Government Exhibit P3037 [Non-designated testimony redacted]
| 00007 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
RICHARD
A. KNOWLES |
| 4 |
was called as a witness, and having been first duly |
| 5 |
sworn, testified as follows: |
| 6 |
EXAMINATION |
| 7 |
BY MR. ANDEER: |
| 8 |
Q. Good morning, Mr. Knowles. Could you |
| 9 |
please state your full name for the record? |
| 10 |
A. Richard Allen Knowles. |
| 11 |
Q. And your place of employment? |
| 12 |
A. SAP America. |
| 13 |
Q. And your business address, please? |
| 14 |
A. 3999 West Chester Pike, Newtown Square, |
| 15 |
Pennsylvania. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00009 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 11 |
Q. I'm going to be asking you a series of |
| 12 |
questions today about the enterprise software |
| 13 |
market in general as well as the Oracle proposed |
| 14 |
takeover of PeopleSoft. Both these topics are |
| 15 |
subject to litigation, as I'm sure you are well |
| 16 |
aware. |
| 17 |
Let me just
lay out a couple of ground |
| 18 |
rules for you before we begin. I'm going to ask |
| 19 |
for both my benefit and for the benefit of the |
| 20 |
court reporter that you make all your answers |
| 21 |
verbal, so both of us need to refrain from as many |
| 22 |
hand gestures in responding to our questions as |
| 00010 |
| 1 |
possible. |
| 2 |
I would
also ask that if I ask a question |
| 3 |
that you don't understand, please let me know and I |
| 4 |
will try to rephrase it. If you need a break at |
| 5 |
any time during this proceeding, just let me know |
| 6 |
and we will try to accommodate you. It's probably |
| 7 |
a good rule that we break about every hour. And |
| 8 |
one final thing. Is there any reason that you |
| 9 |
don't think you could answer my questions |
| 10 |
truthfully or fully today? |
| 11 |
A. No. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00011 |
| 1 |
Q. Back on the record. I believe I asked |
| 2 |
you what are your current responsibilities as vice |
| 3 |
president of operations for SAP America. |
| 4 |
A. Okay. I oversee the North American |
| 5 |
operations on behalf of our CEO. In essence I |
| 6 |
operate as kind of like a chief of staff or a |
| 7 |
mini-chief operating officer for the corporation. |
| 8 |
This entails
duties that represent sales, |
| 9 |
marketing, service, consulting. My role is |
| 10 |
horizontal in nature, crosses all lines of |
| 11 |
business. I execute on the strategies, the |
| 12 |
development of the strategies, for SAP America. I |
| 13 |
oversee the pipeline process and the way we go to |
| 14 |
market to sell in a given quarter, and I work the |
| 15 |
processes that include customers, customer |
| 16 |
satisfaction, and then a variety of special |
| 17 |
projects that the chief executive, Bill McDermott, |
| 18 |
would want me to oversee or execute on. |
| 19 |
Q. So you report directly to the CEO, and |
| 20 |
that is Bill McDermott? |
| 21 |
A. Yes. |
| |
|
| 00020 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 10 |
Q. You had mentioned that SAP America is the |
| 11 |
sales and distribution arm here in the United |
| 12 |
States for SAP AG; is that right? |
| 13 |
A. Yes. |
| 14 |
Q. What is it that SAP America is selling? |
| 15 |
A. Software that SAP AG has created. |
| 16 |
Q. Are there other services in addition to |
| 17 |
software that SAP America offers? |
| 18 |
A. Yes. We have four revenue lines of |
| 19 |
business. One would be software. Second would be |
| 20 |
maintenance and support services. The third would |
| 21 |
be education and training services, and the fourth |
| 22 |
is consulting services. |
| 00025 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 10 |
Q. Are you familiar with the term, |
| 11 |
"Application software enterprise application |
| 12 |
software?" |
| 13 |
A. Yes. |
| 14 |
Q. Where would that fit on this stack? |
| 15 |
A. It actually sits on top of the stack. |
| 16 |
Q. And is this, is enterprise application |
| 17 |
software something that SAP sells? |
| 18 |
A. Yes. |
| 19 |
Q. So just looking at this stack, SAP offers |
| 20 |
enterprise application software; is that right? |
| 21 |
A. Yes. |
| 22 |
Q. Data management, people process/portals, |
| 00026 |
| 1 |
and integration platform. All those products? |
| 2 |
A. Yes. |
| 3 |
Q. Is there anything missing in this stack |
| 4 |
that we have identified? |
| 5 |
A. There's many modules and components |
| 6 |
inside the stack, too numerous for me to rattle off |
| 7 |
the top of my head, but I would like to clarify one |
| 8 |
thing. SAP is in the business of creating the best |
| 9 |
software in the world, and we refer to that |
| 10 |
software as enterprise application software. |
| 11 |
That's our core business. |
| 12 |
NetWeaver
or the technology stack is the |
| 13 |
underpinning by which the software is delivered. |
| 14 |
So NetWeaver is not the primary solution that we |
| 15 |
devise. It actually helps us in the delivery of |
| 16 |
the enterprise application software. So all of the |
| 17 |
products or solutions that we call enterprise |
| 18 |
application software, they all sit on top of the |
| 19 |
technology stack. |
| 20 |
The technology
stack is to us a |
| 21 |
differentiator and an enabler to bring our product |
| 22 |
to market, to help our client solve their business |
| 00027 |
| 1 |
issues or business problems. So the way you asked |
| 2 |
your question, we would reverse it and say what is |
| 3 |
most important is the software at the top of the |
| 4 |
stack, and then the stack becomes a differentiator. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00031 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 6 |
Q. What is the relationship between the R/3 |
| 7 |
enterprise and mySAP ERP? |
| 8 |
A. When we released and came out with mySAP |
| 9 |
ERP with the NetWeaver underpinning, that |
| 10 |
essentially is the next evolutionary step for an |
| 11 |
R/3 customer today. So if you are a brand new |
| 12 |
customer and you came to SAP and said I would like |
| 13 |
to buy R/3, you would essentially be buying mySAP |
| 14 |
ERP with NetWeaver underpinning. So it's next in |
| 15 |
the evolutionary cycle. If you think of time in |
| 16 |
history, you would go from R/2 to R/3 to just mySAP |
| 17 |
ERP, with the NetWeaver stack. That is the cycle. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 00033 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 5 |
Q. Maybe this is -- how many customers does |
| 6 |
SAP America have? |
| 7 |
A. When you say "customers," you mean |
| 8 |
individual buying entities or do you mean |
| 9 |
installations? |
| 10 |
Q. Well, that is a helpful distinction. |
| 11 |
Perhaps first we should identify the number of |
| 12 |
buying entities. |
| 13 |
A. I don't know the exact number. Probably |
| 14 |
in the neighborhood of multiple thousands, like |
| 15 |
maybe close to 2,800 buying entities, 2,800 to |
| 16 |
3,000. |
| 17 |
Q. Just to be clear, this is sort of a |
| 18 |
ballpark figure just between SAP America and buying |
| 19 |
entities; is that right? |
| 20 |
A. Correct. |
| 21 |
Q. The parent SAP AG, do you know how many |
| 22 |
buying entities have a relationship with SAP AG? |
| 00034 |
| 1 |
A. Yes, probably in the neighborhood of |
| 2 |
about 20,000 clients, which translates into roughly |
| 3 |
67,000, 68,000 various installations. |
| 4 |
Q. And in terms of installations in the |
| 5 |
United States -- well, not in the United States, |
| 6 |
I'm sorry. In terms of SAP America's |
| 7 |
installations, what is that figure? |
| 8 |
A. 2,800 to 3,000 equates to somewhere in |
| 9 |
the neighborhood of probably 6,500 installations. |
| 10 |
Q. Now, you have made this distinction |
| 11 |
between buying entities and installations. What is |
| 12 |
the difference there? Why is the number of |
| 13 |
installations so much greater than the number of |
| 14 |
buying entities? |
| 15 |
A. You can have one client procure SAP |
| 16 |
software and actually install it say at four |
| 17 |
different locations, so that would be considered |
| 18 |
four different installations, versus just one |
| 19 |
consolidated instance. So if you have a |
| 20 |
multinational or conglomerate that has multiple |
| 21 |
divisions, we may have sold to various divisions of |
| 22 |
the conglomerate, but not maybe the parent company. |
| 00035 |
| 1 |
That's why. |
| 2 |
Q. Do you have a feel for how many, looking |
| 3 |
first at SAP America, this 2,800 to 3,000 number of |
| 4 |
buying entities, how many of those have mySAP ERP? |
| 5 |
A. Very few. |
| 6 |
Q. Less than 5 percent? |
| 7 |
A. I would say that's probably a good |
| 8 |
number. |
| 9 |
Q. What are the bulk of these buying |
| 10 |
entities using? Are they using one of the R/3 |
| 11 |
versions? |
| 12 |
A. Correct. |
| 13 |
Q. Is there an effort on the part of SAP |
| 14 |
America or SAP AG to convert these customers to |
| 15 |
mySAP ERP customers? |
| 16 |
A. Absolutely. |
| 17 |
Q. How is that done? How is the conversion |
| 18 |
or what is SAP America doing to encourage customers |
| 19 |
to make this switch? |
| 20 |
A. We have, in the normal course of |
| 21 |
business, our sales executives work with the client |
| 22 |
to understand what is their landscape that they |
| 00036 |
| 1 |
have today, what are their needs, what are their |
| 2 |
issues that they still may have within their |
| 3 |
enterprise, and if it makes sense for them to |
| 4 |
migrate or upgrade from say an R/3 installation to |
| 5 |
a mySAP ERP installation. |
| 6 |
Then if
there is a business case, then |
| 7 |
there would be a business reason to proceed and |
| 8 |
actually attempt to work with the client to upgrade |
| 9 |
them. Because in the ERP configuration, they are |
| 10 |
going to get additional capabilities and |
| 11 |
functionalities that they may not have today in |
| 12 |
their current R/3 installation. Unfortunately, |
| 13 |
each case, each client gets a totally different set |
| 14 |
of circumstances. I wish there was a way to say we |
| 15 |
have a group of clients that all look the same, act |
| 16 |
the same, behave the same, but they do not. Each |
| 17 |
enterprise operates differently. |
| 18 |
Q. You mentioned that an R/3 customer |
| 19 |
converting to mySAP ERP or mySAP Business Suite |
| 20 |
will get added functionality; is that right? |
| 21 |
A. Correct. |
| 22 |
Q. Is there an added cost to converting from |
| 00037 |
| 1 |
the R/3 to the mySAP ERP? |
| 2 |
A. Absolutely. We don't do things -- we are |
| 3 |
in the business of making software and selling |
| 4 |
software. We don't give the software away for |
| 5 |
free. |
| 6 |
Q. So one, would one of the costs be an |
| 7 |
additional license cost? |
| 8 |
A. Yes. |
| 9 |
Q. Would there be a cost to implement the |
| 10 |
new version of the software? |
| 11 |
A. Yes. |
| 12 |
Q. Are there any other costs associated with |
| 13 |
an upgrade from R/3 to mySAP ERP? |
| 14 |
A. Well, you would also have maintenance |
| 15 |
costs and you can potentially have training costs. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00039 |
| |
|
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Q. In your experience, are there customers |
| 9 |
that will evaluate their choice of SAP as an |
| 10 |
application software vendor when considering an |
| 11 |
upgrade, will they consider marketplace |
| 12 |
alternatives for enterprise application software? |
| 13 |
A. Absolutely. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00040 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 8 |
Q. I guess I'm focusing on perhaps products |
| 9 |
I have heard referred to as SAP All in One or SAP |
| 10 |
Business One. Are you familiar with those |
| 11 |
products? |
| 12 |
A. Yes. Those are products that we sell at |
| 13 |
the low end of the market through our channel, |
| 14 |
primarily. Those are considered the small to |
| 15 |
medium-sized business solutions. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00044 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 16 |
Q. Why is there two separate sales forces, |
| 17 |
the large enterprise versus the mid-market? |
| 18 |
A. Since our last deposition, when we came |
| 19 |
into this year we changed our go-to-market process |
| 20 |
for covering the market. |
| 21 |
We made
a concerted effort as part of our |
| 22 |
strategy this year to grow our mid-market channel |
| 00045 |
| 1 |
through the direct sales force, and that |
| 2 |
necessitated the need to actually hire and segment |
| 3 |
and distinguish a separate sales force just for the |
| 4 |
mid-market. We defined the mid-market as $200 |
| 5 |
million up to $1.5 billion in annualized revenues, |
| 6 |
and we have a dedicated sales team that goes after |
| 7 |
that market now in each region. |
| 8 |
Then the
other team is large enterprise, |
| 9 |
which we define as $1.5 billion and higher, and we |
| 10 |
have dedicated a sales team to that. The strategy |
| 11 |
and the rationale behind that is with greater |
| 12 |
focus, we would have greater penetration and we |
| 13 |
could get closer to the customer and serve the |
| 14 |
customer in a tighter, more organized fashion. |
| 15 |
Q. So just quickly summarizing, you have one |
| 16 |
sales team, or within each region you may have |
