post

SaaS vs. Open Source for SMB’s – Part 2.

Yet another “Pros and cons of Open source vis a vis SaaS for an SMB” post today.  I feel this one barely scratches the surface, missing basic points like the availability or (mostly) lack of IT skills at a lot of SMB’s. 

For reference on the subject I recommend Shop Talk: SaaS vs. open source – what SMBs should know by Paul Gillin and my own SaaS vs. Open Source for SMB’s? A No-Brainer. 

Tags: , , , ,

post

Software 2006: from 1.0 to 2.0

In my previous post I complained about the lack of  interaction at some of the Software 2006 sessions. Well, the last two sessions I attended (actually running back and forth between the two) were definitely more participatory.

The panel discussion on Blogs and Web 2.0 in Marketing Communications was lively, and finally (!!!) they took a lot of customer questions. There we go, participation!

Greg Gianforte’s presentation on “SaaS – successful go-to-market strategies” was more a traditional one, but there is something in his presence and style that made it very interesting. Of course it’s not just the presentation, but the success story behind it: while his company is not as super-hyped as Salesforce.com, RightNow is definitely a significant player, with Fortune 1000 customers and over $100M in revenue.

Some of Greg’s key points: One-size-fits-all is OK for the typical SMB customer, but large corporations will demand choice in a number of areas:

  • Deployment choice: on-premise and hosted. They have to offer both, even tough 90% of business is now SaaS. Often the large corporate customer insists on on-premise, but their own IT gives them 12 month timeline, so they go live with the hosted version “temporarily” – then they get a taste of it and never move on-premise.
  • Payment choice: a common misunderstanding is to equate On-demand to pay-as-you-go. Payment terms have nothing to do with deployment methods, so they offer monthly term, term net thirty, and perpetual licence+maintenance for both on-demand and on-premise. Interestingly enough, monthly payment (which comes at a premium) is often not chosen by small businesses, but large companies who want to “hide” the cost in the operating budget vs capital.
  • Upgrade choice: Forced upgrades are unacceptable, they have an automated system that allows customers to pick their upgrade schedule in a multi-tenant environment.
  • Integration choice: They’ve done hundreds of integrations, web services making it easier.
  • Customization choice: meeting 80% of the requirements is not enough. High configurability, customization for the rest. Need architecture that supports customization even in the multi-tenant architecture.

Summing it up, these two sessions were informative, lively – but I need to stop now, the wine I smuggled out of the reception area is starting …. to … take …… ef….f….e…c….t.

Related posts:

Tags: , , , , , , ,

post

Software 2006: “Tacit Interaction” is the New Buzzword

I’m sitting (actually standing in front of a workstation typing this away…) at the Software 2006 Conference, which started off with a really good keynote. Before walking up to the workstation, I already knew I “lost the race”- having seen Ross sit close to a power outlet with his Mac in his lap, I knew everything that could be said is already said Jeff also covered the Welcome Address in detail.

Real-time update: these guys are posting faster then I can read: full coverage of Ray Lane’s keynote by Jeff and Ross. Again, I can’t really add anything (other than congrat’s to Ross, Ray did a good plug for the wiki). Ray’s session was followed by Vanessa Colella from McKinsey, and I *swear* I heard the term Tacit Interactions more often then Web 2.0, SaaS, Ajax, Collaborative and Social all lumped together at a TechCrunch party. Too bad Tacit is a private company, I’d run to buy the stock before it gets hyped up. OK, I am not being fair, the fact is, it’s pretty hard to deliver a speech immediately after Ray Lane spoke.

Back with a cup of coffee now … oh, well, considering my poor typing skills, I’m actually glad these guys posted all the facts, so all that’s left to me are a few observations.

For all the “Web 2.0” talk I feel we’re sitting in a “1.0” type conference. Sitting, rather than participating. None of the speakers took any questions, and while it’s OK for the keynote, one would expect the Pundit Panel to end with a Q&A.

Never mind, off we go to the Software Showcase. Well, not much of a showcase, we’re getting Powerpoint-supported presentations of CollabNet, Compiere, Digium and Ingres. Again, no Q&A in the end. Finally, Zimbra saves the day, we’re actually getting an impressive live presentation, the audience wakes up, and in the end, we’re offered free beer. Free, as in Open Source. Opening the bottle is $1, as in support for Open Source.  Beer or not, I can’t wait to get out of Microsoft-prison and start using Zimbra.

All in all, it’s a good conference, interesting topics, good networking, but it’s a bit “old-fashioned”:  “They” present, “we” listen passively, missing all the “Tacit Interaction” we’ve just talked about. Perhaps I’ve attended too many “unconferences” recently, I can’t expect a regular corporate-type conference to be TechCrunch or Techdirt-style 🙂

Related posts:

Tags: , , , ,

post

Optimizing your Participation at Software 2006

Software 2006 hasn’t even started yet, but I already like it.  Software Connections powered by BDMetrics is a cool web-based service that allows you to optimize your participation at the two-day conference.

