Monday, December 17, 2007

Epicor expands presence in retail sector

Epicor has just announced its intent to buy NSB Retail Systems PLC, a vendor of application systems for specialty retail stores. The deal is valued at about $287 million.

The deal will add to Epicor's previous acquisition in the retail space, in 2005, when it picked up CRS Retail Technology Group, Inc.

Commenting on the deal, Terry Tillman at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey writes:
Although CRS has some merchandising and CRM capabilities, the company has primarily focused on point-of-sale (POS) software, hardware and services, which we estimate has accounts for 80%-plus of the CRS business. While there are no specific CRS Retail financial metrics provided in 2007, we know the standalone CRS Retail business reported $69.7 million in total revenue in 2006 and our model assumes it likely grows in excess of the overall Epicor business in 2007. Our model assumes the business achieves 11.5% top-line growth in 2007. With the acquisition of NSB, the combined retail business approaches $175 million, according to our assumptions, and Epicor is now adding a strong set of complementary products in key strategic areas like merchandise systems and merchandise planning.
Epicor's expansion in specialty retailing is a good move. With the acquisition of NSB, Epicor will now have over 400 customers in the this important sector. Epicor's traditional market, focused on small and mid-size manufacturers is pretty crowded, with Tier I vendors Oracle and SAP encroaching from the high end, and its "partner" Microsoft coming at it from the side with its Dynamics line of systems.

Not that competition for the retail sector generally is any less fierce. Oracle and SAP are competing in that space as well, along with JDA Software and Lawson. But I suspect that the specialty retailer market in particular may be somewhat under-served at the mid-tier.

Related posts
Layoffs coming at Epicor?
Epicor to miss its revenue targets

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

TomorrowNow and the future of third-party support providers

CIO Magazine has a long recap and analysis of the situation with SAP's TomorrowNow unit, which is the target of an Oracle lawsuit for IP theft. The article also looks at the future of the third-party support industry, which includes competitors of TomorrowNow, such as Rimini Street.

The conclusion: major enterprise vendor support business is hugely profitable--up to 90% gross margins--which gives a lot of room for third-party providers to make money doing it for less.
Rimini Street’s Ravin says neither the lawsuit nor the SAP press release has dampened his business. “Our business grew and went through the roof after the lawsuit was filed,” he says. That’s because in the lawsuit Oracle included dozens of companies from TomorrowNow’s customer list, which, he says, made other companies wonder, "Am I the only guy paying full price?"
Vendor such as Oracle and SAP, by charging an arm and a leg for support, have in essence created the business opportunity for third-party providers. If TN goes out of business, or Rimini Street acquires it, expect others to rise up to compete as well. That's the free market.

CIO's Magazine's article has more.

Related posts
SAP considering sale of TomorrowNow
SAP admits wrongdoing in Oracle lawsuit
Oracle now charges SAP with copyright violation
Latest on the Oracle/SAP lawsuit
Oracle/SAP lawsuit: view from Rimini Street
SAP subject to criminal charges?
Oracle sues SAP and its TomorrowNow unit

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Rumor mill: Microsoft to acquire SAP

A Spectator reader tipped me off to a rumor in Europe regarding a possible acquisition of SAP by Microsoft. Reuters is reporting the rumor, which sent SAP's share price higher yesterday.

A Microsoft/SAP deal is not out of the question. As I wrote back in 2004, during the Department of Justice lawsuit against Oracle it came out that SAP and Microsoft discussed a possible merger late in 2003. According to Microsoft, the talks were called off because of the complexity of the transaction and subsequent integration. SAP confirmed the story.

I also wrote,
It's not clear that the deal would have passed antitrust scrutiny. But if it had, and the deal had gone through, it would have made Oracle's pitch for PeopleSoft look like a used car offer. A Microsoft/SAP combination would have married the world's largest software developer, with a virtual monopoly on desktop operating systems, with the world's largest provider of enterprise systems to large organizations. The merger would have immediately turned Microsoft's applications group from a provider of business systems to small companies (with its Great Plains and Navision acquisitions) into the premier provider of complex enterprise-wide systems to the Global 1000.
So, has anything changed now that would make a deal more likely? Only that Oracle has been vindicated in its acquisition program, and SAP--though still the industry leader and growing--has not shown the revenue growth that Oracle has.

During the same period, Microsoft's foray into business applications is floundering. Its biggest step has been to rebrand its four acquired products under a single Microsoft Dynamics brand. At the same time, it shuffled its management team and called off Project Green, its program to migrate those products to a single code base.

That said, I don't think these developments make it any more likely that there will be a merger of SAP and Microsoft. The deal would face enormous resistance on antitrust grounds from regulators, especially in Europe, where Microsoft has already lost other antitrust cases. The size of the deal, also, is problematic. Though Microsoft is certainly capable of acquiring SAP, which has a market cap of over $60 billion, it dwarfs the size of Microsoft deals in the past.

