Government Exhibit P3173 [Non-designated testimony redacted]
| 00007 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 22 | Q. All right, sir. And could you tell us |
| 00008 | | 1 | what, if anything, you did to prepare for today's | | 2 | deposition? | | 3 | A. Met with counsel. | | 4 | Q. And that would be Mr. Wall? | | 5 | A. Yes. | | 6 | Q. And when did you meet with Mr. Wall to | | 7 | prepare for today's deposition? | | 8 | A. Yesterday. | | 9 | Q. And how long was that meeting? | | 10 | A. Five, six, five hours. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00012 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6 | Q. All right, sir. You have a document in | | 7 | front of you which, for identification purposes, | | 8 | has marked been marked as Exhibit 550. It's a | | 9 | multipage exhibit. It has numbered in the bottom | | 10 | right-hand corner through page 48. The first page | | 11 | has printed "Board Presentation on M & A | | 12 | Opportunities," dated April 14th, 2003. | | 13 | And I'll ask you if you have seen that | | 14 | before? | | 15 | A. I certainly may have. I don't recall | | 16 | seeing the document. | | 17 | Q. Do you recall Mrs. Catz giving a | | 18 | presentation regarding potential M and A | | 19 | opportunities in this time frame to the board? | | 20 | A. Yes, I do, but I can't imagine it had | | 21 | this many pages. I have never seen a presentation | | 22 | of this length given to the board. |
| 00013 | | 1 | Q. Well, let me ask you to turn to the third | | 2 | page of the document where there is a heading | | 3 | there "Enterprise Software Competitive Profile." | | 4 | And then there are a list of technology and apps | | 5 | on the left-hand side and across the top various | | 6 | company names. | | 7 | Do you see that? | | 8 | A. Yes, I do. | | 9 | Q. Have you seen this document before? | | 10 | A. Again, I may have; I don't recall it | | 11 | specifically. | | 12 | Q. All right, sir. Now, on the left-hand | | 13 | side there are -- like I said, there is a box that | | 14 | says "Technology" next to a number of different | | 15 | technological descriptors -- | | 16 | A. Yes. | | 17 | Q. -- starting with "Database" ending with | | 18 | "Content Management." | | 19 | Do you see that? | | 20 | A. Yes. | | 21 | Q. Would you read through those to yourself | | 22 | first and tell me when you are finished, and I |
| 00014 | | 1 | have a couple of questions about that information. | | 2 | A. (Witness reviewing document.) | | 3 | Okay. | | 4 | Q. Are you familiar with the different types | | 5 | of technologies listed there? | | 6 | A. Yes, I am. | | 7 | Q. And, first of all, database, the first | | 8 | one, what do you understand that to mean? | | 9 | A. General purpose software to manage the | | 10 | storage and retrieval of information. | | 11 | Q. All right, sir. And next to that, under | | 12 | that, is the heading "App Servers." | | 13 | A. Application server, yes. | | 14 | Q. And what does that mean to you? | | 15 | A. It is a development tool environment | | 16 | whereby you create and run your applications. Let | | 17 | me see if I can be a little more clear. In our | | 18 | case it would be the Java language. You program | | 19 | in the Java language and then we have -- so there | | 20 | is a development environment and then there is the | | 21 | execution or run-time environment for running your | | 22 | applications, executing the Java programs. |
| 00015 | | 1 | So it is the program logic. If the | | 2 | database is the data-access portion of your | | 3 | application, storing and retrieving information, | | 4 | the program logic would be executed in the | | 5 | application server. For example, the program that | | 6 | says move that $50 out of the database -- out of | | 7 | your savings account and into your checking | | 8 | account. So those instructions, that portion of | | 9 | your application, would be resident and run in the | | 10 | application server. | | 11 | Q. And then the term "Business | | 12 | Intelligence," what, if any, meaning does that | | 13 | have to you? | | 14 | A. That, again, sits on top -- these all sit | | 15 | on top of the database. Business intelligence | | 16 | might look at your sales over the -- you know, the | | 17 | last, you know, the first ten weeks of this | | 18 | quarter and compare it to the first ten weeks of | | 19 | the previous quarter and draw a graph for you. | | 20 | Q. All right, sir. And "Development Tools," | | 21 | what are they? | | 22 | A. Those would be the development |
| 00016 | | 1 | environment. Tools to help the programmer write | | 2 | the Java code, very much -- you have a | | 3 | word-processing editor you type in your documents | | 4 | too. There is a similar editor for programmers | | 5 | that allow them to type their computer | | 6 | instructions into, and it will -- just like if you | | 7 | have a spell checker, it would have the syntax | | 8 | checkers to make sure that you are putting the | | 9 | parentheses in the right place, as much as it | | 10 | could. It also let's you test your program. So | | 11 | it's the environment in which you write the | | 12 | programs and test the programs. | | 13 | Q. And "Application Integration," what does | | 14 | that represent? | | 15 | A. That's a piece of software, often has two | | 16 | parts. One part is the part that allows one | | 17 | program -- one computer program to talk to another | | 18 | computer program. Let's say you are trying to | | 19 | integrate SAP to Oracle, you know. Let's say it's | | 20 | SAP manufacturing and Oracle financials. So you | | 21 | have to have some way for the SAP application to | | 22 | talk to the Oracle application. If you will, a |
| 00017 | | 1 | cellphone. Just like if I need to contact you, | | 2 | I can call you up on my cell phone. So there is a | | 3 | software that makes the connection. | | 4 | And the most popular form of that now is | | 5 | called Web Services, allows me to actually just -- | | 6 | one program to get in contact with another | | 7 | program, but there still could be a problem though | | 8 | because you might speak Hungarian and I speak | | 9 | French. So there is the other part of the | | 10 | integration software which has to translate how I | | 11 | say "Let's have lunch on Thursday" in a way that | | 12 | you can understand "Let's have lunch on Thursday." | | 13 | And I think the met for is accurate. | | 14 | So how Siebel stores customer records and | | 15 | how SAP stores customer records and how we store | | 16 | customer records is all different, so you need | | 17 | something to translate these formats, these | | 18 | customer record formats, into a common format so | | 19 | the applications can understand one another. So | | 20 | there is two pieces: The communication piece and | | 21 | the translation piece. | | 22 | Q. All right, sir. And the term "systems |
| 00018 | | 1 | management," do you have any understanding of | | 2 | that? | | 3 | A. Sure. As these applications are running | | 4 | on a daily basis, there are people in the data | | 5 | center that have to watch the computers. They | | 6 | make sure you don't run out of storage space, and | | 7 | there are tools, consoles, whereby they can | | 8 | monitor and manage the ongoing computer operation. | | 9 | So let's say a disc drive should break | | 10 | and they can -- they should know about that. | | 11 | Sometimes that failure could be catastrophic, most | | 12 | of the times it's not. The systems are relatively | | 13 | fault-tolerant, but it does that you have to pull | | 14 | that disc drive out and plug another one in at | | 15 | some point in time. | | 16 | So it's a set of tools to both monitor | | 17 | and manage your software. Let's say your | | 18 | Oracle -- or you're adding some antiviral software | | 19 | to your e-mail systems, a new virus has just shown | | 20 | up, and you need to upgrade your e-mail software | | 21 | to protect yourself against this virus which is | | 22 | spreading. So there needs to be management tools |
| 00019 | | 1 | which allow you what's called a patch, to make | | 2 | small changes to the software you are running, and | | 3 | this is a management console that helps the people | | 4 | in the data center apply that fix or that patch to | | 5 | your software. So that's all part of system | | 6 | monitoring and management. | | 7 | Q. All right, sir. And "Storage | | 8 | Management," what, if any, meaning does that have | | 9 | to you? | | 10 | A. Storage management is a subset of systems | | 11 | management -- well, storage management can have a | | 12 | couple meanings, but it's that subset of systems | | 13 | management that has to do with disc storage space, | | 14 | running out of space, failures, backing up the | | 15 | system. So periodically -- you've got a large | | 16 | system, you want to make sure you make a copy of | | 17 | all the data on that system in case of | | 18 | catastrophic failure, so backing it up, adding | | 19 | more storage as you need it. If there is a | | 20 | performance problem, one disc drive is being | | 21 | exercised excessively, you want to split that data | | 22 | across two separate disc drivers to balance |
| 00020 | | 1 | performance. | | 2 | Q. And "Network and Service Management," | | 3 | what meaning does that have to you, if any? | | 4 | A. That would be the other end, again, of | | 5 | this whole thing called systems management. That | | 6 | would be looking at the network. In the case of | | 7 | Oracle, we have a big data center in Texas, but we | | 8 | have users of our system all over the world. So | | 9 | attached to our Texas data center is this vast | | 10 | private network that we've got, and sometimes we | | 11 | can have -- if we want to know if there are | | 12 | problems, performance problems, on the network, if | | 13 | there has a failure of a device on the network. | | 14 | So, again, it's a set of tools that let us look at | | 15 | the state of the network, how its performing, if | | 16 | there is any system failure, that allow us to, | | 17 | again, monitor and fix faults in the network. | | 18 | Q. All right, sir. And "Content | | 19 | Management"? | | 20 | A. Content management is an interesting, | | 21 | relatively new term. It usually means -- it means | | 22 | different things to different people. I guess the |