After creating a profile, Connections will make personalized recommendations for your event plan, companies to see, people to meet.  Of course it’s not just a recommendation system, you can actively serach for all the above, propose meetings with other attendees while preserving their privacy. 

If you ever wondered around an expo floor with a list of people you want to meet, yet have no way of finding them, you’ll appreciate this service – especially if there will be workstations throughout the conference site to access the system.  The one item I’d like to see added: mobile alerts on networking requests or responses to one’s own requests. 

Tags: , , , ,

post

Ellison’s Double Dip: a Conflict of Interest? No.

Netsuite LogoMatt Marshall at SiliconBeat is wondering whether Oracle CEO Larry Ellisons 60% ownership (*) in NetSuite, preparing for a $2B IPO represents a conflict of interest.

I don’t think so.  Oracle dipped into the On-Demand market before,  it did not quite work, so Ellison decided to tackle it differently, through his investments.  He is a Warlord battling in different theaters and maintaining two separate, not directly interchangeable armies.   This is still true, even though Oracle’s second attempt in the SaaS space will likely be successful, especially after absorbing Siebel.

The issue isn’t so much On-Premise vs. On-Demand anymore,  but the market segment they go after: NetSuite is still mostly an SMB player, although more the “M” than the “S” piece.   The SMB market requires a totally different Sales and Marketing approach, amongst others, and Oracle with it’s current “legacy” salesforce can’t reach this market profitably.  It’s the Business Model, not only the technology, that requires a separate “army”.

For the above reasons I’ve long been advocating that SAP also should invest in it’s own NetSuite-equivalent (or better, and I happen to know who ) to tackle the SMB market.

Back to the Ellison factor, Jason  still contends that “NetSuite could get scooped up by Oracle before it ever sees the light of the public markets.”

* (I think it’s actually less than 60%, but more than 50% – but that’s irrelevant here.)

Update (4/2)Vinnie agrees:I have always believed if Larry had invested in every one of Oracle’s alums, he would be a far richer man than Bill Gates…. Maybe Larry should similarly invest in Open Source, Third Party

Maintenance, BPO, Search, Web services start-ups. They represent the

growth and the innovation in the market, not the company he founded.”

Sramana Mitra‘s post is also worth reading.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

post

Software 2006

I’ll be attending “The must-attend software event of the year”, Software 2006, organized by the Sand Hill Group.

The 2,500 participants meet industry leaders on April 4-5th in Santa Clara, CA.

I hope to blog from there, although it’s more likely that I only get to do it after the event.  I also hope to meet many of my readers.  If you’ll be there and would like to meet, drop me a note.  

Tags: , ,

post

Open Source kills innovation (?)

Does Open Source really kill innovation? – debates Michael at SQLFusion, quoting from the Economist, Harvard, Infoworld and others.   It’s worth reading – and considering that they are the company soon launching Open Source Fusion, you can guess what Michael’s answer is.
Full post here.

Tags: , , , , ,

post

SaaS vs. Open Source for SMB’s? A No-Brainer.

(Update)
I have to take issue with Paul Gillin’s approach as he discusses whether SMB’s are better off with SaaS or Open Source Applications. If we equate Open Source to downloadable, on-premise installed software, I have no doubt, and have stated it before that the only good answer is SaaS. But, hold on, a few minutes later we’ll see these two options may not be mutually exclusive for long.

Paul analyzes several criteria:

  • cost
  • speed of deployment
  • customization
  • reliability
  • data ownership
  • vendor viability

These are all issues well-discussed on the web, and although Paul does not explicitly say, my reading is that he also leans towards the SaaS conclusion. The problem is that this criteria-by-criteria approach works well with a typical (mid-size) company where some level of IT expertise is present. Small Business America is very different from the web-savy geeky software startups; the majority are more traditional businesses with no CIO, IT department, in fact often without any IT support whatsoever. While the two main obstacles SMB’s face with any on-premise implementation are cost and (lack of) IT expertise, you can’t just translate the latter into cost – i.e. the cost of hiring full-time IT support. The opportunity cost of Management venturing into IT hiring and project decisions instead of focusing on their primary business makes this an impractical approach, leaving us with only one choice: SaaS.

Another issue not discussed in the article is integration. Open Source or SaaS, getting several packages work together requires IT and business process expertise, which typically means hiring expensive consultants. Therefore, I would go one step further: not only SaaS is the best choice for most SMB’s but they should seek to minimize the number of providers, i.e. the best choice is to use integrated All-In-One solutions.

