To test this bias, ask a regional packaged software salesperson for details about their ASP offering and judge their enthusiasm and responsiveness. Well, some system integrators derive significant revenues from installations, upgrades, performance tuning and other services related to packaged software implementations. These same services either don't apply or are far less time consuming with ASP implementations. Also, many integrators are more likely to have stronger alliances with the software vendors themselves than with the ASPs hosting the applications. Given that many organizations rely heavily on the opinions of their integrator, they may easily be dissuaded from pursuing the ASP model.
Some large businesses feel that ASPs are really designed only for smaller organizations.
This may have been a valid argument two years ago but no longer applies. Large companies may also have other motives for deferring the ASP decision. Of course this fear of change is most prominent in larger, established companies and is somewhat counter-balanced by new companies that view the ASP model as the fastest and most economical way of establishing a systems infrastructure. Many valid concerns that are raised during ASP evaluations relate to bankruptcy, security and privacy risks. Bankruptcy is a very appealing card to play when critiquing the ASP model.