| 00021 | | 1 | easiest way to describe content management is | | 2 | looking at a lot of things that are on a typical | | 3 | website. If you go to our website, there are a | | 4 | lot of text files, there are a lot of references. | | 5 | There might be an interview with a customer saying | | 6 | how wonderful the Oracle products are. We | | 7 | certainly wouldn't put up an interview if they | | 8 | didn't say they liked our products. So keeping | | 9 | track of customer references, customer interviews, | | 10 | analyst reports, all sorts of things that are | | 11 | not -- that are not traditional database data, | | 12 | that aren't structured data, like these reports, | | 13 | videos, interviews, images, all of those things | | 14 | fall into this rough area called "content | | 15 | management." | | 16 | Q. All right. So now- | | 17 | A. By the way, if I can just say, content | | 18 | management, some content management runs on top of | | 19 | a database and some content management runs on top | | 20 | of file systems. | | 21 | Q. I'm sorry, the last part? | | 22 | A. Some content management runs inside of |
| 00022 | | 1 | the database. Most of the stuff sits on top of | | 2 | the database, but you can run it on a file system, | | 3 | if you like. | | 4 | Q. All right, sir. | | 5 | A. Okay. | | 6 | Q. Now, are you familiar with the term | | 7 | "technology stack"? | | 8 | A. Yes. | | 9 | Q. And what does that term mean to you? | | 10 | A. It's a collection of these -- it's a set | | 11 | of these things listed as technology, with the | | 12 | foundation, if you will, you can start at hardware | | 13 | if you want to, say the computer and the disc | | 14 | drives and then you put the operating system | | 15 | software on that, is the most primitive, lowest | | 16 | level piece of software; the database software on | | 17 | top of that, the application server software on | | 18 | top of that. And you can include business | | 19 | intelligence, if you want, and all of those other | | 20 | things as part of your technology stack. | | 21 | Q. You use the term the "operating system | | 22 | software." Is that listed somewhere in the |
| 00023 | | 1 | documents you have got in front of you? | | 2 | A. No, it's not, but it's certainly part of | | 3 | the technology stack. | | 4 | Q. And the operating system software is the | | 5 | software that actually runs the hardware? | | 6 | A. That's correct. | | 7 | Q. And gives the hardware the instructions | | 8 | on what to do in order to manage and manipulate | | 9 | the data? | | 10 | A. Correct. | | 11 | Q. Now, does Oracle supply that type of | | 12 | software? | | 13 | A. No, we don't. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 22 | Q. Well, let's go back this way. Why don't |
| 00024 | | 1 | you describe to me again what's in the technology | | 2 | stack as you understand the term. | | 3 | A. Okay. If I can separate the two things. | | 4 | The technology stack would be again, by its very | | 5 | nature, technical. The users of the technology | | 6 | stack are professional programmers. So -- and | | 7 | they build applications. So the two major areas, | | 8 | two major software areas, are technology where the | | 9 | consumers are professional programmers and | | 10 | engineers, and application programs where the | | 11 | users are everybody, you know. | | 12 | So the technology stack, the | | 13 | foundation -- starting with -- ignoring the | | 14 | hardware and just going straight to the software, | | 15 | the lowest level portion of the technology stack | | 16 | is the operating system. On top of the operating | | 17 | system would be data management, which is | | 18 | separated into two pieces, a file system and a | | 19 | database system, and both of those manage | | 20 | information. One is much more powerful than the | | 21 | other. One is much more easier to use than the | | 22 | others. |
| 00025 | | 1 | So on your PC, you just store a word file | | 2 | and it's a file. It doesn't go into a database, | | 3 | but you can't do content search. You can't | | 4 | search -- there are a lot of limitations. It gets | | 5 | lost periodically, which some people find | | 6 | annoying. The database tries not to do that, so | | 7 | the simplicity versus complexity, more features, | | 8 | more complexity. | | 9 | So operating system, data management made | | 10 | up of database and file management. On top of | | 11 | that, would be, if you will, your application | | 12 | development software or application server, if you | | 13 | prefer, and those are the three major pieces and | | 14 | all of the other pieces here I would say are | | 15 | somewhat important but peripheral to those three | | 16 | major layers. | | 17 | Q. All right, sir. In the documents you | | 18 | have in front of you, the areas that would fit | | 19 | within what you have just described would be the | | 20 | application servers? | | 21 | A. Absolutely. | | 22 | Q. And then the systems management? |
| 00026 | | 1 | A. Well, again, the three critical pieces, | | 2 | if you are drawing a picture, operating system, | | 3 | database and application server. Again, those to | | 4 | me are the large pieces. Then there are | | 5 | peripheral pieces. There are the system | | 6 | management tools. And these are used by people | | 7 | inside of the data center to kind of keep the | | 8 | computer running every day. They do maintenance. | | 9 | We have handed over this pile of stuff to them and | | 10 | they have got to keep it running. So they have | | 11 | basically gauges they watch to monitor what is | | 12 | going on, and if something breaks they have tools | | 13 | to fix what breaks. Those are the monitoring and | | 14 | management tools and that includes for the | | 15 | network, for the storage, for all the software, | | 16 | for the applications, for all of it. So there is | | 17 | a whole cluster of these management tools. | | 18 | Content to management is really part of | | 19 | the data management services. So if I was drawing | | 20 | this picture, our operating system, then the | | 21 | database -- then the data management services, | | 22 | applications server, and then these -- other side, |
| 00027 | | 1 | kind of the management tools to keep it running | | 2 | and then the development tools. The programmers | | 3 | have their own set of tools. There are two | | 4 | different jobs here in building these. They are | | 5 | people who build the applications and then the | | 6 | people who run them every day. | | 7 | Q. All right, sir. | | 8 | A. So the development environment for the | | 9 | builders and the monitoring and management tools | | 10 | for the runners, if will you. | | 11 | Q. On the document that you have in front of | | 12 | you, Exhibit 550, on the column next to technology | | 13 | what on there would be the equivalent of the | | 14 | application server? I guess that's up at the top | | 15 | where it says "App Server." | | 16 | A. App server, yeah. | | 17 | Q. And the data management system would be | | 18 | equivalent to what other items listed here? | | 19 | A. Database and content management. And | | 20 | what's not listed there is file management. | | 21 | Q. Okay. And then the other piece that you | | 22 | mentioned -- data management, application server |
| 00028 | | 1 | and the operating system. | | 2 | A. And the operating system is not listed | | 3 | here at all. Because, again, this is -- again, | | 4 | this is a competitive profile and we just don't | | 5 | compete in the operating system. So this was not | | 6 | intended to be a complete list of the technology | | 7 | stack, just the areas in which we compete. | | 8 | Q. In the technology, would you include | | 9 | software applications as part of the technology | | 10 | stack? | | 11 | A. No. | | 12 | Q. And why is that? | | 13 | A. Because the users are different. So in | | 14 | one case in the technology stack the users are | | 15 | data processing professionals. In the case of | | 16 | applications, the users are everybody. Microsoft | | 17 | Word is an example of a desktop application. Our | | 18 | accounting systems are designed for professional | | 19 | accountants, not for -- and employees of companies | | 20 | to fill out expense reports on the internet. So | | 21 | these are not aimed -- you do not have to be an IT | | 22 | professional to use applications. You have to be |
| 00029 | | 1 | an IT professional to use parts of the technology | | 2 | stack. | | 3 | Q. All right, sir. Now, in the portions -- | | 4 | the parts of the technology stack that you | | 5 | described, in which ones of those does Oracle | | 6 | offer a product? | | 7 | A. I think in everything listed here. So | | 8 | this is our list. So we offer a product in | | 9 | database, application server, business | | 10 | intelligence, development tools, application | | 11 | integration, systems management. I'm not sure I | | 12 | would separate out storage management as separate | | 13 | from systems management, but, you know, network | | 14 | services management, content management. So those | | 15 | are all areas in which we compete. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00031 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 17 | Q. All right. Now, is there in the stack as | | 18 | described it, is there a layer there that you | | 19 | would equate with the term middleware? | | 20 | A. Yeah, absolutely. | | 21 | Q. And what layer is that? | | 22 | A. The application server certainly, |