| 17 |
several sales teams which are dedicated to going |
| 18 |
after accounts with between $200 million and $1.5 |
| 19 |
billion in revenues; is that right? |
| 20 |
A. Yes. |
| 21 |
Q. And then within each of those regions |
| 22 |
there's separate sales forces going after those |
| 00046 |
| 1 |
accounts with greater than $1.5 billion in |
| 2 |
revenues; is that right? |
| 3 |
A. Yes. |
| 4 |
Q. What -- is there a difference -- strike |
| 5 |
that. What brought about this change? Why did SAP |
| 6 |
decide to go with these two separate sales teams, |
| 7 |
so to speak, forces? |
| 8 |
A. It goes back to the heart of our |
| 9 |
strategy, and our strategy was how do we -- it was |
| 10 |
trying to answer how do we get closer to the client |
| 11 |
and how do we continue to grow and innovate our |
| 12 |
business. We identified that as an opportunity the |
| 13 |
mid-market, the $200 million to $1.5 billion market |
| 14 |
is still being underserved and underpenetrated, and |
| 15 |
based on the economy, the way the economy has been |
| 16 |
going, that if there was going to be any growth, |
| 17 |
the smaller companies typically lead in the growth, |
| 18 |
and they also are the first to spend. |
| 19 |
Therefore,
as we begin to come out of the |
| 20 |
economic trough, we wanted to be well positioned to |
| 21 |
serve that market and essentially continue to grow |
| 22 |
our region, our SAP America. Historically from a |
| 00047 |
| 1 |
percentage of business, we also see it as a great |
| 2 |
opportunity as a catalyst to fuel our growth. |
| 3 |
Q. Just so I understand, in order to pursue |
| 4 |
these opportunities that you have identified, it |
| 5 |
was decided you needed two separate sales forces; |
| 6 |
is that right? |
| 7 |
A. Yes. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00048 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 16 |
Q. Is there a difference in selling to |
| 17 |
entities, the different entities? Is there a |
| 18 |
difference selling to a mid-market account, as you |
| 19 |
have defined it, versus selling to a large account, |
| 20 |
as you have defined it? |
| 21 |
A. It depends. And it would depend on a |
| 22 |
couple of factors. Is it different selling to a |
| 00049 |
| 1 |
$1.5 to $2 billion entity versus a $1.499 billion |
| 2 |
entity? Probably not. But selling to a $250 |
| 3 |
million entity versus a $1.5-plus billion entity |
| 4 |
yes, there's going to be some slight differences; |
| 5 |
one, the amount of revenues they have, the amount |
| 6 |
of different processes they might want to automate, |
| 7 |
the amount of capital that they expend in their |
| 8 |
capital budget. There's a variety of things like |
| 9 |
that that will be different. But generically to |
| 10 |
say they are the same, that would not be factual. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00053 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 19 |
Q. And so this system tracks the different |
| 20 |
opportunities that are currently being pursued by |
| 21 |
SAP America sales executives? |
| 22 |
A. Yes. |
| 00054 |
| 1 |
Q. What sort of information is tracked by |
| 2 |
this system? |
| 3 |
A. That's a very broad question. In |
| 4 |
general, it would be all of the activities related |
| 5 |
to the client, meaning what is the solution that |
| 6 |
the account executive anticipates the client |
| 7 |
needing, the potential revenues that we think that |
| 8 |
the sales cycle may generate. If there is a known |
| 9 |
competitor competing for the opportunity, when we |
| 10 |
anticipate it selling or closing. When do we |
| 11 |
anticipate a contract signing. Broad general |
| 12 |
things in those categories. |
| 13 |
Q. You mentioned one of the areas is a known |
| 14 |
competitor. Are account executives encouraged to |
| 15 |
learn what other alternatives a potential client |
| 16 |
might be considering? |
| 17 |
A. If they are a good account executive, |
| 18 |
absolutely. |
| 19 |
Q. How is that done? How is that sort of |
| 20 |
discovery done by the account executive? |
| 21 |
A. It's done based on what you just said. |
| 22 |
Discovery. It's working with the client, trying to |
| 00055 |
| 1 |
ascertain from the client side are you looking at |
| 2 |
other solutions, solution providers. Also |
| 3 |
intuitively they should also know, if they have |
| 4 |
been selling for a while, they should know. So if |
| 5 |
you are looking for X solution, generally available |
| 6 |
information says who offers X solution. We need to |
| 7 |
anticipate them being in the sales cycle. A |
| 8 |
variety of sources like that. |
| 9 |
Q. You mentioned intuition. What sort of |
| 10 |
factors -- again we are focusing on enterprise |
| 11 |
application software sales to these larger |
| 12 |
enterprises. What sort of factors would lead you |
| 13 |
or an account executive to conclude this is my |
| 14 |
competitor. What are the sorts of things they |
| 15 |
should be thinking about? |
| 16 |
A. Depends on the solution definition, if |
| 17 |
it's a broad solution encompassing multiple |
| 18 |
solution areas. Also the scale of the solution. |
| 19 |
For instance, if it's a multinational solution that |
| 20 |
is being sold in a variety of countries around the |
| 21 |
world hosting multiple locations, that is quickly |
| 22 |
going to tell the account executive then it's |
| 00056 |
| 1 |
probably not going to be a start-up company |
| 2 |
competing for that business, just because of the |
| 3 |
size and scope of the project. That would be like |
| 4 |
one factor. |
| 5 |
The other
factor is the type of solution. |
| 6 |
For instance, if they say, well, I'm in the market |
| 7 |
to buy business intelligence software to do |
| 8 |
strategic enterprise management. We would never |
| 9 |
consider, our account executive would never |
| 10 |
consider PlumTree, who is a portal company, |
| 11 |
competing for that business. So it's just logic |
| 12 |
rules based on what is the problem they are trying |
| 13 |
to solve. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 19 |
Q. Another factor may be the scale, and |
| 20 |
perhaps here it would be helpful. What do you mean |
| 21 |
by the scale? You mentioned globally, but are |
| 22 |
there other dimensions? |
| 00057 |
| 1 |
A. There's a variety of dimensions in any |
| 2 |
given sales cycle. I just used scale as one |
| 3 |
example. To elaborate on that, if you have a |
| 4 |
client that has operations in, say, five different |
| 5 |
countries, then that client, if they are going to |
| 6 |
use, say, a financials package, and maybe we are in |
| 7 |
the market to sell them a financials package as |
| 8 |
part of the solution, that means they will need to |
| 9 |
have multicurrency capability. |
| 10 |
Well, to
do multicurrency, the solution |
| 11 |
set needs to provide multicurrency support, which |
| 12 |
we do, which some competitors may not, depending on |
| 13 |
which currency it is. So just by saying I need |
| 14 |
global instance, multiple currency support, and I |
| 15 |
need that supported, that is going to kind of limit |
| 16 |
the field of choice pretty rapidly, depending on |
| 17 |
which countries have to be supported. That is the |
| 18 |
type of logic rules. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00063 |
| |
|
| 2 |
Q. Perhaps that's helpful. You mentioned |
| 3 |
that one of SAP's strengths is global pricing; is |
| 4 |
that right? |
| 5 |
A. Yes. |
| 6 |
Q. What would you list as some of the other |
| 7 |
strengths that SAP has? |
| 8 |
A. We offer the broadest set of available |
| 9 |
languages, largest set of multinational currencies. |
| 10 |
We offer the broadest solution set in the industry. |
| 11 |
We offer the largest innovation and research and |
| 12 |
development to build the best software in the |
| 13 |
world. We run some of the best business processes |
| 14 |
for some of the best companies in the world. And |
| 15 |
because of our customer base, we have throughout |
| 16 |
the last 30-plus years gained insight into best |
| 17 |
practices from all of these industries and all |
| 18 |
these customers that any new customer signing on |
| 19 |
with SAP, they get to leverage that knowledge base. |
| 20 |
And best practices of some of the other best run |
| 21 |
companies in the world. That is what we would |
| 22 |
consider at our high level key differentiators for |
| 00064 |
| 1 |
SAP. |
| 2 |
Q. Starting with the last, what is the |
| 3 |
importance of being able to leverage the knowledge |
| 4 |
base of your customer base? |
| 5 |
A. It's important from the perspective that |
| 6 |
when a client buys a solution, when they are trying |
| 7 |
to solve a problem, that they can rely on a company |
| 8 |
that has done it before, experienced maybe some |
| 9 |
hardships during the learning curve, and it has the |
| 10 |
set of experience that says this is the way we did |
| 11 |
it with XYZ company and this is the way we can |
| 12 |
solve it for you. |
| 13 |
The customer
is not necessarily buying |
| 14 |
just software. They are buying a solution, and |
| 15 |
usually when they are making a decision, they want |
| 16 |
to make a decision based on what company is able to |
| 17 |
speak to expertise, and experience that says they |
| 18 |
can actually do it, and they have actually done it, |
| 19 |
and they have actually earned their, so to speak, |
| 20 |
their stripes and lessons learned. So when we go |
| 21 |
to engage with a client, they are buying that body |
| 22 |
of knowledge, and we believe that is a key |
| 00065 |
| 1 |
differentiator for SAP. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 7 |
Q. You had mentioned a learning curve. |
| 8 |
Could you explain the learning curve as it pertains |
| 9 |
to enterprise application software. What is that |
| 10 |
learning curve? |
| 11 |
A. Learning curve, it depends on the area |
| 12 |
you would like to discuss. Learning curve has |
| 13 |
multiple meanings inside the software world. When |
| 14 |
I use the word "learning curve," the way I meant it |
| 15 |
or intended it was if you are talking about a |
| 16 |
company that has never automated any of its |
| 17 |
business processes, they are doing everything |
| 18 |
manual, for them to go from a manual process or a |
| 19 |
highly dependent, highly focused labor process to |
| 20 |
an automated process, that is going to require a |
| 21 |
major cultural change inside the core DNA of that |
| 22 |
company. |
| 00066 |
| 1 |
Software doesn't necessarily solve that. |
| 2 |
You actually have to have change in the people and |
| 3 |
their mindset along with automation. It's the |
| 4 |
marriage of those two that come together in an |
| 5 |
implementation such as SAP or any of the other |
| 6 |
solutions, for a client to say who is going to be |
| 7 |
best positioned to help me. Who has done that |
| 8 |
before. Who knows my business the best. Who |
| 9 |
understands, by the way, how other companies in my |
| 10 |
industry may be doing this, so who can help me the |
| 11 |
best. We believe that is SAP. |
| 12 |
So the learning
curve is the client has |
| 13 |
got a learning curve that, to make that transition, |
| 14 |
they get to leverage that body of knowledge within |
| 15 |
SAP. Yes, on the product side it's one thing, but |
| 16 |
it's also on how have other companies implemented |
| 17 |
it. How are they leveraging it. Which pieces did |
| 18 |
they leverage first, second and third. That is |
| 19 |
what they get with SAP. That's the learning curve |
| 20 |
I spoke of. |
| 21 |
Q. And that is more from the customer's |
| 22 |
perspective, looking at how SAP can help it get to |
| 00067 |
| 1 |
where it wants to go? |
| 2 |
A. Absolutely. Everything we do is from the |
| 3 |
customer's perspective. |
| 4 |
Q. Looking at that, what are the industries |
| 5 |
in which SAP offers a deep experience, something a |
| 6 |
customer would value? |
| 7 |
A. We offer solutions in 23 broad |
| 8 |
industries. Our primary industries would be the |
| 9 |
manufacturing industries, discrete manufacturing |
| 10 |
process, and in those we break those down into such |
| 11 |
industries as chemicals, pharmaceuticals, aerospace |
| 12 |
and defense, high tech, consumer products, the |
| 13 |
services industries, financial services, banking, |
| 14 |
insurance, state and local government, federal, |
| 15 |
higher ed. Those are the broad categories, but we |
| 16 |
have solutions in 23. |
| 17 |
Q. Within those 23, are there industries in |
| 18 |
which SAP has deeper experience, as opposed to |
| 19 |
perhaps less experience in? |
| 20 |
A. Yes. |
| 21 |
Q. What are some of the deep industry |
| 22 |
knowledges? |
| 00068 |
| 1 |
A. Anything in the manufacturing realm, |
| 2 |
consumer products realm, are typically going to be |
| 3 |
the strong suit. Anything in the services side is |
| 4 |
going to be not as strong, such as the financial |
| 5 |
services side, some in the public sector side, such |
| 6 |
as health care, the public sector area. Those are |
| 7 |
probably the lower level. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 16 |
Q. Is there a learning curve on the part of |
| 17 |
SAP when it is entering, say, an industry in which |
| 18 |
it may not be as familiar with? |
| 19 |
A. Yes. |
