From what you have described the present project is a can of worms. Trying to maintain something like that or add new features is not easy.

Yes, that's correct and exactly the way it's been described to me by everyone involved, which is one of the main reasons it's being re-engineered. In a word: maintainability. Note however, as instructed so far, I'm not to spend any considerable time on it reworking it to utilize the advantages of VFP, only minimal time cleaning up the present code. All those resources and $$ are to be spent on the reengineering.

If the project was done in VFP correctly I would think management would see an improvement in overall performance and maintainability. It is understandable why a new tool will be used under such conditions.

Right, and many seem to agree and recognize that. Although, I've not heard that performance has been an issue. One of the key things that I remembered during my interview was management saying that it had to do with the customer's (whether it be management, IT group, consultants, etc.) perceptions of FoxPro. Obviously, like all software providers, they want to grow and expand the user base of their product. However, for all the reasons we are all aware of, they hit resistance when they've mentioned that it uses FoxPro. Hence, the redesign project resources are to be spent on moving away from FoxPro, to provide what is deemed to be a "more attractive product"...

- Brian