| 00032 | | 1 | business intelligence, parts of content | | 2 | management, application integration are all | | 3 | middleware. | | 4 | Q. And you offer those products that you | | 5 | have described as part of middleware? | | 6 | A. Yes. | | 7 | Q. Who else out there offers products that | | 8 | would fit in the category of middleware? | | 9 | A. IBM, Microsoft, Sun, BEA, SAP. | | 10 | Q. What middleware products does SAP offer? | | 11 | A. They have a product called Net-Weaver. | | 12 | And, again, since we last talked, SAP has | | 13 | aggressively moved into the middleware business. | | 14 | They used to just be in the middleware business | | 15 | for SAP applications, but they have gotten very, | | 16 | very aggressive with their Net-Weaver product and | | 17 | they are now selling it. They have aggressively | | 18 | entered the market in competition with IBM and | | 19 | Oracle and Microsoft and a lot of others. | | 20 | Q. And what do you understand their | | 21 | Net-Weaver product to consist of? | | 22 | A. It's got a Java-execution environment. |
| 00033 | | 1 | It has an ABAP 4. SAP is written in a language -- | | 2 | mainly in a language called ABAP 4. | | | | | | | | 5 | And it's got a Java environment in it. | | 6 | It has business intelligence tools. It has | | 7 | integration components. | | 8 | BY MR. SCOTT: | | 9 | Q. All right, sir. And what function -- | | 10 | what does the SAP product do, as you understand | | 11 | it? | | 12 | A. Exactly what all of the middleware | | 13 | software does. It's an environment for running | | 14 | applications. In other words, they have their own | | 15 | set of development tools, and you develop either | | 16 | an ABAP 4 or Java. You write the instructions and | | 17 | then you put the instructions into the application | | 18 | server and the application server executes the | | 19 | program, runs the SAP program. | | 20 | Q. All right, sir. Is the Net-Weaver | | 21 | product, does that operate software applications | | 22 | other than SAP? |
| 00034 | | 1 | A. Sure. | | 2 | Q. And is there any that you know of that it | | 3 | does not operate? | | 4 | A. So it runs languages. So the best way to | | 5 | describe it is, if you wrote a program in Java, | | 6 | the Net-Weaver environment would run it. If you | | 7 | wrote -- now, ABAP really is a proprietary | | 8 | programming language to SAP. Java is not. Java | | 9 | is an industry standard language. So it supports | | 10 | both SAP's old proprietary language, ABAP, and | | 11 | where SAP is going, which is Java. | | 12 | Q. Now, your middleware products, what | | 13 | language are they written in? | | 14 | A. Very similar to SAP. Well, you shouldn't | | 15 | say "written in." What languages do they run. | | 16 | It's really a run-time environment. | | 17 | So they run our old fashion forms | | 18 | environment. We move to Java a long time ago, so | | 19 | a lot -- so we were very early on on the Java | | 20 | train. We were the first application company | | 21 | really to go to the internet and we were the first | | 22 | application company to adopt Java as its |
| 00035 | | 1 | programming environment. So we support our older | | 2 | environment forms, as well as our new environment, | | 3 | Java. | | 4 | Q. All right, sir. And we may have hit on | | 5 | this, and if I have I apologize. I just want to | | 6 | be clear. Does your middleware product operate | | 7 | applications other an Oracle? | | 8 | A. Of course. | | 9 | Q. Now, are you aware of there being some | | 10 | agreement reached recently between SAP and | | 11 | Microsoft pertaining to the Net-Weaver product? | | 12 | A. Yeah, I think so. | | 13 | Q. And what, if any, understanding do you | | 14 | have of that agreement? | | 15 | A. I believe -- well, Microsoft has its own | | 16 | project language called C-Sharp, and Microsoft has | | 17 | been moving to improve its coexistence with its | | 18 | competitors, to improve its relationships with its | | 19 | competitors. And Oracle, SAP and even Sun have | | 20 | signed agreements or announced agreements with | | 21 | Microsoft supporting coexistence with Microsoft's | | 22 | technology platform which is called .Net. |
| 00036 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7 | Q. All right, sir. You indicated that | | 8 | Microsoft and Oracle had reached some agreement? | | 9 | A. Right. | | 10 | Q. And could you describe that agreement, | | 11 | please? | | 12 | A. Again, it's pretty much a coexistence | | 13 | with Microsoft's .Net, specifically Microsoft's | | 14 | development tools. Microsoft is very, very strong | | 15 | in providing an environment called Visual Studio | | 16 | for programmers. And sometimes programmers want | | 17 | to program in Java, and if they want to program in | | 18 | Java, that's great. We happen to have a Java | | 19 | development environment ourself and a lot of other | | 20 | people have a Java development environments, but | | 21 | Microsoft has its own development environment for | | 22 | C-Sharp and it's called Visual Studio. And we |
| 00037 | | 1 | want to make sure if programmers would like to | | 2 | program in Visual Studio they can still use the | | 3 | Oracle database. So you can use Microsoft tools | | 4 | to write applications and run those applications | | 5 | on top of our database. So, again, it's to make | | 6 | sure there is graceful coexistence between these | | 7 | companies even though we compete. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 14 | Q. What is your understanding of the deal | | 15 | Sun has with Microsoft? | | | | | | | | 18 | THE WITNESS: Yeah. Again, I think | | 19 | besides the fact that they settled their lawsuits, | | 20 | again, it's all around coexistence. It's all | | 21 | designed -- the general umbrella for all of this | | 22 | is companies have different vendors' products |
| 00038 | | 1 | inside the company and Microsoft would like to | | 2 | make sure that their products work well with Sun's | | 3 | products and their products work well with | | 4 | Oracle's product and their products work well with | | 5 | SAP products. | | | | | 7 | Q. Does .Net work well with Oracle's ERP | | 8 | application? | | 9 | A. Well, it depends what you mean by "work | | 10 | with." Oracle's ERP applications are either | | 11 | written in forms or written in Java. They are not | | 12 | written in .Net. It doesn't mean you can't write | | 13 | a program in .Net and integrate it too and have it | | 14 | talk to Oracle applications. So it's back -- you | | 15 | go through our integration layer to go ahead and | | 16 | do that, but, yes, we certainly can coexist, and | | 17 | if you have a Web Services program over here | | 18 | written in .Net and our programs are web-service | | 19 | enabled, and they are, and they are written in | | 20 | Java, those programs can communicate and coexist. | | | | | | |
| 00040 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6 | Q. Microsoft -- what portions of the | | 7 | technology stack does Microsoft supply? | | 8 | A. Microsoft and IBM are the two companies I | | 9 | can think of that pretty much supply the entire | | 10 | stack. So they have the operating -- everything | | 11 | you have in here, plus the operating system, you | | 12 | name it, they have got it. Those two companies | | 13 | are the only companies I can think of that | | 14 | participate in every area of the stack. | | 15 | Q. And, again, I'm not trying to misstate | | 16 | you, so if I have got the terminology wrong please | | 17 | tell me. I understand, for example, with your | | 18 | product, there is a middleware product upon which | | 19 | your applications are placed and then they work | | 20 | directly off that middleware product; correct? | | 21 | A. Correct. | | 22 | Q. Would your product be able to be put |
| 00041 | | 1 | directly on top of the Microsoft middleware | | 2 | product and be able to operate? | | 3 | A. Could our applications? | | 4 | Q. Yes, sir. | | 5 | A. Okay. No. Because our applications are | | 6 | written in Java and the Microsoft middleware | | 7 | doesn't understand Java. In fact, that was the | | 8 | big argument between Sun and Microsoft. So | | 9 | Microsoft doesn't support Java. You come and | | 10 | speak Hungarian to Microsoft, they have no idea | | 11 | what you are saying. So no, you couldn't rehost | | 12 | or you couldn't recompile or you couldn't take our | | 13 | applications and have it run natively on top of | | 14 | the Microsoft middleware because they wouldn't | | 15 | understand the language we were speaking, because | | 16 | we're speaking Java and they speak C-Sharp. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00050 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9 | Q. Now, the on-demand service that you are | | 10 | offering you used to call outsourcing? | | 11 | A. We used to call it outsourcing. | | 12 | Q. So you are actually running somebody's | | 13 | software for them on your machines? | | 14 | A. It's usually our software, but it's not | | 15 | exclusively our software. So as distinguished | | 16 | between IBM that does outsourcing and Oracle that | | 17 | does outsourcing, we try to -- we specialize in | | 18 | running our own software. IBM really will run | | 19 | anyone's software. We run our own software | | 20 | primarily, but we will run third-party | | 21 | applications and we will run custom applications | | 22 | as well as part of a larger suite. |
