????那年的春季和夏季，在思科公司藍(lán)灰色的會議室中，經(jīng)過一系列似乎漫無止境的磋商之后，我們終于很好地理解了思科公司的主要目標(biāo)。他們的目標(biāo)是：

????? 能夠向思科的任何一位客戶銷售NAS，并且獲得Opsware公司非競爭性的積極支持。

????? 產(chǎn)品需打上思科的標(biāo)識。

????? 思科有權(quán)以任何價位銷售產(chǎn)品，甚至可以在銷售某個大型設(shè)備時免費贈送NAS軟件。

????? Opsware 必須“保證”思科的競爭對手不會對Opsware發(fā)起出其不意的收購行動。

????? 有權(quán)進(jìn)入Opsware NAS軟件的源代碼，甚至制造衍生產(chǎn)品（你可以想象，這個要求一度讓我們心痛不已）。

????隨后的整個秋天和初冬，我們穿梭往返于Tasman Drive大街的思科和位于瑪?shù)贍柕麓蠼值腛psware公司辦公室，反復(fù)跟思科公司軟件團(tuán)隊協(xié)商交易框架，及時告知我們的銷售和產(chǎn)品研發(fā)團(tuán)隊談判的進(jìn)展，會同他們一起制定戰(zhàn)略，以確保我們沒有偏離既定目標(biāo)。有些問題（比如源代碼）極其復(fù)雜。然而，就猶如一個人正從重重霧靄中緩緩走出，一項引人注目的交易開始逐漸成型。

????2006年1月13日，也就是Rendition Networks公司收購案結(jié)束1年之后，我們終于跟思科公司達(dá)成了一份全球性的分銷協(xié)定。思科的企業(yè)銷售團(tuán)隊將向其遍及全世界的客戶群銷售我們的NAS產(chǎn)品，思科將其重新命名為思科網(wǎng)絡(luò)管家（Cisco Network Compliance Manager）。Opsware公司的銷售團(tuán)隊將追隨思科公司同仁，為其提供銷售支持服務(wù)，并在此過程中構(gòu)建業(yè)務(wù)關(guān)系，為隨后百萬美元級服務(wù)器軟件的銷售奠定基礎(chǔ)。

頭條新聞的幕后故事——措辭強硬的協(xié)定

????雖然媒體報道和思科公司的公開認(rèn)可帶來的宣傳效應(yīng)很有價值，但讓這種伙伴關(guān)系在實踐中產(chǎn)生非凡成果的卻是一個設(shè)計高明、旨在實現(xiàn)雙贏的交易結(jié)構(gòu)。

????最低收入承諾：雖然談判耗時近9個月，但我們最終說服思科做出了一個為期3年、有約束力的季度收入保證，總額相當(dāng)于我們此前收購Rendition Networks公司時所支付的款項。我們說服思科同仁相信，這樣做將產(chǎn)生雙贏效果：向Opsware公司保證每季度銷售幾百萬美元的產(chǎn)品將給予思科巨大的銷售動力。反過來，它可以讓我們心安理得地中止我們自身的NAS銷售活動，全力以赴地（包括指派一些專門的銷售和產(chǎn)品支持人員）幫助我們的合作伙伴取得成功。

????可觀的收入分成份額：雙方就收入分成份額和最低售價達(dá)成的協(xié)定使思科公司的NAS銷售活動在財務(wù)方面對我們的吸引力幾乎等同于我們直接銷售的效果——因為思科對于軟件的定價能力其實遠(yuǎn)大于我們自己。

????In a seemingly endless series of meetings in Cisco's blue-gray conference rooms over the spring and summer, we gained a good understanding of Cisco's main objectives. They wanted:

????? The ability to sell NAS to any Cisco account, with active support, not competition, from Opsware.

????? Cisco-branded product.

????? Freedom to sell at any price they chose, including throwing in the NAS software free as part of a big equipment sale.

????? "Insurance" against a surprise acquisition of Opsware by a competitor.

????? Access to Opsware NAS source code, and even the ability to make derivative works. (As you might imagine, this one caused us a lot of heartburn.)

????All through the fall and early winter, we shuttled back and forth between Tasman Drive and Opsware's office on Mathilda Avenue, alternately negotiating a deal structure with the Cisco software team and updating and strategizing with our sales and product organizations to make sure we were staying true to our objectives. Some issues, like source code, were extremely complex. Nonetheless, like a figure emerging from the fog, a compelling deal gradually took shape.

????On February 13, 2006, a year after closing the Rendition acquisition, we announced a worldwide distribution agreement with Cisco. Cisco's enterprise sales force would sell our NAS product, rechristened Cisco Network Compliance Manager, to their worldwide customer base. Opsware's sales force would follow their Cisco counterparts, supporting their efforts to sell the network product and in the process building the relationships and laying the groundwork for a subsequent million-dollar-plus server software sale.

Behind the headlines – a deal with teeth

????While the press and public endorsement by Cisco were valuable, what made this partnership work unusually well in practice was a smart deal structure designed to achieve both sides' objectives:

????Minimum revenue commitment: It took us almost nine months, but we persuaded Cisco to make a binding three-year quarterly revenue guarantee that totaled almost as much as we had paid to acquire Rendition. We helped our Cisco counterparts to understand that this would be a win-win: Guaranteeing several million dollars a quarter to Opsware would give Cisco huge motivation to drive sales. In turn, it would give us the assurance we needed to back off our own NAS sales efforts and do everything—including assigning some dedicated sales and product headcount—to make our partner successful.

????Substantial revenue share: We secured a revenue share and pricing floors that made a Cisco NAS sale almost as financially attractive to us as if we had sold it directly—because Cisco could actually charge more for the software than we could.