchase (41%)
Price-checking (27%)
Price too high (25%)
Wanted to save products for later (24%)

Research and suggestions provided by leading eCommerce solution provider ATG (ll.E.1)
address various aspects of the sales process and opportunities to improve the web
experience for the shopper. They merely note that the check-out process should be
simple, which is a direct result of significant improvements by the industry on the whole
since check-out was a major cause of shopping cart abandonment in the early 2000’s.

3.

Compliance with the Requirements does not need to impact the check-out process even
in the slightest bit and hence should not result in any measurable change in the
shopping cart abandonment.

N. Annual Purchase Disclosure to Department of Revenue Requirement provides secure
transmission options protecting customer data.

16

I

P a g e

Exh.6, Exh.1

1.

The Colorado Department of Revenue (DOR) has outlined a process for providing a
secure website protocol whereby a retailer would establish an “account” by which they
can sign on to the DOR website.

2.

Once signed up, the retailer would be part of the secure protocol using industry
standard secure socket layer (SSL) technology.

SSL is the same method by which

retailers usually protect customer and purchase data when their clients interact with
them on their website.
3.

The transmission options, either on-line or if by hard-copy media, would not result in
any cost with respect to securing such data.

EXHIBITS

IV.

Exhibit A
Note:

—

Cost Calculations

1.

Detailed cost calculations are attached as ExhibitA.1
(‘Exhibit A.1 Cost Ca!culations.xlsx”)
Percent of sales is normalized using the approximated $6,000,000 gross annual
sales estimate threshold for retailers subject to the Requirements.
Assumptions regarding time (effort) required for tasks are conservative based on
—

2.
3.

professional experience and review with colleagues.
4.

“Management” refers to personnel in charge of a process, department
i.

Time is accounted for to review requirements, outline a plan and
confirm details

ii.

Time is accounted for developing or revising wording for the
Transactional Notice

iii.

Time is accounted for developing necessary changes to the customer
services scripts

iv.

Time is accounted for writing a customer friendly Annual Notice

v.

Time is accounted for discussing and/or reviewing requirements,
wording or approaches with a professional (“Accountant / Lawyer”)

vi.

Cost for “management” was placed at $105 per hour. This is based on a
senior level employee with $150,000 base salary plus employer costs
(taxes, benefits, ll.F.1) bringing the total to just under $215,000 or just
over $103 per hour.

17

I

P a g

Exh.6, Exh.1

5.

“Business Systems Analyst” was used as a generic, technically capable, resource
who would work with the technology (website and data)
i.
Time is accounted for to modify the website as needed for the
Transactional Notice.
ii.
iii.
iv.

Time is accounted for developing a data extract (identifying the data),
testing the extract and performing a final extract of the required data.
Time is accounted for reviewing the data extract and submitting it to

v.

6.

Time is accounted for incorporating any updates/changes related to the
customer service call center or chat procedures.

DOR.
Cost for “business system analyst” was placed at $65 per hour. This is

based on the highest range of Business System Analyst compensation,
$93,750 (lI.F.3), plus employer costs (taxes, benefits, ll.F.1) bringing the
total to just under $134,000 or just over $64 per hour.
“Administrative Person” was used as a generic, administratively capable,
resource who would work with the office technology required to complete the
Annual Disclosure
i.

Time is accounted for creating the Annual Notice per management
specifications.

ii.

Time is accounted for to create a annually re-usable mail merge

iii.

(merging data extracted by business systems analyst into the Annual
Notice).
Time is accounted for printing, stuffing and mailing Annual Notices using
a ‘worst case’ scenario of minimum threshold sales of approximately
$100,000 and every customer buying just over $500 worth of goods
yielding approximately 200 notices.

iv.

7.

Cost for “administrative person” was placed at $29 per hour. This is
based on the highest range of Senior Administrative Assistant

compensation, $41, 750 (Il. F.4), plus employer costs (taxes, benefits,
II. F.1) bringing the total to just under $60,000 or just over $28 per hour.
“Accountant/Lawyer” was used as a generic term for a trusted outside
professional who would be able to provide third-party review regarding
compliance with Requirements.
i.
Time is accounted for reviewing any new or modified Transactional
Notice
ii.
iii.
iv.