| 00051 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 13 | Q. In your outsourcing service does the | | 14 | customer buy the software? | | 15 | A. Yes, they do. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00054 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 13 | Q. All right, sir. Now, you indicated | | 14 | earlier, and, again, please correct me if I have | | 15 | gotten this wrong, that in addition to Microsoft, | | 16 | IBM has what you would call all the components of | | 17 | the stack? | | 18 | A. Yes. | | 19 | Q. And which of the components offered by | | 20 | IBM does your application software work with? | | 21 | A. Which do we work with? | | 22 | Q. Yes, sir. |
| 00055 | | 1 | A. Well, again, we coexist. Now, IBM's | | 2 | application server supports Java. Most of the | | 3 | application servers support Java. In fact, the | | 4 | only application server that I know of that | | 5 | doesn't support Java is Microsoft's. | | 6 | So we can -- an application written on | | 7 | top of Web Sphere, which is the name of IBM's | | 8 | application server, an application written on top | | 9 | of Web Sphere is likely written in Java, and it | | 10 | can communicate through Web Services with an | | 11 | Oracle application. You can actually take an | | 12 | application written on top of the Oracle | | 13 | application server and run it on top of the IBM | | 14 | application server. You can't do that with | | 15 | Microsoft. We talked about that before, but you | | 16 | can actually lift one of our Java programs off our | | 17 | application server and run it on -- without | | 18 | modification run it on the IBM application server. | | 19 | Q. Do your applications, if you put them on | | 20 | the middleware that's offered by IBM, would they | | 21 | operate? | | 22 | A. The Java -- so if our applications were |
| 00056 | | 1 | written 100 percent in Java, which they will be at | | 2 | some point in time in the future, the answer would | | 3 | be yes. But since they are not, since our | | 4 | applications are written in a combination of Java | | 5 | and an older language called Forms, the Java | | 6 | portion would, but the Forms position would not. | | 7 | Q. Now, you indicated that at some point in | | 8 | time that your software would be written entirely | | 9 | in Java? | | 10 | A. We think so, yes. | | 11 | Q. And when do you project that to occur? | | 12 | A. Oh, every last bit, it would be years. | | 13 | Q. And what percentage of your application | | 14 | software is currently written in Java? | | 15 | A. I'm guessing 30 percent. | | 16 | Q. Now, when did you begin first producing | | 17 | it using Java? And, again, talking about your | | 18 | application software. | | 19 | A. Just starting five years ago. | | 20 | Q. And why did you begin using Java to write | | 21 | your application software? | | 22 | A. We are a great believer in industry |
| 00057 | | 1 | standards and interoperability, so our database | | 2 | was based on a standard language called SQL, and | | 3 | we will invent proprietary languages only in so | | 4 | far as that there is no standard out there that we | | 5 | can adopt. So we much prefer a adopting standard | | 6 | languages. | | 7 | Actually, to promote a proprietary | | 8 | language you really have to be the gorilla in the | | 9 | marketplace, and the only companies that have | | 10 | promoted these proprietary languages successfully | | 11 | was IBM when they were number one and Microsoft | | 12 | now because they are number one. | | 13 | Q. Now, the Microsoft -- the Microsoft stack | | 14 | you said doesn't operate on Java. | | 15 | A. Correct. | | 16 | Q. As your software becomes more and more | | 17 | Java enriched -- | | 18 | A. Yes. | | 19 | Q. -- for want of a better term, will that | | 20 | make it easier for it to operate on the IBM stack? | | 21 | A. Sure. On the IBM middleware. On the IBM | | 22 | Web Sphere. Let me clarify that. |
| 00058 | | 1 | Q. Sure. | | 2 | A. On the IBM middleware, yes. | | 3 | Q. Now, you have used the term "IBM Web | | 4 | Sphere a couple of times. | | 5 | A. Yes. | | 6 | Q. What is that? | | 7 | A. That's IBM's brand name for their | | 8 | middleware. | | 9 | Q. And that's a Java-based product? | | 10 | A. Yes, it is. It's Java plus many other | | 11 | things. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 20 | Q. All right, Mr. Ellison. Let me ask you, | | 21 | if you would, to turn back to Exhibit 550 to your | | 22 | deposition. |
| 00059 | | 1 | A. Yeah. | | 2 | Q. Still on page 3. | | 3 | A. Yes. | | 4 | Q. And just so that -- because we've been | | 5 | over a number of topics, so the record is clear on | | 6 | this, could you describe what database product | | 7 | Oracle currently has available? | | 8 | A. The Oracle database, it's actually called | | 9 | Oracle, same as the name of our company. We have | | 10 | a couple -- three versions actually: Enterprise | | 11 | Edition, Standard Edition and Standard Edition 1. | | 12 | Q. All right, sir. And the difference | | 13 | between those products is what? | | 14 | A. You have the most features in Enterprise | | 15 | Edition, and you can run the most number of | | 16 | processors with Enterprise Edition. So it's | | 17 | scaled. It's just designed for a larger number of | | 18 | users, larger databases. | | 19 | Q. And IBM's database products, what are | | 20 | they? | | 21 | A. DB2. IBM has some older ones called IMS, | | 22 | but they are no longer relevant. |
| 00060 | | 1 | Q. And the IBM DB2 product is a product that | | 2 | your Oracle database product competes with? | | 3 | A. Yes. | | 4 | Q. And Microsoft, what database products do | | 5 | they offer? | | 6 | A. It's a product called Sequel Server. | | 7 | Q. All right, sir. And that is roughly | | 8 | equivalent to your Oracle database product? | | 9 | A. Yeah, we don't think it's as good, but... | | 10 | Q. That's why I said "roughly." | | 11 | A. Roughly. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00061 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 16 | Q. Does Oracle's applications product work | | 17 | with the IBM DB2 database? | | 18 | A. No, it does not. | | 19 | Q. Does Oracle's applications products work | | 20 | with the Microsoft Sequel Server database product? | | 21 | A. No, it does not. | | 22 | Q. All right, sir. Now, in the application |
| 00062 | | 1 | server, what products does Oracle offer? | | 2 | A. We have a product called the Oracle | | 3 | Application Server. | | 4 | Q. And that product is essentially what? | | 5 | A. It is integration software. Our Java | | 6 | run-time environment, business intelligence | | 7 | software. Again, I'm not sure what I have already | | 8 | mentioned. Forms, Java, business intelligence, | | 9 | integration, those things. | | 10 | Q. And when you say integration software in | | 11 | the context of your application server product, | | 12 | what do you mean? | | 13 | A. It actually has connectors to Siebel | | 14 | systems and SAP Systems and PeopleSoft systems and | | 15 | Lawson systems and Cerner systems and all sorts of | | 16 | other systems for connecting up these systems. | | 17 | Q. To your database? | | 18 | A. No. To connect a Siebel system, Siebel | | 19 | application system, to an Oracle application | | 20 | system. To connect a Lawson system to an Oracle | | 21 | system. It's that software we talked about before | | 22 | where there is two portions; one allows them -- I |
| 00063 | | 1 | used the cell phone metaphor; one piece allows | | 2 | program A to connect to program B so you can talk, | | 3 | and then there is the translation piece. | | 4 | Q. All right, sir. And the IBM App Server | | 5 | product, do you know what that is? | | 6 | A. The IBM application server product? | | 7 | Q. Yes, sir. | | 8 | A. Called Web Sphere. | | 9 | Q. And does the Oracle applications, the ERP | | 10 | software, work with that product? | | 11 | A. No. I think you asked me, but it would | | 12 | runs the -- it would run the Java portion of our | | 13 | applications but not the portion in written Forms. | | 14 | So the intent is to get our applications to | | 15 | 100 percent to Java, and I said that will take | | 16 | years. At that point it should run on the IBM | | 17 | application server. | | 18 | Q. And the Microsoft, their application | | 19 | server product is called what? | | 20 | A. Just Windows. | | 21 | Q. And Oracle's ERP software does not run | | 22 | with that application software? |
| 00064 | | 1 | A. They don't support the Java language. So | | 2 | it couldn't execute. It couldn't run -- we can | | 3 | coexist, coexisting versus running on, but, no, we | | 4 | will never be able to run on the Microsoft | | 5 | application server because Microsoft has no | | 6 | intention of supporting the Java language. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00065 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7 | Q. And IBM, does it have an application | | 8 | integration product that is over and above what is | | 9 | offered in its application server? | | 10 | A. "Web Sphere" is one of these terms like | | 11 | "On Demand." It's a big umbrella term and IBM | | 12 | throws almost everything with the kitchen sink | | 13 | underneath it. So when IBM says our Web Sphere | | 14 | revenue was so many dollars, I believe it includes | | 15 | all their integration software. But it really -- | | 16 | Web Sphere is many different products, including, | | 17 | so Web Sphere is not exactly a product. It's, | | 18 | again, this umbrella term under which lots of | | 19 | products are listed. And it includes -- and all | | 20 | their integration software falls under the | | 21 | category of Web Sphere products. | | 22 | Q. Does IBM offer an integration software |