The current undisputed leader in this field is NetSuite, but as they follow Salesforce.com’s footsteps and move upstream chasing midsize businesses, they leave an opening for up-and-coming challenger 24SevenOffice, which focuses solely on SMB’s, and covers a wider range of business functionality than the incumbent.

This is the situation today. Now, let’s revisit the original question: SaaS or Open Source? A tiny startup named SQLFusion is working on making that question obsolete. The dilemma with Open Source: a lot of good applications are available, but they are written by geeks for geeks… you really have to be quite knowledgeable to download and implement them. Example: at one of the startups I am advising I use SugarCRM over the internet. Starting to use it was a no-brainer, but when I looked at the prerequisites and the process of installing it myself, my head started spinning. No way, this is not for me! Open Source Fusion, which I hear is within days of opening for a limited beta will bridge the gap between availability and usability of Open Source Programs, by offering such apps to be used over the Internet. In true On-Demand fashion, maintenance, upgrades all happen in the background, one can start using the programs without implementing them. So it will no longer be SaaS or Open Source, but SaaS and Open Source.

The first incarnation of Open Source Fusion will provide access to individual applications, still leaving the integration dilemma for SMB’s, but the technology under the hood enables the company to later offer an integration layer between the key applications it serves up.

So the future is Open Source Software as a Service. Hm, here’s an ugly acronym: OSSaaS (?)

Update (3/6). Releated posts:

Update (5/23): Stefan over at The Small Business Blog discusses the issue; his company, WinWeb is expected to offer Open Source apps as a service soon.


post

Web 2.0 & Enterprise, Round 3: Enterprise Software for Small Businesses

(Updated)

This post is a continuation of Web 2.0 in the Enterprise – Round 2 in which I reflected on some thoughts brought up by Stephen Bryant in Five Reasons Web 2.0 and Enterprises Don’t Mix.

The Web 2.0 in the Enterprise TIE event I previously referred to was hectic, trying to cover way too many subjects in 90 minutes, with one common underlying assumption: Enterprise means large corporations. The theme of the night was how these Web 2.0 technologies and business/communication approaches will “seep in” to the large enterprise from the bottom up.
What is then Enterprise Software? Typically SAP, Oracle et al come to mind, and I can hear the roar “Enterprise Software is Dead” – well, is it?
If we define Enterprise Software as the traditional heavyweight, expensive, pay-huge-license-fees-upfront, then try-to-implement-forever model it is certainly challenged from two ends, by Open Source and the SaaS model. But there is another definition that is largely being overlooked:
Software that allows a company to conduct it’s everyday business, supporting most of the core, fairly standard business processes any company performs repeatedly.

With this definition, Enterprise Software has a whole new, largely unpenetrated market to enter: that of small businesses, referred to as the SMB or SME segment. Such enterprise functionality has traditionally been beyond reach for a typical small business, for two major reasons:

  • Cost (license, hardware, implementation, maintenance ..etc)
  • Lack of IT resources (integrating applications, designing processes, dealing with multiple vendors ..etc)

SaaS is the right answer for both, since it allows the SMB user to start using the functionality without an upfront investment, does not require implementation, upgrades, maintenance, worrying about backups and security ..etc.

Of course several Open Source packages are available completely free, which is a perfect solution for the cost problem, but I think most of these packages are by geeks for geeks; i.e. you really have to be quite IT-savy to implement, integrate, upgrade them, and as we stated most small businesses simply do not have that type of resource. Yes, that means the Silicon Valley tech-startups are not a true representation of the SMB world
Likewise, I don’t believe SOA, best-of-breed packages working together are an option for the SMB market, for the same reason. They will play an increasingly critical role in larger enterprises with a professional IT organization, but for a few more years SMB’s are far better off with integrated, All-In-One type On-Demand solutions.

Of the Web 2.0 companies Stephen mentions in Five Reasons Web 2.0 and Enterprises Don’t Mix two are offering Integrated On-Demand solutions:

  • NetSuite
    Stephen lists NetSuite along with Salesforce.com, and while they are in the same club, the significant difference is that Salesforce.com is only CRM, while NetSuite offers an integrated CRM+ERP package. They both are trying to become a “platform” via NetFlex and AppExchange, respectively. Both companies are definitely pushing upstream, going after the Enterprise market as in the first definition, i.e. large (or midsize) corporate customers.
  • 24SevenOffice
    Coming from Europe this company is lesser known. They focus on the SMB market and offer a modular but integrated system with a breath of functionality I simply haven’t seen elsewhere: Accounting, CRM (Contacts, Lead Mgt, SFA), ERP (Supply Chain, Orders, Products), Communication, Group Scheduling, HR, Project Management, Publishing, Intranet. Essentially a NetSuite+Communication, Collaboration. I’ve taken their test-drive (currently IE only) and liked it. I would debate how they structure their menu-system, as functions like Product, Inventory, SCM are all hidden under Financials.