18

I

Time is accounted for reviewing any modifications or additions to the
customer service scripts
Time is accounted for reviewing the proposed structure and content of
the Annual Notice.
Cost for “Accountant/ Lawyer” was placed at $250 per hour based on
experience. While actual costs may be higher. they are unlikely to apply

P a g a

Exh.6, Exh.1

8.

to the retailer size and sophistication used for purposes of analyzing the
impact of the Requirements.
While any of the estimates and costs can be extended to a much larger number
based on “committees” working on things, contractors performing the work or
extensive legal reviews, this would not be a reasonable approach
The changes required to comply with the Requirements are simplistic
i.
and would not legitimately warrant a large effort by any group.
ii.
A large or wasteful sized initiative is not a realistic scenario for the
retailer size and sophistication used for purposes of analyzing the impact
iii.

9.

of the Requirements.
On an absolute basis many of the basic functions of the larger retailer
are more expensive but are negated when looked at on a percentage of

sales basis.
The concept of a contractor completing the ‘technical’ aspects identified in the
model as work done by the ‘business systems analyst’ was dismissed
i.
ii.
iii.

The size of effort would not be outsourced by a small retailer,
If outsourced the effort would be completed at a faster rate negating
any incremental contractor labor cost difference, or
Larger retailers outsourcing the effort would incorporate required

changes needed for compliance into larger on-going efforts.
1. Transactional Notice
The compliance with the Transactional Notice is a one-time investment required by the retailer
based on their current sales tax disclosure.
a.

Retailers may already have some form of generic sales tax notice that meets the
Transactional Notice Requirement.
For these retailers, the cost for compliance with the Transactional Notice
Requirement would be $0.

b.

Retailers may have to modify the wording of what will meet the Transactional Notice
Requirement.
For these retailers, the cost for compliance with the Transactional Notice
Requirement would range from $263 to $525.

c.

Retailers may have to add new wording for compliance with the Transactional Notice
Requirement.
For these retailers, the cost for compliance with the Transactional Notice
Requirement would range from $545 to $1,038.

or

or

2. Customer Service Inquiries
Work related to generating the wording or approach for the Customer Service call or web-chat
scripts will leverage work already done on the Transactional Notice (i.e. outside/expert help)
Retailers will have to amend or add to their Customer Service call or web-chat scripts to address
inquiries from customers related to the compliance with the Requirements.
The estimated cost of this one time change will range from $735 to $1,470.

19

P

a p

Exh.6, Exh.1

3.

Annual Notice

a.

Using the extreme case, with essentially just a minimum $100,000 in Colorado and with
every customer purchasing just over $500 annually, the total number of notices
required to be sent would be approximately 200.
i5 Year For these retailers, the total initial one time or first-year cost would
-

ii.

be between $1,601 and $3,023 or 0.027% and 0.050% of gross annual sales.
On-going For these retailers, the on-going yearly cost would be between
$354 and $530 or 0.006% and 0.009% of gross annual sales.
-

or
b.

Part of the retailer population will have low average order amounts, low repeat business
or other factors resulting in few, if any, customers exceeding the threshold triggering
the need to generate an Annual Notice.
For these retailers, there may be no cost related to the Annual Notice Requirement.

c.

By delineating the extreme, the costs can be shown to be a reasonably insignificant
incremental cost for any retailer and in line with general operating expenses.
Larger retailers with greater infrastructure and greater economies of scale are
i.
ignored for purposes of estimating the anticipated cost for an ‘average’
retailer as those costs would be insignificant when measured as a percentage
ii.

d.

of annual gross sales.
It can be assumed that given focus on retailers with low volume of notices,
outsourcing to a mail-house could be impractical and would be chosen only if
economically more sensible.

Consumable costs were obtained as follows:
i.
Paper $0.01 per page based on standard printer paper available at Staples
ii.
Printing $0.022 per page based on Xerox study (average of all printers>
iii.
Envelope $0.34 per envelope from Office Max (pre-printed with disclosure
on outside); actual cost could be mitigated to regular cost of envelope
(approx. $0.06 each) by printing the disclosure prominently on the top of the
-

-

-

iv.
v.
4.

mailing label.
Mailing Label $16.50 for 200 oversized (3.25” x 3.75”) mailing labels on
Amazon.com.
Stamps

-

—

standard current US Postal Service stamp cost.