| 00066 | | 1 | product that is independent of its application | | 2 | servers? | | 3 | A. They offer integration software | | 4 | independent of their Java server. Again, what IBM | | 5 | calls an application server, it's like a menu. | | 6 | It's just like you can put this list of products | | 7 | on a menu and we'll call this menu Web Sphere, and | | 8 | so it's this name of this list -- Web Sphere is a | | 9 | name of a list of products. IBM would like you to | | 10 | believe it's a product, but it's really a bunch of | | 11 | products written by different people at different | | 12 | times and they just aggregate it together as this | | 13 | conceptually aggregate thing together. | | 14 | Q. And Microsoft, what do they have in the | | 15 | way of application integration software that's | | 16 | available? | | 17 | A. Windows Event Server. | | 18 | Q. Is that part of the application server? | | 19 | A. It's part of a Windows Event Server, | | 20 | which is an application server, and that is a | | 21 | product. | | 22 | Q. Now, BEA, what type of application server |
| 00067 | | 1 | product do they offer? | | 2 | A. Again, it's Java-based. The name of the | | 3 | product is WebLogic and they have integration | | 4 | software and portal software and it's got the same | | 5 | thing. We all compete in these areas. | | 6 | Q. Now, BEA does not have a database | | 7 | product? | | 8 | A. They do not. | | 9 | Q. Their application server, what databases | | 10 | are you aware of that that will operate with? | | 11 | A. All of the majors. Most all of them. I | | 12 | mean IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, Sybase. Probably | | 13 | more than that. | | 14 | Q. And will your application software | | 15 | operate on -- operate with a BEA application | | 16 | server? | | 17 | A. Will our application software coexist -- | | 18 | Q. Can you run your application server | | 19 | software on a BEA system application server? | | 20 | A. If it's written in Java. So same thing | | 21 | with IBM. So the Java portion of the application | | 22 | can run on the BEA application server, but the |
| 00068 | | 1 | Forms portions cannot. | | 2 | Q. And going down the chart, we have on page | | 3 | 3 of Exhibit 550, it shows BEA having a circle | | 4 | half black and half white, which indicates | | 5 | "player" at the top next to application | | 6 | integration. | | 7 | Do you see that? | | 8 | A. Yes, I do. | | 9 | Q. Do you have any idea what that means? | | 10 | A. I guess, you know, they're a relatively | | 11 | new player in applications integration. | | 12 | Q. What integration product does BEA have? | | 13 | A. Again, it's around -- it's built around | | 14 | web services. Again, it has a lot of the | | 15 | characteristics of ours. It's built around Java | | 16 | Web Services and specific application translators. | | 17 | Q. And WebLogic that you talked about, the | | 18 | product that BEA, has what is that? | | 19 | A. WebLogic is the name of their Java | | 20 | application server, but it also now includes -- | | 21 | they have expanded it again since we last talked. | | 22 | They have added a lot of integration software, |
| 00069 | | 1 | they have added portal software, so they have | | 2 | expanded their footprint. | | 3 | Q. And the integration software that BEA has | | 4 | added since we last talked, what does that consist | | 5 | of, what does it do? | | 6 | A. It's more connectors to more -- you know, | | 7 | to more databases, more application systems. It's | | 8 | a more capable portal. A portal takes data from | | 9 | lots of separate systems and puts them on the same | | 10 | web page. | | 11 | Q. Now, you mentioned Web Services is a | | 12 | means of application integration; correct? | | 13 | A. Yes. | | 14 | Q. And how long have Web Services been a | | 15 | significant means of doing that type of | | 16 | application integration? | | 17 | A. For years. | | 18 | Q. Beginning approximately when? Well, let | | 19 | me ask you -- | | 20 | A. Four years ago. | | 21 | Q. Let me ask this follow-up question. Who | | 22 | was the first one that offered Web Services as a |
| 00070 | | 1 | way of doing application integration? | | 2 | A. Sun BEA. | | 3 | Q. And was that offered for a particular | | 4 | type of product? | | 5 | A. For their Java -- for their Java server. | | 6 | Q. When did Oracle first begin offering Web | | 7 | Services as a means of application integration? | | 8 | A. Very shortly thereafter. | | 9 | Q. And what products did you offer that | | 10 | integration service for? | | 11 | A. For our application server. It came as | | 12 | part of our application server. | | 13 | Q. And when you say it came as a part of | | 14 | your application server, what does that mean? | | 15 | A. Well, it means if you use our tool set, | | 16 | if you build - if you build your applications | | 17 | using our Java development environment and you run | | 18 | our application server, those -- and program | | 19 | according to the Web Services standards, I mean, | | 20 | programmers have to -- it's a set of standards the | | 21 | way you program to, then program A will be able to | | 22 | communicate with program B across the internet. |
| 00071 | | 1 | Q. And does SAP offer similar type services? | | 2 | A. Yes, they do. | | 3 | Q. And do you recall when they began doing | | 4 | that? | | 5 | A. Sometime after -- they adopted Java later | | 6 | than we did, but two years ago. | | 7 | MR. WALL: I'm sorry, what is the "that"? | | 8 | I'm not clear what the antecedent is. | | 9 | MR. SCOTT: The web integration through | | 10 | Web Services. | | 11 | THE WITNESS: So - and it depends where | | 12 | it shows up in the stack. You might have the | | 13 | ability to support Web Services in your | | 14 | application server or your applications might not | | 15 | be written to the standards, so Web Services are a | | 16 | set of standards you have to write to. | | 17 | So first you would create the technology | | 18 | for Web Services and then you would adapt your | | 19 | applications to support Web Services. So first | | 20 | comes the technology then the applications have to | | 21 | be modified. | | 22 | |
| 00072 | | 1 | BY MR. SCOTT: | | 2 | Q. And were your applications modified to | | 3 | work with Web Services at the time you offered | | 4 | that product? | | 5 | A. The very beginning -- no. The answer is | | 6 | no. It took more time for us. And it's an | | 7 | ongoing process. We because have a lot of | | 8 | application code and a lot of application code has | | 9 | to be updated and updated to support Web Services. | | 10 | Q. And does PeopleSoft offer integration | | 11 | through Web Services? | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00073 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 13 | Q. And are you aware of any other software, | | 14 | ERP software, vendor who has developed their | | 15 | software to the point where integration can take | | 16 | place through Web Services? | | 17 | A. I think everyone is doing this, but I | | 18 | just don't know the status of each vendor | | 19 | separately. | | | | | | | | | |
| 00074 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10 | Q. How was software integration done before | | 11 | the possibility of doing it through Web Services | | 12 | was introduced to the market? | | 13 | A. Again, all Web Services are is a standard | | 14 | protocol. I hate -- I think the metaphor holds. | | 15 | It's just a way of program A, you know, | | 16 | establishing a connection to program B. So for | | 17 | years we've been able to -- we've had different | | 18 | techniques called remote procedure calls, RPCs, | | 19 | where a program in computer A could issue a remote | | 20 | procedure call and talk to computer B. But now | | 21 | that the internet has become a standard way of | | 22 | lacing these computers together, and now that we |
| 00075 | | 1 | have -- it's really about standards. | | 2 | We have always been able to have a | | 3 | program -- program A and program B agree on how to | | 4 | communicate through what's called a remote | | 5 | procedure call. What's different about Web | | 6 | Services now is there is a global standard for | | 7 | interconnecting machines called the internet, and | | 8 | there are intranets and private internets and all | | 9 | these other things, but it's a global standard. | | 10 | Now that there is this global standard for | | 11 | interconnecting machines, we can build a program | | 12 | that uses these standards and these are called Web | | 13 | Services that adopts that standard way of | | 14 | interconnecting. | | 15 | It's as if every cellular telephone -- | | 16 | and there is not -- there is not a global standard | | 17 | for cellular telephones. The reason you need a | | 18 | different cell phone in Europe is because there | | 19 | are different ways, you know, different | | 20 | technologies, but there is -- so there is no | | 21 | standard way of cell phones communicating | | 22 | globally. There is a standard way for computers |
| 00076 | | 1 | to communicate globally. So now we can say, all | | 2 | right, we're all going to go to this standard | | 3 | protocol called Web Services to establish a | | 4 | connection. So any program that can communicate | | 5 | with any other program on any computer any place | | 6 | in the world just as long as they are attached to | | 7 | an internet or intranet or connected in this | | 8 | standard way. | | 9 | It does not solve the problem of, okay, | | 10 | now once we have established a connection, you | | 11 | know, just like me calling someone in Budapest, if | | 12 | I don't speak Hungarian and they don't speak | | 13 | English, we've got a problem. | | 14 | Q. And that would bring into play the | | 15 | translation point of the integration that you | | 16 | talked about earlier? | | 17 | A. Correct. | | 18 | Q. And is that translation point something | | 19 | that's available through the web or is that | | 20 | something that is available through the | | 21 | application server? | | 22 | A. It's definitely not available through the |