| 20 |
Q. What is that learning curve? |
| 21 |
A. Again, that is a very broad question to |
| 22 |
be answered, but let me categorize the answer this |
| 00069 |
| 1 |
way. In the public sector, for instance with |
| 2 |
health care, there's a set of rules and governance |
| 3 |
around the health care area that is referred to as |
| 4 |
HIPPA. To know how HIPPA works and to be able to |
| 5 |
offer the solutions sets to solve the HIPPA |
| 6 |
requirements, that would require us to, one, make a |
| 7 |
substantial investment in learning HIPPA, |
| 8 |
understanding how finances and human capital and |
| 9 |
procurement, et cetera, all work within, inside the |
| 10 |
health care organizations. So it's one thing to |
| 11 |
learn it. |
| 12 |
Then the
next set of body of knowledge |
| 13 |
from a learning curve is how do we actually |
| 14 |
automate it. How can we build in an automated way |
| 15 |
of solving the HIPPA reporting requirements which |
| 16 |
is going to be distinctly different than maybe the |
| 17 |
way a typical manufacture deals with things, |
| 18 |
because manufacturers doesn't have to deal with |
| 19 |
HIPPA. |
| 20 |
So each
industry has its own unique set |
| 21 |
of regulations maybe or processes and we would have |
| 22 |
to make a huge capital investment to learn and then |
| 00070 |
| 1 |
transfer that knowledge actually into automation or |
| 2 |
into writing the code to solve that business |
| 3 |
process issue. |
| 4 |
So it has
two effects on anybody trying |
| 5 |
to get into that business. Lawson has taken great |
| 6 |
steps, I think, and they have done a phenomenal job |
| 7 |
at learning about health care, working with health |
| 8 |
care clients, understanding the needs of health |
| 9 |
care clients and actually transferring that body of |
| 10 |
knowledge into their product. |
| 11 |
SAP, on
the other hand, we have tended to |
| 12 |
focus on other areas and not as well as Lawson has |
| 13 |
in health care, for instance. So in that case we |
| 14 |
would say they are better able to solve that |
| 15 |
business need than we are. |
| 16 |
Q. You mentioned financial services as an |
| 17 |
area in which you have less expertise; is that |
| 18 |
right? |
| 19 |
A. I wouldn't say less expertise. I would |
| 20 |
say that is not our strong suit when you compare it |
| 21 |
to, say, high tech or one of the manufacturing |
| 22 |
industries. |
| 00071 |
| 1 |
Q. Do you find in looking at different |
| 2 |
industries there are different -- you mentioned |
| 3 |
Lawson in health care, but do you see different |
| 4 |
companies in terms in each of these different |
| 5 |
industries? |
| 6 |
A. Depends on the industry. There are |
| 7 |
different dynamics for each industry, and health |
| 8 |
care is just as extreme example, because Lawson |
| 9 |
happens to be phenomenal at health care, but, yes, |
| 10 |
there's different positions and players in each |
| 11 |
industry. |
| 12 |
Q. In terms of financial management |
| 13 |
software, are there differences, say, between what |
| 14 |
a discrete manufacturer may be using for financial |
| 15 |
management and what, say, a health care |
| 16 |
organization is using for financial management? |
| 17 |
A. At the high level, there's no difference. |
| 18 |
They both need to account for money. They both |
| 19 |
have treasury operations. They both have to pay |
| 20 |
people, employees and suppliers. So at the high |
| 21 |
level, no. But when you get into the industry |
| 22 |
differences between a health care organization |
| 00072 |
| 1 |
versus a manufacturing organization, then there |
| 2 |
becomes differences. |
| 3 |
In manufacturing,
they are more worried |
| 4 |
about the accounting and cost management of their |
| 5 |
manufacturing process and cost accounting. Whereas |
| 6 |
in health care, they don't manufacture anything, |
| 7 |
they serve. They serve patients. So the |
| 8 |
accounting is more about patients and supplies and |
| 9 |
different components to serve a patient, whereas a |
| 10 |
manufacturer is worried about widgets and parts and |
| 11 |
inventories. So even though they kind of do the |
| 12 |
same thing and it all involves money, the actual |
| 13 |
how-to is distinctly different. |
| 14 |
Q. And those differences must be accounted |
| 15 |
within the software itself? |
| 16 |
A. Absolutely. |
| 17 |
Q. Let's look at human resources. Are there |
| 18 |
differences between, say, a discrete manufacturer, |
| 19 |
for example, one of the big three automotive |
| 20 |
companies, and a financial institution such as |
| 21 |
Citibank, in terms of HR applications? |
| 22 |
A. There's probably going to be slight |
| 00073 |
| 1 |
differences. Both have employees, both have |
| 2 |
vacation, both have accounting for payroll. At a |
| 3 |
high level generically they would be the same. |
| 4 |
However, in a financial services industry, from an |
| 5 |
HR standpoint they are probably going to measure |
| 6 |
their people and compensate their people quite a |
| 7 |
bit different than a discrete manufacturing person. |
| 8 |
Their compensation may be more hourly based, may be |
| 9 |
performance based on production, whereas financial |
| 10 |
services is going to be more tied to corporate |
| 11 |
goals or revenue streams. |
| 12 |
So the actual,
again, at the high level, |
| 13 |
they may seem similar. You both have employees, |
| 14 |
but at the operational level, how it's implemented |
| 15 |
and what you do with the application is going to be |
| 16 |
distinctly different, industry to industry. So |
| 17 |
unfortunately the same answer as financials. |
| 18 |
Q. So there are differences again that must |
| 19 |
be accounted for within the software, depending on |
| 20 |
what industry you are working in? |
| 21 |
A. Absolutely. |
| 22 |
Q. In terms of the example we used, are |
| 00074 |
| 1 |
there, you have, say there is a unionized work |
| 2 |
force versus a more white collar work force. Is |
| 3 |
that something that is significant in terms of your |
| 4 |
HR enterprise application? |
| 5 |
A. The rules that would govern union labor |
| 6 |
versus non-unionized labor, sure. The management |
| 7 |
of those employees would be distinctly different. |
| 8 |
Again, we are speaking at a very high level. |
| 9 |
Down, the
lower level you go into, the |
| 10 |
actual processes that each company runs is going to |
| 11 |
be distinctly different. I think the best |
| 12 |
statement is this. There are 23 different |
| 13 |
industries that we cover. Each industry is unique |
| 14 |
in its own way, and within each industry, each |
| 15 |
company has its own uniquenesses of how it wants to |
| 16 |
run its operations. So even though I know we are |
| 17 |
contrasting HR between a discrete manufacturer and |
| 18 |
a financial services industry, I want to make sure |
| 19 |
we understand that even in discrete manufacturing, |
| 20 |
the way each of the discrete manufacturers view |
| 21 |
themselves and the way they want to administer |
| 22 |
their HR policies is going to also be different. |
| 00075 |
| 1 |
So at the
broad level industries are |
| 2 |
different, but even within the industries, |
| 3 |
companies are very different. And the software has |
| 4 |
to be able to be configured in such a way to solve |
| 5 |
what that company thinks is the more important |
| 6 |
elements to run its business, to try to create some |
| 7 |
element of competitive advantage from the other, |
| 8 |
their own competitors, within their given industry. |
| 9 |
Q. So looking -- maybe it's helpful to look |
| 10 |
at a particular industry, say high tech. There's a |
| 11 |
number of different desktop manufacturers. You |
| 12 |
have Dell, you have HP, for example. Would those |
| 13 |
two companies, would they be looking for unique |
| 14 |
functions in terms of their HR, their financial |
| 15 |
applications that say a potential vendor, software |
| 16 |
vendor such as SAP would have to account for? |
| 17 |
A. Yes. Each of those would be distinctly |
| 18 |
different, because the way they sell, market, |
| 19 |
distribute, make their products is distinctly |
| 20 |
different, so that is going to require different |
| 21 |
ways of accounting financially for their products. |
| 22 |
So, yes. |
| 00076 |
| 1 |
Q. So it sounds like neither of these |
| 2 |
companies could simply go to your neighborhood |
| 3 |
Office Depot and pull off, say, just an |
| 4 |
off-the-shelf software and plug it in to perform |
| 5 |
these functions. Is that right? |
| 6 |
A. Depends on what application you are |
| 7 |
saying. |
| 8 |
Q. Let's look at HR. Say we are looking at |
| 9 |
Dell. If Dell wants to automate its HR department, |
| 10 |
could it go to Office Depot and pull off a software |
| 11 |
package and just simply install it and run its HR |
| 12 |
department? |
| 13 |
A. At the highest level, sure. It sounds |
| 14 |
crazy, but yes. They could go buy a small |
| 15 |
off-the-shelf software solution for HR and do it. |
| 16 |
They would be crazy to do it, because their costs |
| 17 |
would be astronomically high to run it and probably |
| 18 |
take a lot of people to do it. It's just the same |
| 19 |
as we have firms that we run into today that do |
| 20 |
project management scheduling on Excel. Why |
| 21 |
haven't they converted over to Microsoft Project or |
| 22 |
another project scheduling system? We are talking |
| 00077 |
| 1 |
huge discrete manufacturing companies that actually |
| 2 |
run their manufacturing floor off Excel for project |
| 3 |
management, and they do Gant charts in Excel. Can |
| 4 |
it be done? Sure. It's crazy, but there's |
| 5 |
companies out there that do that. |
| 6 |
Q. The costs are much greater if you do it |
| 7 |
that way than if you implement SAP? |
| 8 |
A. From a manual standpoint, yes, because |
| 9 |
you are not automating the process and you are |
| 10 |
making it more labor intensive. |
| 11 |
Q. So you have more employees tracking and |
| 12 |
inputting data? |
| 13 |
A. Correct. You may not even necessarily |
| 14 |
have more employees, but there is much more room |
| 15 |
for error and you aren't allowing your data to be |
| 16 |
updated in real time. |
| 17 |
Q. So what does SAP do to position itself |
| 18 |
versus, say, one of these companies that may be |
| 19 |
using just stuff they bought off the shelf? |
| 20 |
A. We look at their business process, how |
| 21 |
they actually do it. We look at the cost that it |
| 22 |
takes to do it. We look at the cost, their |
| 00078 |
| 1 |
opportunity costs, meaning if they were to do it |
| 2 |
differently, would they make any substantial gains |
| 3 |
in productivity, would they save cost. And if so, |
| 4 |
we build out a business case that says here is the |
| 5 |
opportunity that is presented before you if you |
| 6 |
want to automate it, and lay out a business case to |
| 7 |
say here is what it's goes to cost, here is what |
| 8 |
it's goes to save, and here is the gap. |
| 9 |
Q. Do you price your product to compete with |
| 10 |
that off-the-shelf product? |
| 11 |
A. Absolutely not. |
| 12 |
Q. Why is that? |
| 13 |
A. Because you are comparing an apple to an |
| 14 |
orange. SAP is not a packaged software solution |
| 15 |
that you would buy at an office products store. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00080 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 9 |
Q. How long will it take SAP to have a |
| 10 |
complete financial services offering? You |
| 11 |
mentioned parts of it are mature, that parts are |
| 12 |
not. |
| 13 |
A. Are you meaning in terms of revenue or |
| 14 |
are you just meaning in terms of what we believe is |
| 15 |
the solution we need to bring to market? |
| 16 |
Q. The latter. The solution you need to |
| 17 |
bring to market. |
| 18 |
A. Based on what we believe is the path that |
| 19 |
we are on, I would think we are -- and this is just |
| 20 |
a rough guesstimate. I would think we believe |
| 21 |
probably in the neighborhood of maybe three solid |
| 22 |
years out. |
| 00081 |
| 1 |
Q. And how long has SAP been working on, |
| 2 |
say, a complete solution set for the financial |
| 3 |
services industry? |
| 4 |
A. We have had solution offerings for |
| 5 |
financial services for many, many years. However, |
| 6 |
a dedicated effort to better understand the |
| 7 |
industry and offer a complete solution set, I would |
| 8 |
say has been renewed probably in the last maybe |
| 9 |
year to 18 months. And that is evidenced by our |
| 10 |
recent announcement with Accenture, to try to |
| 11 |
incorporate their body of knowledge from serving |
| 12 |
financial services, to understand their solution |
| 13 |
set and try to work with them on shoring up and |
| 14 |
continuing the development of ours. |
| 15 |
Q. And this is to help SAP better -- when I |
| 16 |
say this, the better, the relationship with |
| 17 |
Accenture, and I guess that was announced in |
| 18 |
September, 2003; is that right? |
| 19 |
A. Correct. Specifically targeting |
| 20 |
primarily the banking industry within the financial |
| 21 |
services umbrella. |
| 22 |
Q. SAP's motivation in engaging in this |
| 00082 |
| 1 |
relationship is to draw on their body of knowledge |
| 2 |
with respect to the financial services industry? |
| 3 |