Annual Disclosure File submission

a.

—

DOR

The data extracted for the Annual Notice is substantively the same as the data required
by the Annual Disclosure to the DOR.
i. For these retailers, the cost for compliance with the Transactional Notice
Requirement would range from $235 to $470 or 0.004% and 0.008% as a percentage
of gross annual sales.

20 I P a g e
Exh.6, Exh.1

b.

No substantive difference in price between cost of effort, or submission, of file
electronically (web) or by CD/DVD sent by mail.

Exhibit B

—

eCommerce Platform Review

Research guided with methodology outlined by me. Calls and functional review done by
research assistant. Results reviewed by me. Matrix with details attached (“Exhibit 8.1
eCommerce Platform Review.xlsx”).

—

1.

Random Sample of entry to mid-level eCommerce Solutions
a. Google Search “Top Entry Level eCommerce Solutions”
b.
c.
d.

2.

Random sample from “ZippyCart.com”, “SmallBizTrends.com”
Added entries from Google Search “Licensed eCommerce Solutions for small
businesses”
Random sample of companies found in search

Developed Standard Comparison Matrix
a. Target Audience (Entry Level, Mid Range, High End)
b. Type of Solution (Licensed, Hosted (SaaS), Freeware, Packaged)
c. Costs and Options
d. Training and Support
e. Clients using solution (references)
f.

Requirements based on Bill
i.
Transactional Notice (modifying shopping cart)
ii.
Annual Notice and File Submission to DOR (extracting data/formats, mail-merge
capabilities)

3.
4.

V.

Reviewed Websites and/or called selected companies
Documented Answers to Standardized Matrix

QUALIFICATIONS

Attached hereto is a copy of my current CV.
1.

I have been a consultant in the Information Technology area for over 20 years with
experience ranging from extensive coding in the late 80’s/early 90’s to running $100 million
dollar plus, multi-national, systems development programs for Fortune 100 companies.

21

I

P

aga
Exh.6, Exh.1

2.

I have extensive experience in and have provided expert opinions in the subject areas of
Credit Card Systems and State and Provincial Lottery systems, vendors and services.

3.

I consulted with, invested with and helped turn around an eCommerce platform (Succeed
Corporation) providing full feature web-store capabilities (store, catalog, product, shopping
cart, etc.) to small to medium sized retailers.

4.

I have owned and/or have had financial interests in multiple retail companies providing me
hands-on insight to the challenges faced by small retail operations as it relates to
compliance, IT limitations and constrained resources.

5.

I have not published any articles for public consumption.

RECENT TESTIMONY

VI.

I have not testified as an expert at trial or deposition during the past five years.

STATEMENT OF COMPENSATION

VII.

My compensation is $185 per hour. Services are invoiced on an hourly basis without any regard
to the outcome.
.1/
I

Dieter G Gable

22 I

a

Exh.6, Exh.1

________

COST CALCULATIONS

lnitiat onetime and

Transactional
Notice (Modify)

REQUIREMENT +

4’

COMPLIANCE EFFORT

Notice

High

LOW

Low

High

.

non-recurring
Customer Service
Inquiry Script Dev.

Transactional
(NEW>

Low

Annual Notice
(1st year)

High

-

Annual Notice
(on-going)

OR
—

High

Low

4,00

8.00

-

to OCR

High

-

Low

High

2.00

0.30

LOW

File Submission

1.00

2.00

2.00

4.00

Effort (hours)
Management

1.00

2.00

2.50

4.50

4.00

8.00

Business System Analyst

0.50

1.00

0.50

1.00

1.00

2,00

8.00

Accountant! Lawyer

0.50

1.00

1.00

2.00

1.00

1.00

2.00

16.0.0

2.00

4.00

tOO

2.00

16,00

6.00

Administrative Person

2.00

Cost (per hour>
Management

$

105

$

65

$
$

105

Business System Analyst
Administrative Person

S

29

$

$

250

Management

$

Business System Analyst

$
$
$
$

Accountant

/ Lawyer

105

29

$
$
$

5

250

105

$

33

5

$
$

105

$

105

65

$
$

105

65

65

S

65

29

$

29

$

29

$

29

$

250

$

.250

$

250

$

210

5

63

$

42$

$

420

65

$

33

S

66

$

65

65

5
S

105

S

105

$

105

65

65

$

65

$

65

$
$

2

5

29

$

29

5

2.30.