Back to the economics: if SMB’s could not in the past afford Enterprise Software, the same held true for the Software Industry: they could not afford SMB’s, since there was just no way to make the numbers work. The cost of customer acquisition vs. the very low license fees made it an uneconomical model, whether via direct or channel sales.
Once again, technology comes to the rescue: the Internet, and largely Search Engine Marketing changes everything. Joe Kraus, Founder of JotSpot and previously Excite sums it up:
“ Ten years ago to reach the market, we had to do expensive distribution deals. We advertised on television and radio and print. We spent a crap-load of money. There’s an old adage in television advertising “I know half my money is wasted. Trouble is, I don’t know what half”. That was us. It’s an obvious statement to say that search engine marketing changes everything. But the real revolution is the ability to affordably reach small markets. You can know what works and what doesn’t. And, search not only allows niche marketing, it’s global popularity allows mass marketing as well (if you can buy enough keywords). “

Another benefit of SEM is that while traditional advertising can pick the right demographic groups, it cannot pick the right time, only a fraction of the target audience is in “change mode”, looking for a solution. That’s the beauty of Search Engine Marketing: obviously if you are searching, you have a problem and are looking for a solution, which is half a win from the vendor’s point of view.
Small Business Trends recently published a survey on “Selling to Small Businesses”, which supports the increasing importance of SEM: “A full 73% of vendors attract small business customers through search engine results”

Finally a quote from Ziff Davis again: “Products for the long tail and SMB market, where 72 million businesses spend $5k or less each year, are a much easier play” Wow, I don’t know where those numbers come from, but if I were a SMB-focused software vendor, I’d certainly like them … there’s a goldmine out there.

Update (2/22): Perfect timing for this report to come out just now: U.S. SMBs to Spend $2.2 Billion on Software in 2006, Says AMI-Partners

Update (4/17): Interprise Suite (recently debuted at Demo 2006) claims to be “The FIRST Accounting / ERP / CRM Solution to Bring the Power of the Internet to Small and Mid-sized Business“. While I take issue withe the claim to be “first”, considering the breadth of functionality it’s definitely an option to consider for SMB’s .

Related posts:


post

Web 2.0 in the Enterprise – Round 2

Stephen Bryant lists Five Reasons Web 2.0 and Enterprises Don’t Mix (hat tip: Espen Antonsen).  He cites his personal experience of having worked in an innovative small software company that could not close deals with the slow enterprise behemoths. “What we needed was a shorter sales cycle, a very, very big salesforce, or some combination of the two”

One of the key changes we’re experiencing today is that the traditional big salesforce becomes obsolete. 

  • At the recent Web2.0 In the Enterprise event (references here, here, and hereRoss Mayfield, CEO of Socialtext described his bottom-up grassroots approach: first a small team, typically a department, or an ad-hoc project team starts using the hosted wiki … then some other teams within the same organization … eventually Ross walks in to close a corporate level deal, but by the time it’s a fait accompli.  (more in the Wiki Effect).
  • Jeff Nolan of SAP related his experience after making an investment in Socialtext, and bringing the wiki “officially” in-house: he received dozens of emails from SAP-employees who had long been using the hosted version for their own project, just had not told anyone ,since it was “unofficial”.
  • One of Ross’s competitors, Joe Kraus of JotSpot said: “for the bottom-up effect to work, the price has to be expensable, not approvable
  • Of course you could argue the above approach will only be feasible with communication / team collaboration tools, not with Enterprise packages that require the whole company to be on the same platform.  Well, it depends.. as Sales VP in a smaller (30 employee, $5M) company I found myself in a situation where not only my team needed a CRM solution, but the whole company needed some IT modernization. For budgetary and resistance reasons we decided the sales team will march ahead on its own, but we implemented NetSuite, laying the foundation for the rest of the company to join us on one integrated system.
  • Finally, a quote from SugarCRM’s John Roberts: “Software is bought, not sold.”  Nice punchline, not a 100% true, just like the “No Software” tagline from the other guy… but delivers the message: sales is replaced by demand generation, becomes a pull– vs. a push-process.

Next I will talk about how Enterprise Software “comes down” to the SMB sector – but for the sake of readability, it  is in the next post.

P.S. Stephen, perhaps one day we’ll hear about the pig-killing job in Tuscany

Update (2/23):  The Doctrine of Slow and Old: Big Business and New Applications 
Update (2/25)Giving enterprise software practices an ‘angioplasty’   

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,