Another point arguing against such a deal is the cultural aspect. Both Microsoft and SAP have strong corporate cultures, which would be difficult to integrate. Microsoft's legacy as a vendor of shrink-wrapped products is much different from SAP's history as a provider of solutions that take a huge amount presales effort and post-sales professional services. Microsoft has no experience with these things. Its current business applications are all sold and delivered by partners, and even there it has struggled. If Microsoft found selling Great Plains, Axapta, and Navision was a "humbling experience," it ain't seen nothing compared to what it will see with SAP.

On the other hand, I never thought Oracle would complete its bid for PeopleSoft, so my track record is not good on predicting these sorts of things. Furthermore, a Microsoft-SAP combination would be Oracle's worst nightmare, which is--in the interest of promoting competition--perhaps the best reason to hope the rumor is true.

Mary Hayes Weier, blogging for Information Week, has additional analysis.

Update, Dec. 5: SAP is denying the rumor. This news item points out the distinctly "non-Microsoft" technology platform of SAP (i.e. J2EE) as another reason that a deal is unlikely.

Related posts
Microsoft and SAP: the merger that didn't happen

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Dell acquires SaaS platform Everdream

Dell is making an interesting move into services by acquiring an on-demand provider of desktop management services, Everdream.

Everdream's business is aimed at the SMB market, to provide services such as desktop asset management, software distribution, license compliance, antivirus management, backup, remote access, and remote support--all delivered on a hosted, on-demand platform. Everdream has taken a partner-approach. All of the services mentioned above are provided through partners, such as Symantec, Webex, Iron Mountain, and Microsoft. Everdream provides the SaaS (software as a service) platform that allows all of these partner-services to be provided on-demand.

The benefits are clear: small businesses are relieved from having to build and maintain an IT infrastructure and support organization internally. SMBs also are generally too small to outsource desktop support as traditionally provided--most service providers do not even consider a contract for less than 5,000 desktops. Everdream's services, on the other hand, could be set up for a handful of machines.

So why is Dell interested in Everdream? Clearly, acquisition of its SaaS platform moves Dell more strongly into the services business, where margins are higher than in shipping commodity desktops. Dell already offers significant professional services, but more along the lines of traditional outsourcing contracts. Everdream's business model is disruptive to that business and gives Dell a new way to compete with H-P, which has been beating Dell recently in desktop sales.

According to Hoovers, Everdream currently has less than 200 employees--still a small business itself. With the acquisition by Dell, expect this business to grow significantly. As a SaaS provider, it scales easily.

SaaS, in theory, is disruptive to traditional licensed software sales and traditional professional services. Although many companies have deployed SaaS solutions on limited basis, the model has still not taken over in a big way. If Dell is successful in taking Everdream to the next level, it may validate SaaS as an option for a greater number of businesses and really encourage greater adoption.

Dell's press release gives details on the Everdream acquisition.

Josh Greenbaum has an interesting piece outlining why he thinks Everdream's approach using partners is better than that of Salesforce.com.

Update, 10:21 a.m. Greenbaum and Dan Farber, both bloggers on ZDnet, are having now gotten into a bit of a debate about the relative merits of the platforms of Salesforce.com and Everdream. Read Farber's rebuttal to Greenbaum, and Greenbaum's response.

Related posts
IT services in a SaaS world
Software on demand: attacking the cost structure of business systems

Sunday, November 25, 2007

Reading the fine print on ERP contracts

Josh Greenbaum has a good story on why it's important to read, question, and challenge the terms and conditions in ERP license agreements, or any vendor contract for that matter.

The case involves an IBM customer who, eight or nine years ago, signed a contract for PeopleSoft software running on an IBM mainframe. The problem? A clause in the contract stated that the mainframe computer had been discounted as part of the PeopleSoft deal and that if the customer ever moved PeopleSoft off the mainframe, IBM was entitled to raise maintenance fees on the mainframe.

Recently the customer decided to migrate the PeopleSoft application to Microsoft SQL Server. IBM responded by pointing out the migration clause in the long-forgotten contract.

Josh explains the impact:
This tripling of the mainframe price tag effectively wiped out any possible savings for the database migration, not to mention good will and trust. You can imagine how happy this customer is with its long-term “partner.” And how eager this customer is to do any more business with IBM.
The takeaway is, read those contracts before signing them and don't just count on your corporate attorney to do the contract review. Many lawyers read technology contracts from a purely legal perspective and do not have the subject-matter knowledge to see the implications of what the vendor is asking for.

Furthermore, never accept that line that the vendor's salesperson is unable to get changes to terms and conditions because they are part of the vendor's "standard contract." In reviewing vendor contracts on behalf of clients, I've learned: everything is negotiable.

When you are committing your organization to a system and a relationship that may last ten years or more, you need to know what you are signing.

Related Posts
High software maintenance fees and what to do about them

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

SAP considering sale of TomorrowNow

TomorrowNow, which offers third-party support for several of Oracle's products (PeopleSoft, J.D. Edwards, and Siebel) has been under much scrutiny since Oracle sued SAP and TomorrowNow for massive theft of Oracle's intellectual property.

Back in July, as part of its response to the suit, SAP appointed former SAP Americas COO Mark White to oversee TN, with founder and CEO Andrew Nelson reporting to White. The news this week is that Andrew Nelson is leaving TomorrowNow altogether.