$
$

29

280

5
$

29

250

$

250

$

$4

£3

105

520

$

1,040

$
S

232

$
$
$

464

$

5.00

470

2$

470

250

$
$
$
$

5

420

$
$
$
$

$
$

105

29

250

5
$

$

840

$
$

130

250

$

500

735

$

1,470

65

105

260.

105
65

Total (total by level)

Administrative Person
Accountant! Lawyer
Sub-total

-

125
263

$
$
5

-

250
525

S
$
S

$

$
$
$

..

250

$

500

545

S

1,038

-

-

250
1,422

65

S
5

130

58

$

116

S.-

$

-

2,844

5

S

351

2

$

2$

2

176

105

$
$
$
$
$

235

$
$
$
$
$

$

235

$

130

-

210
260
-

-

Consumables (200 Annual Notices)
Paper

$

Printing in black & white

S
$

4$

4

Envelope

66

$

66

S
5

Mailing label

5

17

5

27

$

6

1,601

$
$

Stamp ($0.44>
TOTAL PERSONNEL

$

% of sales ($6,000,000 in annual sales>

263
0.004%

$

525
0.009%

5

845

5

0.009%

1,038

735

$

0,017%

$

0.012%

S

1,470
0.025%

0.027%

4.

‘Best Case”
1st year
on-going

$

‘Worst Case”
itt year
on-going

[5

2,571

‘

I

1$
[$

4,
iO3$

I

3,023
0.050%

4.

735j

5

+

4’
1470

4$

4
68

27

5
$

17

86

S

88.

354

$

530

68

$

0.006%

0.009%

4’

0.004%

0.008%

4’

1,601j

4.

4’

[5

1

+

Is 331

4’
+

F4ó1

+

+

vL4i

DG001
Eshibit A.1 -Cost Calculations

1 of 1

Printed: 11/10/2010

Exh.6, Exh.1

eCommerce Platform Res,ew

VENDORS

4

4’

FUNCTIONAL REVIEW
Source of data

Entry Level solutions (e$200)Montlr cost), Mol range
Type of solution

Free trial avadable?
COST all packages

Go Daddy
Quick $lioppittgCaft
)48fy505-8B77
Company website

Who can dot and how difficult is it estimate
time); if sendor only, detail $5 estimate

Eshibit 6.1 eCommerce Platform Revinsv

Company website, Live Company website
(no sales or customer
Chat with Customer
Service, calling sales and seruice support(
speaking with Jeremy

EyRle$S ettot’efroftt

Campay website
and
Anita Vettickal,
sales staff

Entry Leon

Entry Levet

Mid Range

Mid R9ffge

Hosted or Licensed
(Based on website(

Hosted

Freeware, Custom
(Based on website)

Packaged ortfoyted
(Based on webnite)

No
(Based on webstte)

Yes 15 days
(Based on website)
They offercustom
design No transaction
fees. Beginner$19.99/mo, Starter$24.99/mo, Basic549.99/mo, Standard
$99 99/mo, Pro
$129 99/mo (Based on
pricing page of website)

‘let aSsays free (Eased
on website(
Free, but you must
customize and integrate
on your own. Free add
votes well. Based on
pricing page of website(

No
(Based on website)

Ecørtorrmy-$9.99/Mo
GaIters $29,9/MG
Pf’glnlufts$ALllB/Mb
Discotyrtsldyoupay
multlplelnsonths tsp

All plaits Include free
24/7 phoit€ ssapport,
Online consmsanlty
forums, (Based on
Supportpage of

Tatt compliance capabilities (TRANSACTIONAL CONSUMER NOTICE)
Host to specify what states to collect caves
Yes, builFin tax

Interface for changes if retailer can change. user
friendly or techn Ca

Compano website

OS Commerce

HoSted
(Based’n website)

websitp)

Ability to provide consumer tar notice (we collect
in AZ, CA & OH.. not in )

Shopify
(5B6)704-O2S2

BIStryLeve)

front. All plans include
free hosting, no setup
fee, no per transaction
fees, (Based on pa-lcltsg
page of*bylte)
Training and Support