| 00077 | | 1 | web. It would be available through the | | 2 | application server and perhaps even the | | 3 | applications themselves have to adapt. | | 4 | Q. And when you say the applications | | 5 | themselves may to have adapt, what does that mean? | | 6 | A. We've recently introduced this thing | | 7 | called the customer data hub, and the customer | | 8 | data hub recognizes that companies would like to | | 9 | have -- our big thrust in the e-business suite, | | 10 | the holy grail, the way I sold the e-business | | 11 | suite, one of the great things about it, was all | | 12 | your customer data was in one database. So think | | 13 | about get all your data in one database and then | | 14 | kind of attached the applications to this data. | | 15 | The problem with the e-business suite is | | 16 | it requires customers to get the bulk of their | | 17 | applications from Oracle, and a lot of companies | | 18 | have existing -- have lots of different | | 19 | applications from lots of different vendors. They | | 20 | have been buying applications for the last 10 | | 21 | years and they don't want to switch out all those | | 22 | applications and bring in only Oracle, but they |
| 00078 | | 1 | love the idea of having all their customer data in | | 2 | one place. | | 3 | So we said, all right, as an alternative | | 4 | to the e-business suite, I think we can solve the | | 5 | problem another way. And solving the problem | | 6 | another way is saying, all right, keep your Siebel | | 7 | and keep your SAP and keep your whatever you got, | | 8 | your PeopleSoft, who knows what you got, all this | | 9 | different stuff, keep it all, the Oracle | | 10 | financials, I mean live in this environment, but | | 11 | we will refer to it as a spoke system and we will | | 12 | have at the center this database called the | | 13 | customer data hub, and every time a salesman | | 14 | enters a new customer into the Siebel we'll make a | | 15 | copy of that data, if you will, it goes from the | | 16 | hub to the spoke. Every time the billing system | | 17 | notes that a customer is late in paying, we'll | | 18 | make a copy of that, that customer information, | | 19 | put that in the customer data hub. | | 20 | So you are going to collect all much this | | 21 | information from all of these spoke systems into | | 22 | this hub system and you can interconnect them |
| 00079 | | 1 | using Web Services to establish the connection and | | 2 | then the translation software to -- and then | | 3 | Oracle provides what is called a data model for a | | 4 | very rich database. So we can handle sales | | 5 | information and billing information and marketing | | 6 | information and service information for all | | 7 | different kinds of customers in all different | | 8 | kinds of industries. | | 9 | Q. Do you see this product as a replacement | | 10 | for your application software? | | 11 | A. No. No. | | 12 | Q. Then what is the purpose of it? | | 13 | A. It's -- not everyone is going to buy | | 14 | Oracle's application software. Not everyone is | | 15 | going to buy only Oracle application software. | | 16 | Very large companies, even if they decided to go | | 17 | the e-business way, would take them years to get | | 18 | from where they are today to get to the e-business | | 19 | suite, and they would like to take advantage of | | 20 | having that 362-degree view of their customers. | | 21 | They like the idea of all their customer | | 22 | information in one place. So it is something |
| 00080 | | 1 | that's very attractive to large customers who live | | 2 | in an environment of heterogenous technologies and | | 3 | heterogenous applications. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00095 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 21 | Q. Now, do you -- in implementing the data | | 22 | hub and product, do you see that as a means by |
| 00096 | | 1 | which you could end up selling more or less | | 2 | application software? | | 3 | A. More. | | 4 | Q. And how is that? | | 5 | A. Again, we think it's a very | | 6 | interesting -- there are two kinds of barriers -- | | 7 | there is two problems with selling the e-business | | 8 | suite. One is the conceptual problem which is, | | 9 | gee, I don't want to throw away all my existing | | 10 | applications and go to Oracle, just get out of my | | 11 | office, I'm not going to do it. The other is, I | | 12 | love the idea, but how do I get from here to | | 13 | there. It's going to take years. | | 14 | Q. How do I get from here to there in | | 15 | relation to what? | | 16 | A. How do I go from my heterogenous | | 17 | environment of thousands of separate systems to | | 18 | this nirvana you're talking about of this Oracle | | 19 | e-business suite. I don't know how I gracefully | | 20 | migrate from where I am today. I don't know how | | 21 | to get there. Tell me how I get there. | | 22 | And a customer data hub is designed to |
| 00097 | | 1 | address both of those customers. Where the | | 2 | e-business suite has been very successful is | | 3 | smaller companies where the cost and the time | | 4 | required to put in the e-business suite is just | | 5 | not onerous. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 15 | Q. The data hub product you believe will | | 16 | allow you to sell more application software | | 17 | because it will give a mechanism for customers who | | 18 | want a central database to transition from having | | 19 | a lot of systems to the e-business suite and get | | 20 | the benefit of having a central database during | | 21 | that process? | | 22 | A. Correct. |
| 00098 | | 1 | Q. And then for other customers who are not | | 2 | in the market to change because they don't want to | | 3 | go buy a system, it will allow them to centralize | | 4 | their data in one area and allow you to sell some | | 5 | application software to operate on top of the hub? | | 6 | A. Right. Right. Otherwise that customer | | 7 | would just be closed to us for some time. | | 8 | Clearly, we would have opportunities in very large | | 9 | companies. You have opportunities to sell this | | 10 | division and that division and this application, | | 11 | but it's nice to not be on the periphery. It's | | 12 | nice to be in the center. | | 13 | Q. When was the data hub product rolled out | | 14 | by Oracle? | | 15 | A. In the last six months. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) (Blank page) | 00114 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 14 | Q. When your deposition was taken last year, | | 15 | you had decided to roll out the data hub product? | | 16 | A. What was the date of my deposition? | | 17 | Q. January 20th, 2004. I misspoke. This | | 18 | year. | | 19 | A. This year, right. Probably. | | 20 | Q. Do you have a specific recollection as of | | 21 | the time of your deposition that you had decided | | 22 | to roll out the data hub product? |
| 00115 | | 1 | A. I don't. | | 2 | Q. Would there be documents within Oracle | | 3 | that would indicate when you had decided to roll | | 4 | out that product? | | 5 | A. Well, clearly we roll -- it was shortly | | 6 | before we announced it. Shortly, as I say, no | | 7 | more than 60 days before we announced it and maybe | | 8 | as soon as -- the decision might not have been | | 9 | made -- may have been two weeks before, so I just | | 10 | don't remember. | | 11 | Q. Well, certainly when your deposition was | | 12 | taken in January 20th, 2004, you were aware of the | | 13 | data hub product being under development at | | 14 | Oracle? | | 15 | A. Yes, probably, yeah. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00120 | | 1 | Q. Now, does the data hub only handle | | 2 | customer-related information? | | 3 | A. Yes, but that's a little bit misleading | | 4 | because when you keep track of customers, you | | 5 | would like to know what products those customer | | 6 | buy. So when you say I'm just going to keep track | | 7 | of customer data, you are forced to keep track of | | 8 | product information. | | 9 | Q. For example, does the data hub and the | | 10 | software that comes with it, does that support | | 11 | what we will call human resource functionality? | | 12 | A. In a narrow sense. For example, you | | 13 | might want to know who are the customer support | | 14 | people that support General Electric, right, so | | 15 | the answer is yeah, kind of. | | 16 | Q. Okay. Well, does the data hub product, | | 17 | as currently constituted, support things like | | 18 | payroll and benefits and information and functions | | 19 | related to a company's own employees? | | 20 | A. Well, the answer is we are coming out | | 21 | with a product shortly called the Employee Data | | 22 | Hub, something like that, but, again, these things |
| 00121 | | 1 | are all - the trouble - everything is connected. | | 2 | So one of the things you would like to know is how | | 3 | much am I spending selling to General Electric. | | 4 | So to find that out you would have to know who are | | 5 | the salespeople, how much they make, what you pay | | 6 | to them in commissions. So, in other words, | | 7 | you're asking the question show me my most | | 8 | profitable customers, show me my most unprofitable | | 9 | customers, how much did GE buy, how much should we | | 10 | spend supporting General Electric, selling to | | 11 | General Electric, all of those things. So you can | | 12 | argue that's all customer data, that's all -- is | | 13 | that customer data or HR data. | | 14 | Q. Well, you said you are going to come out | | 15 | at some point with something you are calling the | | 16 | HR data hub? | | 17 | A. Right. | | 18 | Q. What is that? | | 19 | A. That is -- again, a lot of people have | | 20 | separate -- I think it's called an Employee Data | | 21 | Hub, and there is a lot of the employee | | 22 | information that you might not necessarily keep in |