In a press release, SAP said that it is "considering several options for the future of the TomorrowNow business, including possible sale."

What's going on? It would appear that SAP is coming to the conclusion that acquisition of TomorrowNow was a mistake in the first place. Taking maintenance and support business away from Oracle, getting involved so closely with Oracle's customers, and handling Oracle's intellectual property--even if all done within the law--is simply too difficult for Oracle's main competitor to manage. Whatever benefits SAP might gain by facilitating customers' migration away from Oracle are probably not worth the difficulty in avoiding the potential legal risk.

It's too bad, because the nascent third-party support model has a lot to offer as an alternative to direct vendor support. It gives customers choices and puts the primary vendor on notice that it cannot take its maintenance and support business for granted. Unfortunately, SAP's misstep with TomorrowNow has been a setback for the model.

Update, Nov. 23. The Financial Times is reporting that Rimini Street may be interested in taking Tomorrownow off the hands of SAP. Rimini Street is the main competitor to Tomorrownow as a third-party support provider to Oracle clients. If a deal materializes, it would be full circle for Seth Ravin, CEO of Rimini Street. Seth was co-founder of Tomorrownow and was with the firm until it was sold to SAP.

Seth is quoted, "We are interested, but we are proceeding cautiously and need to analyse it first." He also declined to say whether he was talking to SAP about a deal.

Update, Nov. 27. Datamation has more on the possibility of Rimini Street taking Tomorrownow off the hands of SAP. It reports that Rimini Street's business has "quadrupled" since Oracle filed suit against SAP, according to Dave Rowe at Rimini Street.

Related posts
SAP admits wrongdoing in Oracle lawsuit
Oracle now charges SAP with copyright violation
Latest on the Oracle/SAP lawsuit
Oracle/SAP lawsuit: view from Rimini Street
SAP subject to criminal charges?
Oracle sues SAP and its TomorrowNow unit

Sunday, November 18, 2007

ERP support staffing ratios

The cost of supporting an ERP system goes far beyond the vendor's maintenance fees. The largest part of ERP total cost of ownership is the cost of internal resources, such as applications folks, DBAs, business analysts, ERP administrative personnel, and help desk. Yet, there is remarkably little data available to benchmark these costs.

Therefore, over at Computer Economics, we've launched a new survey to determine typical staffing levels in various categories required for ongoing support of ERP systems.

If you complete the 10-minute survey, we'll send you a free summary of the results.

Take the survey now.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Layoffs coming at Epicor?

A reader informs me that employees at Epicor are "expecting a layoff at any time." Speculation is that layoffs will come in smaller territories, which would then be serviced from larger metropolitan offices. The reader's source is an insider at Epicor, and the reader--whom I know--has no ax to grind.

I should emphasize that there is no confirmation for a pending layoff at Epicor. However, it would not be surprising in light of the revenue shortfall that Epicor warned about in late October.

Update, Aug. 15, 2008: See the new post on Epicor layoffs.

Related posts
Epicor to miss its revenue targets

Monday, November 12, 2007

IBM buying Cognos

The last large independent vendor of business intelligence solutions is about to fall: Cognos has agreed to be acquired by IBM. The price values Cognos at nearly $5 billion. IBM's move follows similar moves by competitors earlier this year, when SAP's agreed to buy Business Objects for $7 billion and Oracle bought Hyperion for $3.3 billion.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting this morning:
...The head of IBM's software group, Steve Mills, said acquiring Cognos -- which already had a business partnership with IBM -- was not inspired by those previous deals. IBM has been on an acquisition tear in recent years to build out its software portfolio and improve the company's overall profit margins.

"We never do acquisitions on defensive moves or based on what others are doing,'' Mr. Mills said.
Like Hyperion and Business Objects, Cognos is used by organizations with a variety of enterprise systems. In fact, many smaller ERP vendors have partnered with Cognos in the past to provide data warehouse and business intelligence functionality for their solutions. For example, QAD, Epicor, MAPICS (now part of Infor), and ROI (now part of Infor) both use Cognos as part of their total solution. Even SAP has a partnership with Cognos as part of its business warehouse offering.

From this perspective, IBM--which for the most part does not compete with business application software providers0--is a good home for Cognos. IBM is more of an infrastructure and tools provider for other software vendors. I would expect, therefore, that IBM would continue and even expand these partnerships.

[Updated Nov. 14 to correct list of ERP vendors partnering with Cognos.]

Related posts
SAP to buy Business Objects
Oracle hustles Hyperion

Thursday, November 01, 2007

i2 forms committee for possible sellout

i2 announced today that it has formed a committee of independent directors to explore options for increasing shareholder value.

The market is reacting favorably to the news of i2's exploration of a possible sale. Share price is up over 5% from yesterday's close as of this writing. i2 also announced an increase in its Q3 earnings, which may have something to do with the market's reaction.

I would note however, that the earnings increase is from a 9% decline in expenses which more than offset a 7% decline in revenue--not a good sign for i2's business.

Related posts
Pro-sellout shareholder of i2 elects second board member
Major i2 shareholder calls for sale of i2