Core Commerce
(800(747-4270

alcul6torsIPall
packdgps(Radgdon
)‘eatUrES.pBge(, Resily
conflgUrePaRoptiorf$.
Establish state-by-state.
a flat tax and VAT.
(Based on Product ToCr
page)
2 spabghteadd OuEtofls
ditylaitnief’S dieting
sheckostpmceux sq all
packagRs(Based on

(Based on website)

-

-

Free (ioe phone support
during business hou’s
and 24/7 emergency
line. Training coleus,
forums, Slugs,
knowledge base, and
user guide online

Yes-SO days
(Based on website)
Basic’$24/Mothru

Premier’ $ll9/Mo, B
Leveld, MOPE pGpiSlSf’is
BSsness’$9E/Mo, All
have trantactiots fe*s
except Premier. Custom
plans available. (Based
on pricing page of
websA)

Anyone minimal effort

Mid H gh End
Licensed,
-

Based :n website)
No
lEased on webote)
Community $0 loot ar
option due to hgh
effort)
Profess univ starts at
$2995 USD/Yr
Entetarise $ 12,990/Yr
(Based on pricing page
of website)
-

-

Stlppcv’t plans pod
lratningfor extra cost.
RANGE. Online fortsms,

Community and
Professional ed,con has
only user gu’de and
forums Support ‘5
asai’able for tne
Enterprise edition (Gold
and Platinum plans
24/7/365 phone and
internet support)
-

Yes (Based on webste)

Unknown

-

awa)tiftgrespOalse from
company

yeticSn
5
Yav addctiptom Unknown, may require
verhage, If more iS
custom deve opment
reqsiil’ed, It Is aneasy

Yes sased on discussion
with company

Uiikriopin
awBitiflg tesport8frorni
coinpaety

Unknownawa ting response from
company

lJetkl’town
awaiting responsefrom

Unknownawaiting response from
company

-

customlSatton. (Based
on discussion with
Jeremy in sales)

Usef’cSfi chlsge anid It Interface is user friend y RetaIler cuss cheligh Iffy
appeaf’StO he user
is IltirtOf’, Vendor can
fi-iendly(llsydobon)hve
chaisgeif more
demo)
complicated. (Based on

Miniravleffort

Company webste
and
Adi Adam.
sales (b email)

-

Yes, callr email, Rep chat, Common ty support n
submit ticket. OitIiIsS
forums. Newsletter
documentation, app
store, forums,
knowledge base, (Based
on welypite)

Yes, can be triggered by Yes (Based on websfte)
billing or shipping
address and tracked by
state and county (Bated
on website)

Yes, If you base any
terms and conditions
that you need to inform
the customer about,
phone call with support) enter them in the rerr-rs
& Conditons field.

Depefsdson nsany
factoff, must call to get
qutete, RANGE. Øused
onemailfronssales)

Magento

discussion with Jeremy
In sales)
Minutes for the retailer

Unknown

-

company

Unknown

Unknown

-

awmt)vg response from
con’fpafty

Unknown
awaiting response from
company
-

DG002
Pr,rrted

I1/1C2C1C

Exh.6, Exh.1

eComrnerce Platform Review

VENDORS

4

1
Go Daddy

QuiceShoppingCart
FUNCTIONAIREVIEW
[phone]
Data extraction capabilities (ANNUAL PURCHASE & SUMMARY TO 00281
Ability to eotract database info (customer name,
YR8, 8iidtabaSo fields
addresses (ship to! bill to), purchase amounts)
can be estrbcted irs aS
packageo. (Bayed ott
phyg fail with support).
Search Bod filter your
customers’ prders by
order status, payment
status and customer.
(Based ox Product Tour

4’

2

2
Shopify
[phone]

Core Commerce
800 7’7-42’0

Yes, You can select any
oral orders to eoport
Can also export
customer information.

OS Commerce

Yes eli pack8get, CBrI Yes, all data goxs nto
create a customer group your database
and query cust.c’mars
wlsospantmorethsy
S500 lust yner. (Based
on discussion with
Jeremy in sales)

ExeresteStorefront

Magxrito

Yes, reporting dasignBd
aroisrrd Crystal Reports

Yes, all data goes

HTML, POP, Eycei

CSV and Excel

Depends on the
capabilities of your
database

User friertdiy

User Pr endly

Yourself, or hire a
vendor

Unknown
awaitingresponse from

Very easy, but wiY
-eouire data
manipulation in Excei or
Access

-

sty

your database

page)

formats for eotraction ).cso,

?)