A. Correct. If we go back to the learning |
| 4 |
curve, it made better, from a strategy standpoint |
| 5 |
it made better sense for us to work with Accenture, |
| 6 |
who have, has already gone through the learning |
| 7 |
curve and understands the market needs of say a |
| 8 |
bank, and particularly the U.S. banking process, |
| 9 |
than it was to have us do it ourselves. |
| 10 |
Q. Does the relationship with Accenture |
| 11 |
shorten the development time? |
| 12 |
A. That is a goal. That is the intention, |
| 13 |
yes, from a strategy standpoint. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00085 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 20 |
Q. I would like to turn to, again, Exhibit |
| 21 |
26 and then SAP 01191. In the first issue there, |
| 22 |
Lawson spent far less than SAP on research and |
| 00086 |
| 1 |
development. The number there quoted is $53 |
| 2 |
million; is that right? |
| 3 |
A. Yes. |
| 4 |
Q. Then the attack point. "Lawson spent 14 |
| 5 |
percent less on research and development over the |
| 6 |
past year." How is that used as an attack? What |
| 7 |
is the significance of spending less year-to-year |
| 8 |
on R&D? |
| 9 |
A. It goes to momentum within the |
| 10 |
enterprise, within their company. It's critical in |
| 11 |
the software world to show that you are in tune |
| 12 |
with the market and that you are making progress to |
| 13 |
innovate and develop your product. |
| 14 |
One of the
things we train our sales reps |
| 15 |
to do is in a sales cycle such as going against |
| 16 |
Lawson, to point this out. The reason is this. |
| 17 |
Ask the question, why did Lawson spend less money. |
| 18 |
Maybe their product was less important this year. |
| 19 |
Maybe they aren't investing in, innovating and |
| 20 |
making their solution the best it can be in the |
| 21 |
world. Maybe they are having financial difficulty |
| 22 |
and they had to cut costs. So if they have cut |
| 00087 |
| 1 |
costs on their product, then the product is not |
| 2 |
going to improve next year. |
| 3 |
These are
just questions that this one |
| 4 |
line in a publicly traded piece of information |
| 5 |
opens for our sales reps to ask the questions. We |
| 6 |
don't say that we know the answer. We are just |
| 7 |
saying to the sales rep that in a sales cycle, if |
| 8 |
they are up against Lawson, this is something you |
| 9 |
should call into question, because R&D investment |
| 10 |
and the stability of R&D investment over the long |
| 11 |
term goes to product integrity and the product, the |
| 12 |
way it innovates into the future. So either they |
| 13 |
are improving their product or they are stagnating. |
| 14 |
If they reduce their R&D investment, they are |
| 15 |
stagnating, especially by that large of a percent. |
| 16 |
That is a red flag. Something is wrong at Lawson. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00102 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 20 |
Q. Now, you mentioned this was a growth |
| 21 |
strategy. What was SAP's traditional base? If |
| 22 |
this was a new market for SAP or new opportunity, |
| 00103 |
| 1 |
what was, how would you describe their traditional |
| 2 |
market? |
| 3 |
A. Traditional market, loosely defined, I |
| 4 |
would think would be like $500 million and up, |
| 5 |
would be our good, core, always do business at. |
| 6 |
Q. Are there, beyond the industry |
| 7 |
differences which we discussed, are there |
| 8 |
differences in your success depending on a |
| 9 |
company's revenues? I mean, you mentioned the |
| 10 |
decision to create this new sales force for $200 |
| 11 |
million to $1.5 billion and then $1.5 billion and |
| 12 |
above. |
| 13 |
A. Yes. |
| 14 |
Q. And we talked about some of the reasons |
| 15 |
behind that. Now, consistent with that, I guess |
| 16 |
I'm still trying to understand, what is the need |
| 17 |
for this dedicated sales force for the $200 million |
| 18 |
to $1.5 billion market. |
| 19 |
A. We see that there is a huge opportunity |
| 20 |
in that segment. If we look at just the volume of |
| 21 |
business and the amount of revenues that we extract |
| 22 |
from the $1.5 billion market and up, we do fairly |
| 00104 |
| 1 |
well. And from a strategy standpoint, we would |
| 2 |
call that growing our customer share or growing our |
| 3 |
wallet share of a client. Meaning if they have an |
| 4 |
installation of SAP, we would be focused on cross |
| 5 |
selling other applications, trying to expand the |
| 6 |
SAP footprint within the enterprise. |
| 7 |
In the segment
of $1.5 billion and below, |
| 8 |
just the sheer volume of business, it did not |
| 9 |
equate to the same ratio for the effort. We would |
| 10 |
call that our market share strategy. Just because |
| 11 |
of the sheer number of enterprises, we feel that we |
| 12 |
are underserving that market. And the reason why |
| 13 |
we are underserving that market is because our |
| 14 |
sales reps are focused, the sales reps that we had, |
| 15 |
focused on the large enterprises. Their time was |
| 16 |
being eaten up by these large enterprises. When |
| 17 |
you are dealing with a multinational conglomerate, |
| 18 |
one sales or two salespeople, it takes a lot of |
| 19 |
time from that person to be knocking on doors and |
| 20 |
try to sell to other smaller-sized companies. |
| 21 |
So for us
to grow, we decided that one of |
| 22 |
our growth strategies was to actually take a sales |
| 00105 |
| 1 |
force, dedicate it to what we were calling the |
| 2 |
mid-market in order to drive our market share up, |
| 3 |
meaning bring in net new business. Historically if |
| 4 |
you look at business, the business cycle for SAP |
| 5 |
over the last couple years, the vast majority of |
| 6 |
our business has been customer share business, |
| 7 |
meaning customers that were already a client, |
| 8 |
adding net new solutions or upgrades, et cetera, |
| 9 |
but we were not bringing in a good share of net new |
| 10 |
business. Not when you compare it to that of, say, |
| 11 |
Oracle, PeopleSoft, Siebel, JD Edwards. They were |
| 12 |
growing net new clients at a much greater rate than |
| 13 |
we were. |
| 14 |
So we viewed
that from a pure strategy |
| 15 |
standpoint. We were leaving that market unserved. |
| 16 |
It was to the best interest of SAP in order to fuel |
| 17 |
our growth to dedicate someone and hold them |
| 18 |
accountable for selling to that segment. So it was |
| 19 |
because of our own internal efforts of viewing |
| 20 |
ourselves as an opportunity that we said let's |
| 21 |
create a separate sales force. |
| |
|
| 00112 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
Q. Are there differences in how SAP |
| 4 |
positions its products to, say, a customer with |
| 5 |
$800 million in revenue versus say a customer with |
| 6 |
$8 billion in revenue? |
| 7 |
A. Yes. There is a difference. |
| 8 |
Q. What would those differences be? |
| 9 |
A. It would go to, more to our marketing and |
| 10 |
perception areas. Oftentimes SAP is viewed as |
| 11 |
being too costly, too long to implement, very |
| 12 |
complex software solution. So for some of the |
| 13 |
smaller organizations that might be like an $800 |
| 14 |
million company or smaller, those are going to be |
| 15 |
the typical answers or statements that a company |
| 16 |
may make to us. |
| 17 |
So we work
with our sales reps to help |
| 18 |
them answer those questions. It costs too much. |
| 19 |
Well, we have redesigned and repackaged our |
| 20 |
solutions over the years. They have evolved and |
| 21 |
now it doesn't cost too much, and cost is relative. |
| 22 |
We look at total cost of ownership. So we make a |
| 00113 |
| 1 |
commitment to the client that if the business case |
| 2 |
doesn't prove it, we don't want them buying our |
| 3 |
solution. And that is a commitment we make up |
| 4 |
front with the client. |
| 5 |
Second is
on, it takes too long or costs |
| 6 |
too much to implement. What we work with a client |
| 7 |
on in that case or in that regard is we actually |
| 8 |
have done some research to look at the average time |
| 9 |
it takes to implement our software given different |
| 10 |
sizes of companies. And we will show them that |
| 11 |
for, I think your example was an $8 billion |
| 12 |
company. Yes, the complexities that surround that |
| 13 |
company are going to be from a scale standpoint, |
| 14 |
people changes, technology changes, the amount of |
| 15 |
systems they have already in place. Their |
| 16 |
environment will be a little more complex, so it |
| 17 |
may take longer to implement the solution, |
| 18 |
depending on what they are buying, versus that of |
| 19 |
an $800 million company. But we have an average |
| 20 |
implementation graph that we typically will refer |
| 21 |
to or show and say for companies within your size, |
| 22 |
the average implementation time in that case might |
| 00114 |
| 1 |
be six to nine months, whereas with the $8 billion |
| 2 |
company it might be more like 12 to 15 months. So |
| 3 |
that is how we try to answer that question. So the |
| 4 |
sales approach is going to be a little different in |
| 5 |
the messages that we deliver. So that is how there |
| 6 |
would be a difference. |
| 7 |
Q. So it sounded like, and correct me if I'm |
| 8 |
wrong, messaging to an $800 million company there |
| 9 |
are three areas that SAP has found it needs to |
| 10 |
address. One is too costly; two, that it takes too |
| 11 |
long to implement; and three, that it's too |
| 12 |
complex; is that right? |
| 13 |
A. Not the too complex, to an $800 million. |
| 14 |
Oftentimes it's the $800 million and below customer |
| 15 |
that would say your software is too complex. It |
| 16 |
might be too much for what we need. That, we don't |
| 17 |
want to buy something that we don't need. We |
| 18 |
normally don't hear that from an $8 billion |
| 19 |
company. We hear that from an $800 million |
| 20 |
company. |
| 21 |
Q. I'm sorry, I meant to reference the $800 |
| 22 |
million company. The $8 billion company, what |
| 00115 |
| 1 |
makes these three things not concern, why aren't |
| 2 |
these concerns of the $8 billion company? |
| 3 |
A. These are typically the top three things |
| 4 |
that we will hear from a variety of sources. An $8 |
| 5 |
billion company, the internal complexities that |
| 6 |
govern their structure, their IT landscape, their |
| 7 |
business processes, typically are going to be |
| 8 |
oftentimes more complex than an $800 million |
| 9 |
company. Again, depending on which industry they |
| 10 |
are in. |
| 11 |
Generically
at the top, if you ask any of |
| 12 |
our SAP clients what do you think of SAP, or maybe |
| 13 |
someone that is not a client, regardless of size, |
| 14 |
that is going to be the top three things they will |
| 15 |
probably rattle off the top of their head. At |
| 16 |
least that is the analysis and data input we have |
| 17 |
gotten back from our research. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00116 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
Q. What makes that so different? Why is the |
| 4 |
$8 billion company so different from the $800 |
| 5 |
million company? |
| 6 |
A. The best answer is that it depends. |
| 7 |
There's no set of, there's no five reasons why. |
| 8 |
Each company is going to be different. Just the |
| 9 |
sheer size and scope, and depending on which |
| 10 |
industry, the business processes that they deal |
| 11 |
with are typically going to be on average larger |
| 12 |
and more complex and the solution set is going to |
| 13 |
be needed to solve that, going to need to be larger |
| 14 |
and more detailed versus an $800 million company. |
| 15 |
That is
not to say that an $800 million |
| 16 |
company does not have a lot of the same business |
| 17 |
issues or even some of the same complexities. |
| 18 |
Certain industries might be just as complex, |
| 19 |
especially companies that are in maybe a high |
| 20 |
growth or fast growth mode. |
| 21 |
You take
a small company that is, say, |
| 22 |
$500- to $800 million that is growing annually at |
| 00117 |
| 1 |
20 to 25 percent, there's only a few of those |
| 2 |
around today. If they are growing at a clip of 20 |
| 3 |
percent a year, then they are going to have a |
| 4 |
totally different set of challenges than an $8 |
| 5 |
billion company that is averaging 1 percent or 2 |
| 6 |
percent growth. So in that case the complexities |
| 7 |
that surround that smaller company are going to be |
| 8 |
even more challenging. They are having to add more |
| 9 |
people, more systems, changing the way they do |
| 10 |
business. If they are a manufacturer, they are |
| 11 |
having to bring on new production lines. Each |
| 12 |
customer is different. To categorically lump a |
| 13 |
client together based on revenues, that is doing a |
| 14 |
disservice to each of our clients who are just into |
| 15 |
the general market overall. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00118 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 8 |
Q. One of the complexities you mentioned was |
| 9 |
the pace of growth. The $800 million growing at 20 |
| 10 |
percent annually presents challenges to, say, a |
| 11 |
vendor attempting to sell them an enterprise |
| 12 |
software application; is that right? |