| 00122 | | 1 | your HR system. For example, you're authorized to | | 2 | approve purchases over $10,000 -- up to $10,000. | | 3 | That might be stored in your accounting system. | | 4 | So your -- your territory includes all of the | | 5 | State of Maine for sales. Well, that might be | | 6 | stored in the sales system. So there is a lot of | | 7 | information that's tied to people that you don't | | 8 | think of necessarily being part of the HR system. | | 9 | Q. Well, first of all, when did you start | | 10 | developing the employee hub? | | 11 | A. We are just -- it's a work-in-progress | | 12 | right now. | | 13 | Q. Do you have an estimated time of arrival | | 14 | for that to hit the market? | | 15 | A. We might, but I don't know what it is. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00124 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 22 | Q. Does the current data hub handle |
| 00125 | | 1 | financial management support, things such as | | 2 | general ledger, accounts payable, accounts | | 3 | receivable, asset management, those types of | | 4 | functions? | | 5 | A. No. | | 6 | Q. Do you have any plans to roll out a | | 7 | product that will do that in a data hub context? | | 8 | A. No. The general ledger in a sense is a | | 9 | data hub. There is what's called a consolidated | | 10 | general ledger. Our general ledger product | | 11 | actually allows you to have several different | | 12 | companies in your -- General Electric uses it. | | 13 | They have several different businesses, lots of | | 14 | different businesses and they do what is called a | | 15 | consolidation inside of their general ledger, | | 16 | which is a hub function, statutorily required. | | 17 | Q. So I take it that you're not coming out | | 18 | with a financial data hub that will do that type | | 19 | of thing? | | 20 | A. It would be duplicative. | | 21 | Q. Of your current products? | | 22 | A. Yes. |
| 00126 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 13 | Q. All right, sir. Looking at page 3 on | | 14 | Exhibit 550 again, the pieces that go in the | | 15 | technology stack that you have defined would | | 16 | include database, application servers and | | 17 | application integration, correct? | | 18 | A. The three primary chunks I would describe | | 19 | would be operating system at the bottom, database | | 20 | in the middle, and application server on top. We | | 21 | put application integration as one of the | | 22 | components of application server. |
| 00129 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10 | Q. All right, sir. Now, in relation to | | 11 | operating systems -- or the technology stack | | 12 | generally, as you have defined it, operating | | 13 | systems, database and application server, would | | 14 | the acquisition of PeopleSoft allow you to compete | | 15 | better with Microsoft? | | 16 | A. Absolutely. | | 17 | Q. And how so? | | 18 | A. Well, Microsoft's -- that's a very -- to | | 19 | compete with Microsoft, we think -- Microsoft | | 20 | relies on its scale to compete. So they sell | | 21 | software in high volume at a low price. And what | | 22 | enables you to sell software at a low price is |
| 00130 | | 1 | high volume, because you have a very high fixed | | 2 | cost and almost insignificant or nonexistent | | 3 | marginal cost. So if you can amortize your fixed | | 4 | cost over a large number of customers, you're able | | 5 | to lower prices. That's why the biggest software | | 6 | company in the world has very low prices. So to | | 7 | compete with Microsoft, and the driving force for | | 8 | this acquisition, is for us to get larger, for us | | 9 | to have more customers, so we can compete on price | | 10 | in what's going to be an increasingly | | 11 | price-competitive market. | | 12 | Q. All right. Now, let me back up here. | | 13 | The idea of the PeopleSoft acquisition assisting | | 14 | you in competing with Microsoft is a function of | | 15 | scale? | | 16 | A. Largely a function of scale. | | 17 | Q. And in that context, you define "scale" | | 18 | as meaning what? | | 19 | A. More customers. | | 20 | Q. And more customers would help you compete | | 21 | with Microsoft how? | | 22 | A. Okay. So let's say in order to build an |
| 00131 | | 1 | application it costs you a million dollars. Let's | | 2 | say you have one customer. You only got one | | 3 | customer for the application. You have got to | | 4 | charge at least a million dollars for it or you | | 5 | lost money. Let's say you have a million | | 6 | customers for it. You could make two dollars for | | 7 | it and make a lot of money. | | 8 | So the development costs are fixed. In | | 9 | our business the development costs are different | | 10 | than almost any other business in the world. We | | 11 | have very, very large fixed costs and we have to | | 12 | get back the money on the fixed costs by selling | | 13 | more than one copy. The more copies we sell, the | | 14 | more we can lower the price. | | 15 | So if we think that price competition is | | 16 | going to increase, and whenever Microsoft gets in | | 17 | the neighborhood price competition increases, | | 18 | guaranteed. As price competition increases, what | | 19 | enables us to compete is having more customers, | | 20 | because then we can charge a lower price. | | 21 | And -- but, again, it's obviously more | | 22 | complicated than that. We can also spend more on |
| 00132 | | 1 | innovation and engineers and engineering and | | 2 | enhancements. So if we have more customers -- if | | 3 | we have one customer we can't spend a million | | 4 | dollars on the product. You can't do it because | | 5 | no one is going to pay you a million dollars for | | 6 | the product. But if you have a million customers | | 7 | or 10,000 customers, you can spend more. | | 8 | So it's a combination. So as you get | | 9 | more and more customers two things happen. You | | 10 | spend more on R and D and you lower the price and | | 11 | you kind of split the difference and, God willing, | | 12 | your profits increase also. So that's the | | 13 | dynamic. That's why Microsoft is so profitable. | | 14 | They have low prices, but they have a huge number | | 15 | of customers. They spend a lot of money in R and | | 16 | D. They spend more money in R and D than anybody. | | 17 | They have the lowest prices, just in general. | | 18 | That's how they beat all their competition in the | | 19 | PC application business. They just had the lowest | | 20 | prices. And the way they get away with that is | | 21 | they have lots and lots of customers. They make | | 22 | it up in volume. |
| 00133 | | 1 | For us to compete -- and that's who we're | | 2 | competing with. So here comes Microsoft. What do | | 3 | you do? You have to have lots of customers. | | 4 | Because you have to increase your spending in R | | 5 | and D and you have to lower prices simultaneously, | | 6 | and the only way you can do that is to get to | | 7 | scale, is to get more customers. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00137 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 20 | Q. Now, in relation to - again, looking at | | 21 | exhibit -- page 3 of Exhibit 550 -- | | 22 | A. Right. |
| 00138 | | 1 | Q. -- on the column at the end -- | | 2 | A. I have memorized this page now. | | 3 | Q. I would hope so. | | 4 | At the last column there is the heading | | 5 | "PSFT," which I take it stands for PeopleSoft? | | 6 | A. Yes. | | 7 | Q. And under that it indicates that | | 8 | PeopleSoft has some presence, though according to | | 9 | the key, not significance presence in business | | 10 | intelligence, developmental tools and application | | 11 | integration. | | 12 | Do you see that? | | 13 | A. Yes, Ido. | | 14 | Q. Does the technology -- or do you know | | 15 | anything about the technology they have in those | | 16 | areas? | | 17 | A. Yeah. There development tools are -- | | 18 | they have this proprietary language called | | 19 | PeopleTools and they built business intelligence | | 20 | on top. Their programs are written in this | | 21 | language called PeopleTools. And this is all the | | 22 | stuff that's around PeopleTools. Because it's |
| 00139 | | 1 | unique to PeopleSoft, they have to build their own | | 2 | integration pieces and their own development | | 3 | environment. | | 4 | Q. And I take it that since those are | | 5 | proprietary, obtaining that technology is not what | | 6 | is driving you to do this deal? | | 7 | A. No. No. | | 8 | Q. Okay. | | 9 | A. No. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00151 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5 | Q. Is there a particular size or scale that | | 6 | you have as a target out there that you want to | | 7 | achieve either through this acquisition or some | | 8 | other mechanism? | | 9 | A. Yeah, you have to -- I mean, our | | 10 | problem -- our problem is, you know, in the | | 11 | technology area is IBM's a little bit bigger than | | 12 | us in software and Microsoft is a lot bigger than | | 13 | us in software. So we certainly have to -- you | | 14 | know, and those are our two major areas in the | | 15 | technology stack, two major competitors in the | | 16 | technology stack. And we have to get -- if you | | 17 | take away Microsoft's X box business or MSN, we | | 18 | have to get close to their size in software. So | | 19 | if we're 10 billion dollars now, I would be much | | 20 | more comfortable that we could defend ourself if | | 21 | we were 20 billion, than 10. We would probably | | 22 | have to be twice as large as we are now. |
