Archive for August, 2008

I’m in the wrong industry

larry8 Well kind of the right industry but the wrong part of it… or something.

I wonder how Oracle CEO Larry Ellison copes - SEC filings released today show that his 2008 fiscal year total compensation package was USD84.6 million. Ellison also realised a $544 million windfall from cashing in stock option. Other awe-inspiring stats: Oracle paid Ellison a $1 million base salary and $10.8 million in non-equity incentive compensation. Oracle also paid $1.4 million to protect Ellison, with most of the bill covering security at his 45-acre home in Silicon Valley.

How does he cope? Must be tough making ends meet…

It was only a matter of time…

For years Apple fanboys have been using the security benefits of using anything other than a Windows machine as justification for their dogmatic view around Apple products and services.

Of late I’ve been hearing more reports of viruses specifically targeting the Apple operating system - surely this is a function of the rising popularity of the products out of Cupertino - the more popular they become, and the more fanboys proclaim the security benefits of Apple products - the more motivated the dark knights of virus, phishing and spam infamy will be to invade the Apple products.

It was interesting to see then that Apple’s seriously plagued MobileMe service has been the target of a phishing scam.

Yet another nail in the coffin of the fanboy’s dogma?

2766152822_dfb86b55f1_o

Even the boring stuff looks good as SaaS!

So the title of this post was a little tongue in cheek. It’s easy to get excited about things like collaboration and conferencing delivered as SaaS - but what about more humble use cases?

Enter TenderLink. TenderLink is a product that takes the jaw droppingly exciting world of tendering/quoting/RFI and RFP (all now termed ERFx notices) work and deliverers it as a SaaS product.

TenderLink provides a customisable web portal where organisations can list their ERFx notices that can be linked from their own website and provides all the requisite security that a system like this should.

TenderLink can be used as a private ERFx noticeboard (organisations advertise upcoming proposals to their own preferred suppliers) or as a public facing service. Given the concerns customers have about security with web based solutions, it’s good to see that TenderLink have had their solution independently audited by Price Waterhouse Coopers.

Features

Key features of TenderLink’s solution include;

  • The ability to attach documents to an ERFx (for example specifications or blueprints
  • The ability to create templates that ERFx responders can fill-in - allowing for a time saving through automated pre-qualification
  • The ability to rate different suppliers skills and attributes and thus target specific ERFx notices to particular competencies
  • The ability to create forums where suppliers can ask questions and gain further information

Benefits

TenderLink lists the main benefits of using their product to be;

  • Increased efficiency
  • Decreased costs
  • Increased professional image

Costs

TenderLink has a $7500 set-up fee to crate the e-tender portal. Thereafter users are charged per ERFx notice with a minimum fee of $500/month

Summary

Given the cost structure, TenderLink isn’t a solution for the small fry. For an organisation however that is putting out a large number of ERFx notices, TenderLink should create sufficient efficiencies that it pays for itself quickly. The heightened level of audit, the ability to automate key parts of the process and the efficiencies gained by tagging specific supplier are all valuable features.

Zoho’s CEO Answers The Question, “Why compete with Google?”

(this is a cross posting with MiramarMike.co.nz)

Sridhar Vembu, CEO of Zoho, has posted a fascinating insight into the perceived strategy of Google that includes some astounding financial facts such as:

Google makes nearly as much in profit per employee as SAP or Oracle Salesforce make in revenue per employee

He concludes his thinking with:

It is fairly obvious they [Google] are in it to put Microsoft on the defensive on its home turf, so that Microsoft’s offensive capability in the internet is diminished. It is also perfectly clear why Microsoft wants to be an internet player - as Google has shown, it is a higher margin business even than its monopoly-profit core business.

I suspect there are two other reasons
Firstly, Google is a business like any other and has the same computing needs as all companies (word processing, sharing information yada yada yada) and there was NO WAY they were going to let a (”the”) major competitor be the vendor for the IT solutions. And so they bought/built their own. Once they were stable enough why not use them as a weapon as outlined above.

The second reason is hinted at in Google Blogscoped’s, Why Google Buys Companies:

Data. Like articles, meta data, digital archives, photographs.

As we know, Google’s stated aim is “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” This statement does not limit itself to “only websites” … it’s the “world’s information”. The vast majority of the “world’s information” is not packaged up all neatly onto a publically facing website - it’s held in Word documents, emails and PC C: drives. How was Google to get access to this information - by providing the tools for us to move our use into the Web and let Google get at it.

Oh, and as a response to Sridhar’s post the C|Net News writer Dan Farber has posted Zoho’s last stand which is, again, a great read with the takeaway point for me being:

If Google can attract consumers with its apps, gaining entry into small- and medium-size business won’t be a huge profit-sucking sinkhole of sales and marketing. The search giant claims that more than 500,000 businesses and schools have signed up for the free and $50 per-user-per-year Google Apps. According to Dave Girouard, head of Google’s enterprise division, the Google suite has about 10 million active users. Google can afford to invest in building the the market for Google Apps, and Microsoft will be forced to alter the economics of its Office business as cheap and capable cloud-based suites, with offline capabilities, gain traction.