| 13 |
A. It could, yes. |
| 14 |
Q. Can you think of other examples in which |
| 15 |
the characteristics of the company create |
| 16 |
challenges for the enterprise software application |
| 17 |
vendor? |
| 18 |
A. There's a variety of potentials. Another |
| 19 |
example, to give you an example, would be, let's |
| 20 |
say you have a company that has decided from a |
| 21 |
strategy standpoint that they are going to change |
| 22 |
their manufacturing processes. Maybe they are |
| 00119 |
| 1 |
changing their locations of plants or maybe they |
| 2 |
are going to go from a make to a buy, where they |
| 3 |
are going to outsource most of the manufacturing. |
| 4 |
That is
a pretty complex decision and has |
| 5 |
ramifications on labor, plant location, assets, |
| 6 |
human capital, for a potential outsourcing. That |
| 7 |
is a highly complex, that one decision becomes a |
| 8 |
highly complex set of factors that would say how am |
| 9 |
I going to do this. |
| 10 |
If they
have a software solution from SAP |
| 11 |
or anyone else, that is going to require quite a |
| 12 |
bit of changes in order to facilitate that. Any |
| 13 |
type of strategy change that a board wants to |
| 14 |
implement typically will have ramifications across |
| 15 |
all lines of business, and that is just one |
| 16 |
example. So pick any business scenario and it |
| 17 |
could have the same ripple effect, and it could |
| 18 |
affect software. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00120 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
Q. What is involved with implementation? |
| 4 |
Why isn't it simply just plugging in SAP software, |
| 5 |
loading the disk and letting it run? |
| 6 |
A. The reason is usually when you load a |
| 7 |
disk and let it run, that would lead me down the |
| 8 |
path that you are talking about desktop software, |
| 9 |
where it's going to be installed on one computer |
| 10 |
and probably going to be used by one person making |
| 11 |
a simple process like typing a Word document or |
| 12 |
maybe creating an Excel spreadsheet. |
| 13 |
When you
install enterprise application |
| 14 |
software, oftentimes it's going to be touching or |
| 15 |
controlling what we would call a mission critical |
| 16 |
system of a company. You use financials or HR, |
| 17 |
let's say, how are you going to pay your people. |
| 18 |
If it doesn't work right, your people don't get |
| 19 |
paid. You have a whole bunch of upset employees. |
| 20 |
That's totally different than your desktop computer |
| 21 |
hung up and you have got to reboot your computer to |
| 22 |
get your Word document back, or you lost your Word |
| 00121 |
| 1 |
document. Losing a Word document and comparing |
| 2 |
that to having payroll not run on time, that is |
| 3 |
comparing apples and oranges. |
| 4 |
In our previous
deposition I gave you the |
| 5 |
example of supply chain and compared it to desktop |
| 6 |
solutions. If you try to schedule your raw |
| 7 |
materials into your production line incorrectly, |
| 8 |
you could shut down your whole production line, |
| 9 |
impacting not only your inventory, but downstream |
| 10 |
effects to your consumers and all of your employees |
| 11 |
who are in manufacturing. And to stop a production |
| 12 |
line, you are going to cost the corporation |
| 13 |
literally millions of dollars a day. Comparing |
| 14 |
that to something that you can just install |
| 15 |
yourself on one desktop or something like that, |
| 16 |
you, it's not a fair question. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00124 |
| 1 |
MR. LINDSTROM:
Let me break in and offer |
| 2 |
a suggestion, if it would be helpful to you. I'm |
| 3 |
not sure if it would be, but I notice in the past |
| 4 |
few minutes there have been references back and |
| 5 |
forth to testimony given during the CID proceeding. |
| 6 |
That transcript has been marked as Exhibit 27 at |
| 7 |
today's deposition. I have read it, and if it |
| 8 |
would expedite matters, I would be happy to |
| 9 |
stipulate for purposes of this deposition that |
| 10 |
either side could use the CID examination, Exhibit |
| 11 |
27, as though it were a deposition taken in this |
| 12 |
proceeding, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil |
| 13 |
Procedure, and that way we won't need to go over |
| 14 |
the same matters, unless there's further |
| 15 |
questioning that you want to conduct on those. |
| 16 |
And, of course, I would be free to cross, if I |
| 17 |
thought it was appropriate, based on Exhibit 27. |
| 18 |
MR. ANDEER:
Okay. Sure, I will agree to |
| 19 |
that. I believe that will save us some time. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00128 |
| 1 |
Q. Does SAP have the right to increase |
| 2 |
maintenance prices annually? Is there a lock, do |
| 3 |
you lock in -- strike that. In your typical |
| 4 |
contract, does SAP commit to the 17 percent level |
| 5 |
for the life of the software? |
| 6 |
A. No. No. |
| 7 |
Q. Is it an annual commitment? Is it |
| 8 |
renegotiated annually? |
| 9 |
A. It's not renegotiated at all. A typical |
| 10 |
contract is, today's pricing is 17 percent, and |
| 11 |
it's for one year. And we bill it annually at the |
| 12 |
beginning of the year, and it's subject to terms |
| 13 |
and conditions of the pricing. So if we have a |
| 14 |
price increase, then they will be subject to the |
| 15 |
price increase going forward. When we work with |
| 16 |
the client on that, we are talking 17 percent of |
| 17 |
what could be potentially millions of dollars for a |
| 18 |
sale. They typically will want some reassurances |
| 19 |
on pricing, and that is where we will then fall |
| 20 |
back and say we have not had a price increase for |
| 21 |
almost 10 years, so the likelihood of that going up |
| 22 |
to 18 or 22 next year is, the probability is |
| 00130 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
Q. Are the customers using -- we had |
| 4 |
referenced earlier, I guess 2,800 entities that SAP |
| 5 |
America has a relationship with, that you sold |
| 6 |
software to. |
| 7 |
A. Approximately. |
| 8 |
Q. What percentage of those buying entities |
| 9 |
are also using SAP or making themselves availed of |
| 10 |
SAP's maintenance services? |
| 11 |
A. The exact number I'm not positive of. |
| 12 |
However, with a great deal of, a good number, I |
| 13 |
would say we are probably talking about probably |
| 14 |
high 90s. Very few instances of SAP are not |
| 15 |
maintained. Very few. |
| 16 |
Q. In discussing maintenance with customers |
| 17 |
or in the sales cycle, let's look more broadly. In |
| 18 |
the sales cycle you are looking at, obviously, your |
| 19 |
software license pricing at some point, as well as |
| 20 |
your maintenance pricing at some point. Are they |
| 21 |
also interested in future versions? Say several |
| 22 |
years ago I'm looking at R/3 enterprise. Were they |
| 00131 |
| 1 |
interested in where SAP was going to develop its |
| 2 |
product to the point where it's now mySAP ERP? Was |
| 3 |
that a subject of discussion? |
| 4 |
A. Oftentimes it is. The clients don't, |
| 5 |
oftentimes the clients don't refer to it the way |
| 6 |
you asked the question. What they want to know is, |
| 7 |
as part of the sales cycle, the clients typically |
| 8 |
will ask us for what is your product road map, in |
| 9 |
which they would like us to tell them where is the |
| 10 |
product headed, what are our R&D efforts that are |
| 11 |
currently underway with that particular element, |
| 12 |
that module, that package or piece of |
| 13 |
functionality. |
| 14 |
And what
we do is during the sales cycle |
| 15 |
we will share with the client the product road map |
| 16 |
that we make publicly available to all clients |
| 17 |
going forward. What we do not do is tell a client |
| 18 |
here is the real deal that we are going to do with |
| 19 |
this product. We are going to change it this way |
| 20 |
and that would be three years out. That may be a |
| 21 |
strategy for us three years out, but we are not |
| 22 |
going to tell a client that. |
| 00132 |
| 1 |
We are extremely
conservative on what we |
| 2 |
show a client, because one thing that SAP wants to |
| 3 |
make sure of, because competitively I think it's |
| 4 |
another differentiator, is we are very true to what |
| 5 |
we commit to. So if we say here is the product |
| 6 |
road map, here is what we know and this is what we |
| 7 |
plan to deliver, then that is what we work toward. |
| 8 |
So we don't try to promise anything in the future |
| 9 |
that we don't know that we have a good probability |
| 10 |
of delivering. |
| 11 |
Then at
the same time we don't paint a |
| 12 |
picture for each client that is different. It's |
| 13 |
the same picture. You want the product road map, |
| 14 |
corporation A, B or C, they are going to get the |
| 15 |
same product road map at all companies. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00133 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 16 |
Q. Are the costs, are you aware of the costs |
| 17 |
involved with transitioning customers -- strike |
| 18 |
that. Are the costs, you have identified there are |
| 19 |
some costs going from R/3 enterprise to mySAP ERP? |
| 20 |
A. Yes. |
| 21 |
Q. Is it your understanding there are |
| 22 |
similar costs associated in going from an earlier |
| 00134 |
| 1 |
PeopleSoft version to a PeopleSoft 8? |
| 2 |
A. Yes. Anyone in this space would have a |
| 3 |
cost differential. |
| 4 |
Q. Anyone meaning any vendor going from one |
| 5 |
version to another, there is a cost difference. |
| 6 |
A. In any software company going from one |
| 7 |
version to another, there is going to be an |
| 8 |
incremental cost. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00135 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 17 |
Q. Are there costs to that customer in going |
| 18 |
from PeopleSoft 7 to SAP? |
| 19 |
A. Yes. |
| 20 |
Q. What are those costs? |
| 21 |
A. Costs off the top of my head would be |
| 22 |
licensing, maintenance, implementation. That would |
| 00136 |
| 1 |
be the three broad costs. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 18 |
Q. Can you explain or list some of the |
| 19 |
differences between the two implementations? Where |
| 20 |
are some of the differences? Why is it different |
| 21 |
implementing it in kind of a, what we will call |
| 22 |
greenfield opportunity versus, say, a company that |
| 00137 |
| 1 |
already has PeopleSoft 7 or an Oracle 10.7 |
| 2 |
installed? |
| 3 |
A. It's going to vary by -- in terms of what |
| 4 |
you are trying to get to, I think it's going to be |
| 5 |
hard to contrast the two, because each client is |
| 6 |
different. So with the greenfield opportunity, |
| 7 |
there would be a whole bunch of caveats, like do |
| 8 |
they even have any other type of technology |
| 9 |
implemented or are they just using desktops, so |
| 10 |
they don't even have an infrastructure. Do they |
| 11 |
have any other type of software? HR. How do they |
| 12 |
do their financials. If they have experience with, |
| 13 |
say, Oracle or Lawson or someone else on the |
| 14 |
financial side, then the implementation may not be |
| 15 |
nearly as bad. |
| 16 |
If they
are totally manual and they are |
| 17 |
just now going to the first enterprise-type |
| 18 |
solution and this is the first time they ever |
| 19 |
bought software of this magnitude to run an |
| 20 |
automated process, business process, that is going |
| 21 |
to create a whole set of challenges and skill set |
| 22 |
issues that they are going to need to have a |
| 00138 |
| 1 |
learning curve on, versus a client that is a |
| 2 |
PeopleSoft customer or an Oracle customer that has |
| 3 |
an older version that, just by that very nature, |
| 4 |
knowing that, that means they at least understand |
| 5 |
the use of technology. They understand the use of |
| 6 |
automated business processes. They understand the |
| 7 |
implications that it has on culture within the |
| 8 |
company and the dynamics that surround it. |
| 9 |
So to take
those two and contrast them, |
| 10 |
it's going to be very different. At the highest |
| 11 |
level, the learning curve that the PeopleSoft or |
| 12 |
the Oracle shop has is going to help them on their |
| 13 |
implementation, versus someone that is going from a |
| 14 |
totally manual, because totally manual means there |
| 15 |
will have to be a lot more change in management |
| 16 |
that will have to happen. Whereas with PeopleSoft |
| 17 |
or Oracle shops, they have already started that |
| 18 |
change in management. They have already changed |
| 19 |
the way they do the business process. That is |
| 20 |
talking highest process. That is not talking |
| 21 |
operations and people and skill set. That is just |
| 22 |
trying to compare the two here in a brief |
| 00140 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 17 |
Q. Another one of these campaigns is one |
| 18 |
targeted at I believe a company you said was Baan? |
| 19 |
A. Baan; correct. |
| 20 |
Q. Is that campaign, could you go into that |
| 21 |
a little bit more? Is that campaign the same sort |
| 22 |
of strategy as what you are doing with the JD |
| 00141 |
| 1 |
Edwards/PeopleSoft campaign? |
| 2 |
A. Not exactly. The Baan campaign was an |
