I just sent the following email to my VMware rep (some edits have been made to protect the innocent). We'll see what he has to say!
We haven't met, but I gather that you are our account representative. Our VAR is arranging a meetup, but that looks like it won't be until mid to late August, so I wanted to get in touch with you directly ahead of that meeting.
To give you a sense of my role in my organization, I am the lead Windows system administrator. I am also the primary implementer and maintainer of our vSphere environment, having built it from the ground up starting a little less than five years ago and having seen it through several iterations and transformations. We are now roughly 70% virtualized in terms of our server environment (the holdouts are servers which are best suited to running on bare metal because of performance, resource, or platform constraints) and perhaps 15-20% virtualized from a desktop perspective, with a VDI expansion initiative just kicking off. Since I first became acquainted with the power of virtualization and VMware Virtual Center, I have been a constant champion of both, on the grounds that virtualization on vSphere offers us tremendous advantages over any other solution.
With that in mind, I'm sure you're aware of this thread on the VMware Communities site: http://communities.vmware.com/thread/320877?start=990&tstart=0. One of the comments which has been made by VMware employees and other thread contributors is that we, the customers, need to reach out to our VMware representatives about our dissatisfaction with the new licensing model. As I commented in the thread, I feel that two major errors were made by VMware in this scenario:
1) No outreach was done to determine what impact this licensing change would have on the customers.
2) The new licensing model is a significant and punitive shift from the old one, at once increasing the complexity of the licensing scheme and massively increasing its cost.
To illustrate the impact this would have one us, we just purchased 6 new servers, dual-socket with 256 GB of RAM. Assuming that we achieve a 1:1 utilization ratio through memory compression, etc., we would now be on the hook for 5 licenses instead of two, and it's not unrealistic to assume that we could get to the point that six licenses would be required. In actual fact, we see a moderate oversubscription of RAM when memory granted is measured against memory consumed, so a 3x increase in licensing cost is about what I would need to budget for, based on our current hardware build, and that multiplier will only increase. I could go into some more detail, but the essence is that the new licensing model makes the licensing cost a significantly larger cost of any new server deployment, whereas XenServer, for example, is licensed on a per-server basis. Previously, VMware's licensing model had the advantage of being very straightforward if not inexpensive; now it is both convoluted and much more expensive than it already was.
At a higher level, the licensing change has had the following immediate impacts:
1) For the first time in five years, I am seriously considering a primary virtualization platform other than VMware.
2) I have no idea what the new features in vSphere 5 are, which I normally would have sought to learn immediately, because any upgrade plans are indefinitely postponed pending a thorough evaluation of competing products.
I recognize that any migration to an alternate platform would be difficult and time-consuming, but the new price structure suddenly makes it compelling.
I know that I am not the only dissatisfied customer (far from it, would be my guess). I look forward to hearing how VMware intends to address this issue.
Not sure why VMware needs a "impact team" unless they are really trying to assess the potential losses in revenue in the future. 