Expr.syt Grderiiyformatioir Excel, CSV, UPS
tosoficroxftfte (Based WorldShip

Interface for extract if retailer can extract. user
friendly or techn cal
.

Who can do it and how difficult is it (estimate
time); if vendoronip, detail $5 estimate

OW orXM(, )Ssadrr
)fitfoite anddlsci2ssipiy

capab lit en of pour

Oft PrOduct Toerpage)

.

wittyjeremy irs skIes)

database

U8erctiy extract through Retailer van extract, user AetSiler carleiorac, user
inlerfece rsd it appears fr endly
*igrsdly. (Bated oh
to be user friendly.
website and discrusgion
(Based on Product Tour
with Jeremy in sales)
page)
Retailer Can do it with
Retailer can do it with
Retailer cars do it with
minimaleffort

r,’i’vimul effort

minimaleffort

Depends on the

-

company
,

3

Data extraction capabil ties (ANNUAL CONSUMER OISCLOSU)fE)
Any maii’merge capabilities lfvo, able to merge
2
Ntsvpuldneedtp ha
2
specific data fields
done xssirsg Office type

software,
S

B

Average size of clients (in ai’,ual Sales)
h-rd out how thei’ sues distribute. i.e. how many
retai ers are under 5500k, how many are over
$5,000,008. maybe they have some natural
distribution they could share with us or, a’,
aggregated basis?

Client references

Since there are towend
limits on disk space
(2GB) and bandwidth
(10006(, this is for

No, would need to be
done using Office type
software

Unknown
awaiting response from
company
-

smaller businesses

ifS S)stro, Utbenhom,
Oreen Apple icitchen,
SteBa Bails (Based on
wesblt)

No, would needtu

be

ffoou rising Office type

software,

Can accommodate
larger retailers
(>$lOhl/annuai sales).
Current range of

No, would need to be
done using Office type
software.

Usximowys
xweitkfgfespoefse from
comoarw

done using Office type

Can accommodate any
size retailer as it is
customizab e

Unknownawaiting response from
company

Unknown
awaiting response from
company

Over 230,000
storefronts (according to
the Small Business
Trends website article
about the best
ecommerce systems for
smal businesses)

‘tulip World, Euyflettrhan
1
Coilectiofy5 Marret

3M, Samsuog, The North
Pace, Lenooo, Homed cs,
Jack Wolfski, Vizio,

No, would need to be
software

-

customers in all sites,
based ottdipcryooiOri
wilts Jerannv in sSlwsS
Over 13,000 stores.
Olan Mills, Pet Sate, GE,
Mchigan State, Clear
Channel Radix, Thomas
Neyon Publishers,
Guitar Syndicate Abba
Jasu, Minnesota
Wo’kwear (approo
$1’n/yr in gross reoer’se
according to interview),
Golf Is Life, The Basket
Lady, Begaiabel com.
(Based on wevb Se)

Afhsfne$tVlptarrsktiosyel,
Teds

Motors, flop

itighters, The
Indianapolis Star, Pitar
Evisu,Themepaek,Sociai
Suicide (Based on
wesbite)

$hpeit,4ran fleet,

AtlanticTactlcal, Holland Espresso, Stussy, Myla
Bulb Farms,
(Based ox wesbite)
ChefShop.cortr (Based ox
wesbite)

DG003
Evhibit 8.1- eCommerce Platform Review

2 of 2

Exh.6, Exh.1

Printed. 11/10/2010

DIETER GABLE
4455 E Camelback Road, A-240
Phoenix, Arizona 85018

Cell: 602-300-9270
Work: 480-343-9478
SUMMARY

Highly involved and action oriented senior executive experienced in working with “C-Level” executives to
understand business challenges and define well founded strategic initiatives and business solutions with
focus on measurable outcomes. Proven ability to build and inspire teams to solve problems and reach
strategic business goals. Over 20 years experience both domestically and internationally, with deep
experience in state & local government and financial services. Specific strengths include:







Corporate & Board Governance
Organizational Restructuring
Complex Program Management
Business & IT Transformation
Structured Systems Development Methods