| 3 |
early campaign, if my memory, if I recall it |
| 4 |
correctly. It was one we launched in January of |
| 5 |
2003. And the idea there was Baan I believe had |
| 6 |
just been sold again, and their market share and |
| 7 |
revenues had continued to decrease over the last |
| 8 |
couple years, and they had been I think sold or |
| 9 |
acquired several times in like the last two to |
| 10 |
three years. So we just viewed that as a unique |
| 11 |
opportunity to walk in and help these Baan |
| 12 |
customers out, because the Baan product was |
| 13 |
stagnant. Their technology stack was stagnant. No |
| 14 |
R&D was really being invested there. There was |
| 15 |
really no good product road map, at least from our |
| 16 |
assessment, so we figured these customers were |
| 17 |
literally left holding the bag with no future |
| 18 |
development. SAP viewed that as a unique |
| 19 |
opportunity. |
| 20 |
Q. When you say the Baan product was |
| 21 |
stagnant, what do you mean? |
| 22 |
A. If you look at the time in between their |
| 00142 |
| 1 |
product releases or updates or new product roll |
| 2 |
outs, it had become slow and the time gap started |
| 3 |
to widen. Their R&D spending went down. Their |
| 4 |
sales went down. So we viewed that as the product |
| 5 |
is not maturing and advancing. Innovation stopped |
| 6 |
and they become stagnant or actually not keeping |
| 7 |
pace with the new technologies in the marketplace. |
| 8 |
So we viewed that as a competitive opportunity. |
| 9 |
Q. So it's important, or you viewed it as an |
| 10 |
opportunity because you saw that there was no |
| 11 |
ongoing development with the product? |
| 12 |
A. Correct. |
| 13 |
Q. Was the product being maintained? |
| 14 |
A. I don't know. I believe so. I believe |
| 15 |
they were still reporting decent maintenance |
| 16 |
revenues, but maintenance and innovation are two |
| 17 |
different things. |
| 18 |
Q. Why are those -- could you explain why |
| 19 |
are those two different things? I mean what -- |
| 20 |
strike that. When you say innovation, what do you |
| 21 |
mean by that? |
| 22 |
A. Software. The area that we work in, the |
| 00143 |
| 1 |
enterprise application software market, the |
| 2 |
technology that we use and have evolved to solve |
| 3 |
business problems fosters itself in the capability |
| 4 |
that a software matures. In other words, software |
| 5 |
evolves over time. It becomes better. It can do |
| 6 |
more. It can solve more issues. It can integrate |
| 7 |
with other systems. It can, it morphs over time. |
| 8 |
We viewed Baan as lacking those things, and we |
| 9 |
didn't see any insight or future direction for |
| 10 |
their product. So if a customer, if a Baan |
| 11 |
customer -- at least this was our position -- if a |
| 12 |
Baan customer wanted to improve a business process |
| 13 |
and it was XYZ business process, the Baan product |
| 14 |
probably would not be able to support them to do |
| 15 |
that, because it's not new, it's not been kept up |
| 16 |
to date, or at least from our estimation it was |
| 17 |
not. |
| 18 |
So we viewed
that as an opportunity to go |
| 19 |
in and say, well, we can help you do X, Y and Z. |
| 20 |
So evidently Baan hasn't, so why don't you just |
| 21 |
come on over to SAP and we will help do you that. |
| 22 |
And by the way, we are going to be around a while. |
| 00144 |
| 1 |
And we have got great momentum and we are going to |
| 2 |
have a lot of customers in your industry and we |
| 3 |
invest a lot of money in R&D and they don't and all |
| 4 |
those other things. That's why. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00147 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 11 |
Q. Let's focus on 29, since that is the one |
| 12 |
you are probably at least somewhat more familiar |
| 13 |
with. This is the e-mail is from Bill McDermott, |
| 14 |
who you identified as the CEO of SAP America, to |
| 15 |
you and Greg McStravick. Who is Greg McStravick? |
| 16 |
A. Greg McStravick is, at the time of this |
| 17 |
document, he was the senior vice president of |
| 18 |
marketing, and why I was probably copied on this is |
| 19 |
that I had the role that Greg has this year, last |
| 20 |
year. Prior to his arrival, I ran marketing, so |
| 21 |
that is probably why we are both on the e-mail. |
| 22 |
Q. It looks like Mr. McDermott has forwarded |
| 00148 |
| 1 |
a message from Mr. Apotheker containing two |
| 2 |
attachments. I would like to focus on the second |
| 3 |
of these attachments, which starts at SAP 29031. |
| 4 |
A. Yes, I'm there. |
| 5 |
Q. What is CMI? |
| 6 |
A. Competitive market intelligence. |
| 7 |
Q. Are these regular alerts? Is that |
| 8 |
something you regularly receive? |
| 9 |
A. Yes. |
| 10 |
Q. Who prepares these documents? |
| 11 |
A. They are prepared out of the CMI group |
| 12 |
that reports through global marketing, and they |
| 13 |
send these alerts out to our worldwide organization |
| 14 |
as what it is, as an alert, to notify people of |
| 15 |
things that are happening within the marketplace. |
| 16 |
Q. And CMI, is that, you said they report up |
| 17 |
through the global marketing group? |
| 18 |
A. That is correct. |
| 19 |
Q. Where is that group located? |
| 20 |
A. CMI is, the bulk of these individuals are |
| 21 |
housed in the Waldorf, Germany area. Global |
| 22 |
marketing's headquarters is located in New York, |
| 00149 |
| 1 |
New York. |
| 2 |
Q. Are these alerts something you would read |
| 3 |
and rely on in the ordinary course of business? |
| 4 |
A. Broadly speaking, yes. |
| 5 |
Q. Do you know who within the CMI group |
| 6 |
prepared this particular alert? |
| 7 |
A. No. And the reason for that is this is a |
| 8 |
team effort. This document is a team effort. |
| 9 |
Components of this document were probably, is |
| 10 |
oftentimes gathered from the field organizations, |
| 11 |
such as the market intelligence team in SAP |
| 12 |
America. They would work with their counterparts |
| 13 |
in CMI, the global team, to provide input from the |
| 14 |
field organization, and then they would compile all |
| 15 |
of the analysis from the field and their own |
| 16 |
analysis to create this type of a document. This |
| 17 |
is a collaborative document. |
| 18 |
Q. Looking at SAP 29032, which is the second |
| 19 |
page of this attachment, looking at the first |
| 20 |
column, the final bullet point, would you mind |
| 21 |
reading that for the record? |
| 22 |
A. "PeopleSoft customers are the ones hurt |
| 00150 |
| 1 |
the most. With Oracle abruptly devaluing users and |
| 2 |
their investment in PeopleSoft applications, Oracle |
| 3 |
plans to end future enhancements to products and |
| 4 |
will force customers to incur switching costs in |
| 5 |
the future." |
| 6 |
Q. Do you agree with that statement? |
| 7 |
A. Yes. |
| 8 |
Q. Why do you agree? I mean, could you |
| 9 |
explain why you agree with that statement? |
| 10 |
A. The reasoning, again, this goes back to |
| 11 |
the timing of this document and the timing of where |
| 12 |
this analysis comes from. Oracle, in its initial |
| 13 |
bid to buy PeopleSoft, one of the statements they |
| 14 |
made was that they presented an end-of-life |
| 15 |
campaign or end-of-life statement concerning the |
| 16 |
PeopleSoft applications and made a declarative |
| 17 |
statement that their products would have to morph |
| 18 |
or transition into the Oracle suite. Because of |
| 19 |
that, that is why this paragraph is in there. This |
| 20 |
is our analysis based off of what the |
| 21 |
representatives from Oracle stated. It totally |
| 22 |
devalues the investment that PeopleSoft has made to |
| 00151 |
| 1 |
their shareholders, to their product line and to |
| 2 |
their customers, to totally dismiss it and say that |
| 3 |
it is of no value, and the customers they have |
| 4 |
today and the process they are running is of no |
| 5 |
value and that it's going to have to transition to |
| 6 |
Oracle. That was what we consider a very |
| 7 |
overheated, hard-handed approach to the clientele |
| 8 |
and to their shareholders. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00152 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 14 |
Q. Sure. Oracle has publicly said it will |
| 15 |
upgrade PeopleSoft customers to the most recent |
| 16 |
version of Oracle eventually. |
| 17 |
A. Okay. |
| 18 |
Q. Is this upgrade to the next release of |
| 19 |
Oracle, whenever that is going to take place, is |
| 20 |
that as easy or as painless as Oracle has made it |
| 21 |
sound? |
| 22 |
A. No. |
| 00153 |
| 1 |
Q. And why is that? |
| 2 |
A. Based on the knowledge that I have, |
| 3 |
Oracle's products only run, for instance, on an |
| 4 |
Oracle database. Oracle typically integrates only |
| 5 |
with itself, aggressively. PeopleSoft has a little |
| 6 |
bit of a different approach, where they are a |
| 7 |
little more open in working with multiple databases |
| 8 |
and tend to operate in a little bit more of a |
| 9 |
heterogeneous environment. Oracle tends to not be |
| 10 |
that way. |
| 11 |
So therefore
to go from a more |
| 12 |
heterogeneous type of environment and stating that |
| 13 |
you must now come to Oracle and only use Oracle |
| 14 |
databases and only have all your infrastructure on |
| 15 |
Oracle and become more, a little more homogeneous, |
| 16 |
that is going to be painful, especially if you have |
| 17 |
a PeopleSoft shop that is quite diversified in a |
| 18 |
heterogeneous environment. To say that the |
| 19 |
conversion is easy and they will just convert over |
| 20 |
to Oracle, that is not a solid claim. |
| 21 |
Q. What makes it so painful? You said this |
| 22 |
would be a painful process. Could you kind of |
| 00154 |
| 1 |
discuss what is involved with that? What does it |
| 2 |
take to take a PeopleSoft customer and change it to |
| 3 |
an Oracle customer, or just not even looking at |
| 4 |
PeopleSoft, is it similar to what it would take to |
| 5 |
convert a PeopleSoft customer to an SAP customer? |
| 6 |
A. Yes and no. Yes in regard that to switch |
| 7 |
any type of enterprise system to another, that is a |
| 8 |
pretty substantial change. Why is it more |
| 9 |
difficult in this situation? To go from an SAP or |
| 10 |
from a PeopleSoft to an SAP, we tend to be a little |
| 11 |
bit more open, especially with our NetWeaver |
| 12 |
technology stack. We basically say that we are |
| 13 |
totally open, totally integratable with other |
| 14 |
systems. |
| 15 |
We have
an infrastructure that supports |
| 16 |
that. We are .NET compliant, J2EE compliant. We |
| 17 |
have an XI or exchange infrastructure layer to show |
| 18 |
that we have connectors and integration points to |
| 19 |
other systems. PeopleSoft is not nearly as robust |
| 20 |
as us, but has at least some of the same |
| 21 |
capabilities, and they tend to be much more open. |
| 22 |
So there
still is going to be a |
| 00155 |
| 1 |
monumental task. The reason why this is in this |
| 2 |
document is because Oracle tends to be much more |
| 3 |
closed in their systems infrastructure, because |
| 4 |
they want everything. So we believe that |
| 5 |
directionally and from a strategy standpoint, that |
| 6 |
is a disadvantage for PeopleSoft. But to be clear, |
| 7 |
to go from Oracle, PeopleSoft, SAP, Lawson, any of |
| 8 |
the others, to switch, it's going to be costly and |
| 9 |
it will require a good labor of time and effort. |
| 10 |
And the
other thing I will add is, though |
| 11 |
I'm not a technologist, as I stated earlier, JD |
| 12 |
Edwards core architecture is distinctly different |
| 13 |
than the PeopleSoft core architecture. Those are |
| 14 |
two competing architectures that have to come |
| 15 |
together, and somebody has got to win or the |
| 16 |
product has to become rearchitected to blend those |
| 17 |
two lines together. |
| 18 |
Oracle is
a totally different set of |
| 19 |
architecture. So in this situation you are talking |
| 20 |
about taking three architectures, merging them into |
| 21 |
one company and saying that the Oracle architecture |
| 22 |
is the one that is going to win, and discounting |
| 00156 |
| 1 |
the value of the PeopleSoft architecture and |
| 2 |
discounting the value of the JD Edwards |
| 3 |
architecture. That has massive ramifications on |
| 4 |
the way technology would be used by any company. |
| 5 |
Q. So it sounds like there are costs |
| 6 |
associated any time you are going from one |
| 7 |
application to another vendor's application. |
| 8 |
A. Yes. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 21 |
Q. You have testified that you don't believe |
| 22 |
that the process will be all that easy if Oracle |
| 00157 |
| 1 |
attempts to transition existing PeopleSoft |
| 2 |
customers to the new version of Oracle? |
| 3 |
A. Correct. |
| 4 |
Q. What is your basis for that belief? |
| 5 |
A. My basis would be reliant upon fact, and |
| 6 |
the fact that I will draw on is SAP's history. If |
| 7 |
you look at the history of this market and you look |
| 8 |
at the players within this market, you do not see a |
| 9 |
large amount of switching between different |
| 10 |
systems. |
| 11 |
So, for
instance, even though we have a |
| 12 |
PeopleSoft/JD Edwards campaign, we have not had |
| 13 |