Large Client Development
Financial / P&L Management
Capital and Debt Structuring
Complex Negotiations
International Work / Multi-lingual

EXPERIENCE
TB Consulting, LLC, Scottsdale, AZ
2007 – Present
CEO, Director
Technical Services and Software Development firm focused on SMB marketplace including State & Local
Government. Select client experiences:





Multi-year, multi-million dollar contract for client with $500m revenue
Multi-year contract with Court Trustee for applications management and infrastructure support
Customer focused solutions to upgrade technology yielding immediate measurable benefits
Identified opportunities for streamlining and reducing work flow/efforts up to 80%

AZ Merchant Partners, LLC, Scottsdale, AZ
2003 – Present
Founder, Director
Consultancy founded to address the needs of mid-sized, mainly Arizona based, businesses leveraging four
key components (Strong Corporate Governance, Strategy Development, Experienced Management and
Capital Formation) to deliver meaningful and quantifiable results. Select client experiences:
IPSA (Financial investigations & risk advisory firm), Phoenix, AZ
Structured acquisition of company and formation of Fortune 100 level board
 Structured acquisition with no cash up-front and no outside equity or debt
 Restructuring of operations for increase in value of company by ~$10 million within first year
Succeed (eCommerce solution provider), Tempe, AZ
Restructured overall operations, cost structure and focus of struggling company
 Year 1 cost savings of nearly 25%/$1 million; provided for capital to invest in product development
 Increased sales and positioned company as #1 fastest growing software company in AZ (2007)
Champion College Solutions (School loan default prevention), Mesa, AZ
Restructured operations, aligned staff and reengineered processes with updated technology under budget
 Implemented new management and sales team to deliver major accounts (20% annual growth)
 Decreased headcount by over 50% with improved throughput and customer satisfaction
NeoSurg (Laparoscopic device manufacturer), Houston, TX
Led capital campaign with unique investment structure providing company needed funds and flexibility
 Jointly developed the go-to-market strategy aimed at positioning company for acquisition
 Positioned for acquisition by rival (Cooper Surgical) within 24 months at substantial multiple
Exh.6, Exh.2

DIETER GABLE

Page 2

F1 Race Factory (Indoor karting & entertainment), Phoenix, AZ
Co-founded company with focus on providing corporate meeting & team building capabilities
 Developed into leading US track hosting US indoor karting finals since inception in 2003
 Restructured cost structure during economic downturn yielding highest single year profitability
ACCENTURE, LLP, Phoenix, AZ
1989 – 2003
Partner, Financial Services (State & Local Government until 1996)
A $23B Management Information, Technology Consulting and Outsourcing Company, providing service to
FORTUNE 100/500 and large Corporations internationally in a variety of industries and governments.
Specialized in large programs with focus on ‘metrics & measurements.’ Select client experiences:
Chase Bank (WaMu)
Optis Program Development Director
Directed $300 million plus dollar program to streamline home loan originations
 Integrated numerous internal and 3rd party systems enabling significant increase in market share
 Implemented technology to improve speed of decision by ~80% and speed of close by ~35%
American Express (US & UK)
Triumph Program Development Director
Directed software development effort for $500 million dollar plus program over 3 years (200+ team)
 Enabled leading credit card products – Blue Card US/Europe, Black Card and Affinity cards
 Eliminated tens of thousands of hours of unwarranted software development backlog and costs
JusticeLink™ Justice Product
Practice Lead
Assumed leadership of stalled project and delivered working solution within 9 months
 Implemented first of kind electronic filing capability at no cost to Prince George’s County (MD)
 Project and benefits featured on national news; product spun off to venture group & Lexis Nexis.
ACCLAIMS™ Lottery Product
Practice Lead
Directed group in providing systems and services to US state and foreign lotteries
 Increased market share of back office systems to over 25% of US States’ market
 Improved market place positioning with international presence in Canada and Europe
EDUCATION/PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Bachelor of Science, Finance

University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona

Bachelor of Science, Real Estate

University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona

AFFILIATIONS AND RECOGNITION



Project Management Institute, Member



Ryan House Children’s Health Charity, Chairman of Board, Board of Directors



Luke Air Force Base, Honorary Commander, Fighter Country Partnership



University of Arizona, MIS National Board of Advisors



University of Arizona, Presidents Club
Exh.6, Exh.2