like a hundred or even a thousand customers come |
| 14 |
running, saying yank out my PeopleSoft system |
| 15 |
because I fear Oracle and let me give you a bunch |
| 16 |
of money, SAP. We have just not seen that. I'm |
| 17 |
talking less than a handful may have chosen to do |
| 18 |
that. So though it's nice in documents, in |
| 19 |
practicality there is a lot of money in investment |
| 20 |
and human capital and emotional intelligence built |
| 21 |
into these systems. You don't go and rip them out |
| 22 |
and replace them overnight. |
| 00158 |
| 1 |
And to trivialize
them, that they can |
| 2 |
just transition from PeopleSoft to Oracle, is a |
| 3 |
total disregard to the investments into the process |
| 4 |
that these companies are running. We are talking |
| 5 |
about running a core company's foundation. The |
| 6 |
shareholders should be shaking in their shoes. |
| 7 |
What if
their manufacturing plant closes |
| 8 |
or production line stops? So to trivialize it, |
| 9 |
that you can just upgrade it and they will |
| 10 |
transition, we view that as not accurate, and our |
| 11 |
history would say we don't go around replacing a |
| 12 |
lot of systems. That is not our core business. |
| 13 |
Our core business is selling net new, and if it's |
| 14 |
PeopleSoft HR that is implemented, we would be |
| 15 |
selling around them to sell a supply chain. We |
| 16 |
would sell them financials. We would sell them |
| 17 |
something else. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00161 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 4 |
Q. In the sales process, in the sales cycle |
| 5 |
we identified, when is price first mentioned? |
| 6 |
A. It varies by client. |
| 7 |
Q. So customers may ask in the discovery |
| 8 |
phase how much your products cost? |
| 9 |
A. Yes. |
| 10 |
Q. And how do you answer that question, how |
| 11 |
does SAP answer that question? |
| 12 |
A. Early in the discovery process we would |
| 13 |
typically answer that it depends on the solution |
| 14 |
set you are trying to drive and what business |
| 15 |
process you are trying to solve. So without having |
| 16 |
a good solution definition, which would be kind of |
| 17 |
like toward later in the evaluation phase to know |
| 18 |
what the client really needs, it's hard to really |
| 19 |
determine a price. We can definitely give ranges |
| 20 |
and ballparks, but it would be just a guess. |
| 21 |
Q. So if I'm a company in the market for an |
| 22 |
HR solution and I'm just beginning the process and |
| 00162 |
| 1 |
I ask how much is HR going to cost me, your |
| 2 |
response would be -- |
| 3 |
A. It depends on what functions of HR you |
| 4 |
would like. What functions of HR or what business |
| 5 |
issues or bottlenecks in your company are you |
| 6 |
trying to solve. |
| 7 |
Q. So SAP needs to learn about that |
| 8 |
particular customer's needs, as well as plans, in |
| 9 |
order to price the product. Is that fair? |
| 10 |
A. Correct. That's why that phase is called |
| 11 |
discovery. We have to discover those things and |
| 12 |
have a good understanding in order to craft or |
| 13 |
portray back to the customer the right set of |
| 14 |
solutions. |
| 15 |
Q. I believe the second phase was what I'm |
| 16 |
going to call the solution phase or the |
| 17 |
demonstration phase. |
| 18 |
A. Evaluation, yes. |
| 19 |
Q. During that phase, can SAP offer a more |
| 20 |
realistic price or can it quote a price to a |
| 21 |
potential customer? |
| 22 |
A. It's during that phase where we begin to |
| 00163 |
| 1 |
get a handle on what the customer is going to want, |
| 2 |
because what we end up having to demonstrate is |
| 3 |
typically what they are going to need to procure. |
| 4 |
So it's at that phase that we actually are in a |
| 5 |
better position to start pricing out the scenario |
| 6 |
for the client. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00164 |
| 1 |
Q. In the sales process, does SAP generally |
| 2 |
quote one price and that's it? Is there just one |
| 3 |
price for the product and end of negotiations? Let |
| 4 |
me rephrase. I can see I asked another poorly |
| 5 |
worded question. You said the pricing is dependent |
| 6 |
on a number of different metrics. You have got |
| 7 |
types of users, number of users, these different |
| 8 |
engines, how many things you are going to be - the |
| 9 |
number of transactions perhaps through these, the |
| 10 |
software is going to be accounting for. Those are |
| 11 |
all different metrics in calculating a price for |
| 12 |
the product. |
| 13 |
A. Could be, yes. |
| 14 |
Q. Once that price has been determined by |
| 15 |
SAP, is there an engagement with the customer to |
| 16 |
explain that price? Is it a collaborative effort |
| 17 |
in terms of SAP working with the customer to |
| 18 |
explain how its products are priced? |
| 19 |
A. Yes. We would work with the client and |
| 20 |
explain based on the solution they need in their |
| 21 |
definition what we would be able to provide them |
| 22 |
and the pricing that it would entail and give them |
| 00165 |
| 1 |
a price and what we would consider, like a total |
| 2 |
cost of ownership. Here is the maintenance |
| 3 |
component. If you want us to work with you on |
| 4 |
education and training, here is what we would |
| 5 |
recommend for education and training. Also, if you |
| 6 |
want us to run the implementation or if it's a |
| 7 |
partner and they are going to do that separately, |
| 8 |
that's fine. We would leave that part out. So it |
| 9 |
is a definitely a collaborative effort. It is not |
| 10 |
a here is one price, call us when you are ready to |
| 11 |
order. This is very collaborative. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00170 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 17 |
Q. And that level would be what? At what |
| 18 |
level are you starting to review discount approval |
| 19 |
requests? |
| 20 |
A. Anything that goes to Bill McDermott or |
| 21 |
higher. |
| 22 |
Q. So according to this document, that is 75 |
| 00171 |
| 1 |
percent commercial, 85 percent public services? |
| 2 |
A. Right. Or greater. |
| 3 |
Q. Is that in fact what you are reviewing? |
| 4 |
A. Correct. |
| 5 |
Q. What sorts of information is included in |
| 6 |
these approval requests? Let me ask you a |
| 7 |
different question. What ideally would you like to |
| 8 |
see in these approval requests? |
| 9 |
A. One would be the pricing in general. |
| 10 |
What are they buying at? What is the list price? |
| 11 |
What is the standard discount? What is the |
| 12 |
non-standard discount? What is the final price? |
| 13 |
To make sure that maintenance is being represented |
| 14 |
properly, that it's 17 percent or more based on |
| 15 |
what services they want. |
| 16 |
Understanding
what is the sales |
| 17 |
background for why this request is being submitted, |
| 18 |
especially at this level above, to CEO's office or |
| 19 |
greater. There has to be compelling reasons why we |
| 20 |
would want to offer a greater than 75 percent or |
| 21 |
greater than 85 percent discount. What are the |
| 22 |
reasons? What are the market conditions? Maybe |
| 00172 |
| 1 |
the customer has a unique situation. Maybe they |
| 2 |
want to use our software in a different way than |
| 3 |
maybe we price. |
| 4 |
So there
has to be, in my mind when I'm |
| 5 |
working with our executive management team, there |
| 6 |
has to be a business, some level of a business case |
| 7 |
and firm reason to offer this level of a discount. |
| 8 |
So I'm looking for the business justification, and |
| 9 |
if it doesn't satisfy myself, I will work with Joe |
| 10 |
LaRosa to go back to the account team, to go back |
| 11 |
and say this doesn't look warranted. Please |
| 12 |
resubmit, rework. |
| 13 |
Q. Do you verify the information with the |
| 14 |
account team? |
| 15 |
A. That is part of Joe LaRosa's job. I only |
| 16 |
get involved if it's, if something just doesn't |
| 17 |
seem right or I need extra clarification to make |
| 18 |
sure if it's called into question at Bill |
| 19 |
McDermott's level or Mark White's level that I'm |
| 20 |
prepared with the answer. |
| 21 |
Q. Is competition, are competitors or |
| 22 |
competitive solutions a part of this deal summary? |
| 00173 |
| 1 |
A. Yes. |
| 2 |
Q. Is that something that is always |
| 3 |
included, sometimes included? |
| 4 |
A. It's always included. It's always asked, |
| 5 |
as part of the deal summary. One of the standard |
| 6 |
questions is, is there a competitor involved. If |
| 7 |
yes, explain the competitive nature of the sales |
| 8 |
cycle. |
| 9 |
Q. What is typically found in the |
| 10 |
competitive nature? What are you looking for? |
| 11 |
A. Who the competitor is, if known. What is |
| 12 |
the competitive offering, if known. Maybe how the |
| 13 |
competitor is positioning the software solution, if |
| 14 |
known. How the competitor is pricing their |
| 15 |
product, if known. If we have any intelligence |
| 16 |
around that that we have gained. Things like that. |
| 17 |
Q. And that information is all useful to you |
| 18 |
in crafting your e-mail message that goes up the |
| 19 |
chain? |
| 20 |
A. Correct. |
| |
|
| |
|
| 00174 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 4 |
Q. So in your approximately year and a half |
| 5 |
of experience, what sorts of deals do you see? You |
| 6 |
are seeing deals with substantial discounts. What |
| 7 |
sort of deals are you seeing? What comes across |
| 8 |
your desk? |
| 9 |
A. Anything greater than 75 or 85 percent. |
| 10 |
Q. Is it a common occurrence to see that |
| 11 |
sort of request? |
| 12 |
A. No, not a common occurrence, no. |
| 13 |
Q. Out of the opportunities being pursued by |
| 14 |
SAP, do you have a feel for what percentage of |
| 15 |
those opportunities may call for this kind of |
| 16 |
request? |
| 17 |
A. If my memory serves me right, in the |
| 18 |
first quarter -- the best way I can answer the |
| 19 |
question is to give you an example. In the first |
| 20 |
quarter I think, if I recall correctly, we did in |
| 21 |
excess of 300 transactions. In the first quarter |
| 22 |
deals that I was involved with, at this level of 75 |
| 00175 |
| 1 |
or 85 or greater, probably talking less than 10, |
| 2 |
maybe 12. |
| 3 |
Q. How often are those requests denied by |
| 4 |
your office, at your level, the CEO level? |
| 5 |
A. I wouldn't say -- never. In 18 months. |
| 6 |
Q. How often have you seen a request denied |
| 7 |
by Leo? |
| 8 |
A. None. |
| 9 |
Q. In your 18 months of working in this |
| 10 |
role? |
| 11 |
A. Correct. And the reason for that is |
| 12 |
there's a pretty hard filter before it gets to Bill |
| 13 |
McDermott. So if anything, the justification is |
| 14 |
built aggressively or it doesn't get to Bill |
| 15 |
McDermott or to Leo. So it's not that me in the |
| 16 |
middle, that I'm denying it, it's that we are |
| 17 |
proving out of business case, and if there is not a |
| 18 |
business case, it has to be reevaluated or we need |
| 19 |
to understand the situation better in order to get |
| 20 |
it to Bill or to Leo. |
| |
|
| |
|
| 00178 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 20 |
Q. What vendors are you seeing most often at |
| 21 |
your level, in terms of competition? |
| 22 |
A. Generally speaking? |
| 00179 |
| 1 |
Q. Sure. |
| 2 |
A. Oftentimes it is Oracle, PeopleSoft. |
| 3 |
Public sector side it would be PeopleSoft, maybe |
| 4 |
AMS. More times than not. |
| 5 |
Q. And I believe you had testified earlier |
| 6 |
account executives are encouraged to discover early |
| 7 |
on who the competition might be for a particular |
| 8 |
opportunity? |
| 9 |
A. Absolutely. |
| 10 |
Q. Why is that important? Why is that |
| 11 |
important to SAP? |
| 12 |
A. To make sure that we know how to position |
| 13 |
our product in the best light possible. So we |
| 14 |
highlight our strengths, we minimize our weaknesses |
| 15 |
as it relates to the competitor that we believe is |
| 16 |
competing for the business. |
| 17 |
Q. So SAP will position itself differently, |
| 18 |
depending on who they believe the competition is |
| 19 |
for a particular opportunity? |
| 20 |
A. Absolutely. If we have a way to |
| 21 |
differentiate ourselves, then we exploit that. |
| |
|
| 00183 |
| |
|
| |
|
| 3 |
Q. When we are talking about positioning, |
| 4 |
one part of that is positioning during the |
| 5 |
demonstration phase or the kind of explaining to |
| 6 |
the client what your solution offers; is that |
| 7 |
right? |
| 8 |
A. Yes. |
| 9 |
Q. And so during that process you are also |
| 10 |
explaining what perhaps a competitor doesn't offer? |
| 11 |
A. Yes. |
| 12 |
Q. Are there other ways in which SAP |
| 13 |
positions itself beyond simply this kind of |
| 14 |
technical feature-to-feature comparison? |
| 15 |
A. Yes. |
| 16 |
Q. What are some of those ways? |
| 17 |
A. Could be industry expertise. It could be |
| 18 |
momentum within a particular industry. For |
| 19 |
instance, let's say in a given industry, say the |
| 20 |
top six leaders within that industry based on, say, |
| 21 |
the Fortune 500, let's say the top six of those |
| 22 |
companies are SAP clients. |
| 00184 |
| 1 |
From a momentum
standpoint, let's say we |
| 2 |
are selling to a company that is not even in the |
| 3 |
top 20. We can say hey, we handle the processes |
| 4 |
for the top six. Subliminally meaning you want to |
| 5 |
be like the top six, don't you? If we can handle |
| 6 |
theirs, think of how you are going to benefit |
| 7 |
because we can handle yours. And don't you want to |
| 8 |
become one of the best run companies in the world, |
| 9 |
just like the top six? |
| 10 |
So the body
of knowledge of having a |
| 11 |
customer base is healthy and also showing that you |
| 12 |
have momentum in an industry, saying you have got |
| 13 |
this type of presence or this type of footprint |
| 14 |
within the given industry. That helps. |
| 15 |
Q. So just to summarize, one, you position |
| 16 |
yourself feature to feature. This is what we |
| 17 |
offer, this is what they don't offer. Two, you |
| 18 |
kind of leverage your industry experience in a |
| 19 |
particular group or your industry knowledge to win |
| 20 |
deals, as well; is that right? |
| 21 |
A. Yes. |
| |
|
| 00187 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 7 |
Q. Just so I'm clear, in terms of pricing |
| 8 |
and what matters and what doesn't matter in terms |
| 9 |
of your deal approval process, if you are looking |
| 10 |
at a financial opportunity, financial management |
| 11 |
opportunity at a Fortune 1000 company. This is for |
| 12 |
a corporate implementation. If the only competitor |
| 13 |
identified is, say, IFS, IFS's pricing will have no |
| 14 |
impact on the pricing, SAP's pricing? |
| 15 |
A. In general, that is correct. However, |
| 16 |
since you said IFS, we would say oh, what industry |
| 17 |
is this? Because IFS is strong in a couple of |
| 18 |
particular industries. So if they are actually |
| 19 |
making a play in an industry that we view as one of |
| 20 |
their weaker industries, we may not discount nearly |
| 21 |
as much, because we know IFS really, at the end of |
| 22 |
the day, no matter what price they are offering, |
| 00188 |
| 1 |
they are probably going to be in a situation that |
| 2 |
is going to put the client at risk, and if we |
| 3 |
position strong, we think our position will hold. |
| 4 |
Q. So it's not simply the identity of the |
| 5 |
competitor, it's the whole kind of competitive |
| 6 |
picture, what industry you are in? |
| 7 |
A. Correct. |
| 8 |
Q. What, who the customer is? |
| 9 |
A. Correct. |
| 10 |
Q. What their needs are; right? |
| 11 |
A. Correct. That is why I said you can take |
| 12 |
the competitor's name and remove it. We are |
| 13 |
agnostic to the competitor. It's all the factors |
| 14 |
that surround it, to your point. What industry? |
| 15 |
What is the situation? What are they wanting to |
| 16 |
use it for? How strong is our business case? Did |
| 17 |
they allow us to help them with the business case |
| 18 |
so we understand what their payback will be or |
| 19 |
their anticipated ROI? All those factors have to |
| 20 |
be taken into consideration. Then you can plug in |
| 21 |
a competitor's name. That's fine. But we are |
| 22 |
agnostic to that. What matters is the client. |
| 00189 |
| 1 |
Q. But part of what matters to a client, it |
| 2 |
sounds like, and correct me if I'm wrong, is the |
| 3 |
functionality or features of the product? |
| 4 |
A. That is selfishly, from a SAP |
| 5 |
perspective, that is what we would typically say |
| 6 |
from a product standpoint. By the end of the day |
| 7 |
most clients, we would like to think they would |
| 8 |
have brand preference toward SAP, but at the end of |
| 9 |
the day, the customer is not looking for a brand to |
| 10 |
buy. They are looking for a solution. The best |
| 11 |
solution that is going to satisfy their business |
| 12 |
needs and solve their problems in the most |
| 13 |
cost-effective way with the greatest return. Take |
| 14 |
our name, any competitor's name. |
| 15 |
Whoever
does the best job positioning |
| 16 |
that business case, that value case for that client |
| 17 |
is going to win the business. Functionality, |
| 18 |
hopefully they have the right functionality to |
| 19 |
deliver on what they need, and if the client has |
| 20 |
done a good job doing that, the due diligence, they |
| 21 |
will know that. But functionality is one of the |
| 22 |
many variables the client should be looking at. |
| 00190 |
| 1 |
Q. I'm sure you have mentioned it, but what |
| 2 |
are some of those variables, if you wouldn't mind |
| 3 |
simply listing for my benefit what are the |
| 4 |
variables you believe the customer should be |
| 5 |
looking at? |
| 6 |
A. Total cost of ownership, scalability, |
| 7 |
multinational, whatever the multinational features |
| 8 |
that they will need. What is the value case for |
| 9 |
delivering it? What is the implementation proposed |
| 10 |
time frame? What business solutions and what |
| 11 |
processes are being resolved or solved through the |
| 12 |
software implementation? What is the potential |
| 13 |
impact to the organization, meaning level of effort |
| 14 |
to actually do this project, and what is the |
| 15 |
cultural impact from a changed management |
| 16 |
standpoint. |
| 17 |
Price enters
into it, also. Is it, does |
| 18 |
it need industry functionality and industry support |
| 19 |
besides just a general solution, and who has the |
| 20 |
best industry expertise? What is the amount of R&D |
| 21 |
and research and development that is dedicated to |
| 22 |
that particular industry or that solution set going |
| 00191 |
| 1 |
forward? What is the product road map? I think |
| 2 |
that's 12 things off the top of my head. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00195 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 17 |
Q. In terms of the subject matter of this |
| 18 |
document, ERP, first maybe it would be helpful to |
| 19 |
start, what is ERP in terms of this document, what |
| 20 |
does it refer to? |
| 21 |
A. Those elements that comprise the ERP |
| 22 |
suite, which depending on which analyst firm you |
| 00196 |
| 1 |
want to refer to, they define ERP a little |
| 2 |
differently. ERP again was, initially the term ERP |
| 3 |
was dubbed by Gartner several years back and now |
| 4 |
they, their definition of this market or this suite |
| 5 |
area is called ERP 2, which includes core ERP plus |
| 6 |
CRL. At the heart of ERP is financials, human |
| 7 |
resources, controlling, treasury, some elements of |
| 8 |
procurement, et cetera. |
| 9 |
Q. So in terms of ERP, it includes both |
| 10 |
human resources and financials? |
| 11 |
A. Correct. |
| 12 |
Q. Now, in terms of that ERP, who is SAP's |
| 13 |
most frequent competitor? |
| 14 |
A. Oracle first. |
| 15 |
Q. Who is SAP's most, second most frequent |
| 16 |
competitor? |
| 17 |
A. PeopleSoft. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00272 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 9 |
Q. Would you look at the HR column, please, |
| 10 |
and tell me, do you consider yourself to be |
| 11 |
competing with each of the entities listed in this |
| 12 |
column in the U.S. market? |
| 13 |
A. No. We would consider ourselves main |
| 14 |
competitor with everybody with the exception of |
| 15 |
ADP. Traditionally we would not compare ourselves |
| 16 |
to an ADP today. |
| 17 |
Q. Why is that? |
| 18 |
A. Because they sell services and we sell |
| 19 |
software. |
| 20 |
Q. Can you ever think of an instance where a |
| 21 |
customer decided to outsource a particular |
| 22 |
functionality such as its HR processes to ADP or |
| 00273 |
| 1 |
Fidelity or another BPO outsourcer rather than buy |
| 2 |
your HR suite? |
| 3 |
A. Based on my knowledge of our win/loss |
| 4 |
process, I have never seen ADP come across as a |
| 5 |
loss, so to answer your question, no. |
| 6 |
Q. Do you know of any circumstances where |
| 7 |
you have competed in the final round against ADP in |
| 8 |
a particular procurement? |
| 9 |
A. Not that I have working knowledge of, no. |
| 10 |
Q. Okay. |
| 11 |
A. Or tracking knowledge of. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00367 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 4 |
Q. I just had a few follow-up questions |
| 5 |
based on Mr. Lindstrom's examination. You had |
| 6 |
talked about efforts, your efforts to track SAP's |
| 7 |
position, vis-a-vis I believe you called it your |
| 8 |
top seven competitors; is that right? |
| 9 |
A. Yes. |
| 10 |
Q. And those were identified at the time, |
| 11 |
one grouping was SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft, |
| 12 |
JD Edwards, Siebel, Manugistics and i2. |
| 13 |
A. That is correct. |
| 14 |
Q. Out of that listing, which of those |
| 15 |
companies offers a human resources application |
| 16 |
product? |
| 17 |
A. Oracle, PeopleSoft, SAP. That's it. |
| 18 |
Q. And JD Edwards? |
| 19 |
A. I'm sorry, JD Edwards. I consider them |
| 20 |
PeopleSoft now. Sorry. |
| 21 |
Q. Same question now with respect to |
| 22 |
financial management software. Which of these |
| 00368 |
| 1 |
companies offers a product in that space? |
| 2 |
A. The same. Everybody except Siebel. |
| 3 |
Q. So those three don't offer an HR solution |
| 4 |
or financial management solution? |
| 5 |
A. No. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00369 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 15 |
Q. Looking at finance, Sage, is Sage a |
| 16 |
software vendor that SAP competes with in small, |
| 17 |
medium businesses, as we have defined it, under |
| 18 |
$200 million? |
| 19 |
A. Yes, but I think we have seen, if I |
| 20 |
recall, I think we have seen them up in the lower |
| 21 |
end of the mid-market, above $200 million. |
| 22 |
Q. So where is kind of the top end in which |
| 00370 |
| 1 |
you encountered Sage? |
| 2 |
A. Below $500 million. |
| 3 |
Q. Below $500 million. Can you think of any |
| 4 |
instance in which you competed for Sage or perhaps |
| 5 |
in a best subsidiary software in accounts above |
| 6 |
$500 million dollars? |
| 7 |
A. Not to the best of my recollection, but |
| 8 |
if I do recall though, if I remember right, Sage is |
| 9 |
a company that not only has a best, but they have |
| 10 |
grown through acquisition. We view them as a |
| 11 |
viable competitor that is growing up market. |
| 12 |
Q. When you say up market, where are they |
| 13 |
growing up market? |
| 14 |
A. In other words, instead of just competing |
| 15 |
in the less than $200 million space, I think we |
| 16 |
will in the future see them more aggressively come |
| 17 |
and try to serve the needs of the $200- to $500 |
| 18 |
million dollar market and attempt to grow even |
| 19 |
north of that. Above $500 million. It's part of |
| 20 |
this, part of our intelligence tells us that they |
| 21 |
are continuing to improve their product, they have |
| 22 |
an acquisition feeling about them and they want to |
| 00371 |
| 1 |
grow and become a much more viable competitor in |
| 2 |
the financials area. |
| 3 |
Q. Do you anticipate their competing in |
| 4 |
accounts above a billion dollars? |
| 5 |
A. Not any time soon. |
| 6 |
Q. And I believe you testified under |
| 7 |
Mr. Lindstrom's examination that Intuit is a |
| 8 |
commercial off-the-shelf solution; is that right? |
| 9 |
A. Yes. Intuit? |
| 10 |
Q. Yes. |
| 11 |
A. That is correct. |
| 12 |
Q. Turning to HR, Kronos, does Kronos offer |
| 13 |
a full HR functionality to your knowledge? |
| 14 |
A. No. |
| 15 |
Q. Again, there's another mention of Sage |
| 16 |
here. Would the same sorts of market metrics that |
| 17 |
we mentioned with respect to their financial |
| 18 |
business apply to their HR business? |
| 19 |
A. Yes. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 00372 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| 18 |
Q. We talked a little bit earlier about the |
| 19 |
infrastructure, the technology stack and enterprise |
| 20 |
applications and their relationship to one another. |
| 21 |
Does SAP sell databases? |
| 22 |
A. No. I mean, we have a reseller's |
| 00373 |
| 1 |
agreement with Oracle, so we can actually sell the |
| 2 |
Oracle product, but we don't have our own. We used |
| 3 |
to have our own database. We divested of that |
| 4 |
either in late 2002 or early 2003. So we do not |
| 5 |
today have our own software. |
| 6 |
Q. How often do you resell Oracle's |
| 7 |
database? |
| 8 |
A. Quite often. We are their number 1 |
| 9 |
distributor of their database. |
| 10 |
Q. Do you have an understanding of what, we |
| 11 |
identified 2800 to 3,000 buying entities in the |
| 12 |
United States that SAP America has a relationship |
| 13 |
with. How many of those buying entities are using |
| 14 |
an Oracle database under your products,nd your |
| 15 |
application? |
| 16 |
A. I wouldn't exactly know the correct |
| 17 |
percentage, but I would say the vast majority, over |
| 18 |
a majority, over 50 percent. |
| 19 |
Q. Over 60 percent? |
| 20 |
A. Probably closer to 60. We characterize |
| 21 |
Oracle as a well established, phenomenally great |
| 22 |
database company, and we happen to be their number |
| 00374 |
| 1 |
1 reseller and partner. |
| 2 |
Q. How long have you had this arrangement |
| 3 |
with Oracle to resell its database? |
| 4 |
A. For many years. I don't know the |
| 5 |
inception date of it, but for a long time. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|