| 00153 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 13 | Q. So you see the world as we go forward | | 14 | ending up being Microsoft on one side and | | 15 | essentially everybody else on the other? | | 16 | A. Microsoft versus mankind with Microsoft | | 17 | in the lead. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00160 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 9 | Now, based on your earlier testimony, I | | 10 | take it that you have competed with Microsoft in | | 11 | the database arena for quite sometime? | | 12 | A. Yes. | | 13 | Q. And how long have you folks been going | | 14 | head to head in database products? | | 15 | A. Certainly over a decade. | | 16 | Q. Were they in first or were you? | | 17 | A. We were. | | 18 | Q. And how much of a lead did you have on | | 19 | them timewise? | | 20 | A. We had a huge lead, but they actually | | 21 | purchased their product from Sybase. They bought | | 22 | the code from Sybase, very much like they bought |
| 00161 | | 1 | NetVision and, you know... | | 2 | Q. All right, sir. And over time, do you | | 3 | have any -- as of today, do you have any idea, | | 4 | roughly, of what your share is versus their share | | 5 | in the market? | | 6 | A. We're definitely -- | | 7 | MR. WALL: "The market" defined as what? | | 8 | MR. SCOTT: As database products. | | 9 | MR. WALL: So all relational database? | | 10 | MR. SCOTT: All relational database | | 11 | products. | | 12 | THE WITNESS: They are probably slightly | | 13 | larger than we are on Windows and of course they | | 14 | don't exist on mainframes or on Unix or on Linux | | 15 | at all, so we're considerably larger there. | | 16 | BY MR. SCOTT: | | 17 | Q. Now, in the area of relational database | | 18 | products, have you been able to grow share against | | 19 | them or have they grown it against you? | | 20 | A. I think they have consistently grown it | | 21 | against us. | | 22 | Q. Are they at a point in database products |
| 00162 | | 1 | where you could consider them to have a monopoly | | 2 | on relational database products? | | 3 | A. No. | | 4 | Q. Now, in the relational database product | | 5 | area, how is it that you have been able to | | 6 | maintain a competitive position against them such | | 7 | that they have not been able to monopolize that? | | 8 | A. We had a many, many year head start and | | 9 | we have been able to keep our engineering team | | 10 | together, but we think we have an engineering team | | 11 | that's better than theirs and we started before | | 12 | them, way before them. | | 13 | Q. From a cost standpoint, looking at it | | 14 | from a customer standpoint, how do you compare to | | 15 | Microsoft in the relational database arena? | | 16 | A. We have more customers. | | 17 | Q. I'm sorry, I meant how much does it a | | 18 | customer, the cost of acquiring yours, versus the | | 19 | cost of acquiring Microsoft's comparable products. | | 20 | A. Microsoft has a lower purchase price. | | 21 | Again, I'm oversimplifying. But, in general, | | 22 | Microsoft has a lower purchase price and we think |
| 00163 | | 1 | we have a lower total cost of ownership. For | | 2 | example, if we run substantially faster on a | | 3 | computer than they do, you don't have to spend as | | 4 | much money on the computer. You can get a smaller | | 5 | computer. If we require less labor to operate the | | 6 | system, you don't have to hire as many people to | | 7 | run it. So when we talk about the total cost of | | 8 | ownership, it's very different than purchasing | | 9 | just the database component. | | 10 | Q. Now, in the area of enterprise software, | | 11 | based on your experience in competing with | | 12 | Microsoft in database, do you believe that they | | 13 | would be able to monopolize the sales of | | 14 | enterprise application software? | | 15 | A. No. | | 16 | Q. And why is that? | | 17 | A. It's a very competitive market right now. | | 18 | The systems installed are highly durable. People | | 19 | don't pull these systems out and reinstall them. | | 20 | Now, I suppose if you said, you know, 25 | | 21 | years out could they get to a monopoly position or | | 22 | 30 years out, I wouldn't so glibly answer no, but |
| 00164 | | 1 | certainly in my -- in the next 10 years, no | | 2 | chance. The rate of turnover of these products is | | 3 | relatively slow. People don't change their | | 4 | accounting system, HR, manufacturing, supply chain | | 5 | systems very frequently. Even small businesses | | 6 | don't change them very frequently. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00189 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 11 | Q. All right. Mr. Ellison, you have in | | 12 | front of you a document which has been marked for | | 13 | identification purposes as Exhibit 553 to your | | 14 | deposition. | | 15 | A. Yes. | | 16 | Q. It's a one-page document bearing | | 17 | ORCL-EDOC-0122 -- 12 -- let me start that again. | | 18 | All right. You have in front of you a | | 19 | document which has been marked as Exhibit 553, | | 20 | identification ORCL-EDOC-01242183. It's dated | | 21 | June 7th, 2003, e-mail from you to Charles | | 22 | Phillips and Safra Catz, re: |
| 00190 | | 1 | Accenture/PeopleSoft. | | 2 | Do you see that? | | 3 | A. Yes. | | 4 | Q. And that's an e-mail that you wrote, the | | 5 | one at the top, "What a great opportunity to | | 6 | expand our reach. This is looking better every | | 7 | hour. Larry." | | 8 | A. Yep. | | 9 | Q. And below that is an e-mail that you | | 10 | appear to have been sent from Mr. Phillips, | | 11 | talking about a call that he had received from the | | 12 | CFO at Accenture? | | 13 | Do you see that? | | 14 | A. Yes. | | 15 | Q. Is that someone that you knew? | | 16 | A. His name is Harry Eu. I know him now, | | 17 | but I didn't know him then. | | 18 | Q. And this says, "The potential acquisition | | 19 | of PeopleSoft hit home and made them," referring | | 20 | to Accenture, "realize we could turn into a | | 21 | must-have partner and he offered to set up a | | 22 | meeting between me and their top 10 partners which |
| 00191 | | 1 | I plan to do." | | 2 | Did you have any understanding of what he | | 3 | meant by Oracle turning into a must-have partner | | 4 | from Accenture's standpoint? | | 5 | A. As we get bigger, our importance in the | | 6 | marketplace increases; so, yeah, we're a bigger, | | 7 | more important company. | | 8 | Q. Well, do you know if Accenture had any | | 9 | type of relationship with PeopleSoft prior to your | | 10 | announcement that you were going to try to acquire | | 11 | PeopleSoft? | | 12 | A. We have a relationship with Accenture. | | 13 | PeopleSoft has a relationship with Accenture. SAP | | 14 | has a relationship with Accenture. Cerner has a | | 15 | relationship -- | | 16 | MR. WALL: Slow down. You are hitting | | 17 | warp speed at this point. | | 18 | THE WITNESS: Sorry. | | 19 | I think most major software companies -- | | 20 | Accenture is one of the two largest system | | 21 | integrators in the world, and I think every major | | 22 | software company has a relationship with them. |
| 00192 | | 1 | BY MR. SCOTT: | | 2 | Q. And your reply to this e-mail says, "What | | 3 | a great opportunity to expand our reach." What | | 4 | did you mean by that? | | 5 | A. To get to get more Accenture partners | | 6 | involved in our business. | | 7 | Q. And what do you mean by the term | | 8 | "Accenture partners"? | | 9 | A. Accenture, even though it's a publicly | | 10 | held corporation now, still has a partnership | | 11 | structure, and each of these partners runs their | | 12 | own business in certain geographic areas, and we | | 13 | would rather -- they would be increasing the | | 14 | amount of business they did with Oracle. | | 15 | Q. So by developing a relationship with more | | 16 | of these partners, you have the potential to do | | 17 | more business and thereby expand your reach? | | 18 | A. Yes. | | 19 | Q. When you said here "This is looking | | 20 | better every hour" in this e-mail, what did you | | 21 | mean by that? | | 22 | A. I guess this is the day after our tender, |
| 00193 | | 1 | so things were happening quickly at this time, and | | 2 | I think we were happy with our decision to make | | 3 | the tender. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 00215 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7 | Q. Well, do you recall at any point in time | | 8 | where your growth slowed to a point in | | 9 | applications where it was unacceptable to you | | 10 | personally? | | 11 | A. Sure. The last -- 2001, 2002, 2003 were | | 12 | tough years, you know, post-bubble. I mean, | | 13 | people were spending a lot less on tech. And, | | 14 | plus, some companies had accustomed themselves to | | 15 | a much higher rate of spending. At least we | | 16 | hadn't done that. | | 17 | Q. And you attribute your dissatisfaction | | 18 | with your level of applications sales to what? | | 19 | A. Well, primarily, not only, but primarily | | 20 | the macroeconomy then. I mean, we can blame | | 21 | ourselves, you know, our own people after that. | | 22 | It's our own. |
| 00216 | | 1 | Q. So would it be fair to say that there was | | 2 | less applications business out there with the same | | 3 | number of players trying to win it? | | 4 | A. There was a lot less of all technology | | 5 | business. There was less database. There was | | 6 | less computer hardware, less PC business. You | | 7 | name it, there was less of it. | | 8 | Q. As a result of the economy having an | | 9 | impact on what people were spending in tech, did | | 10 | that make competition more aggressive? | | 11 | A. That's an interesting question. It's a | | 12 | brutal business. I'm not sure it's any more | | 13 | competitive in bad times than it is in good, to | | 14 | tell you the truth. I have heard, but I don't | | 15 | really think it's -- you know, it affected that | | 16 | dynamic. It's a very tough -- people fight for | | 17 | every deal. | | 18 | Q. But in 2002-2003, you would agree there | | 19 | was less business to be had with essentially the | | 20 | same number of players trying to have it? | | 21 | A. Yes. | | 22 | Q. In the applications area? |
| 00218 | | | | | 2 | Q. Let me ask the question again so we're | | 3 | clear. | | 4 | A. Sure. | | 5 | Q. You said that you saw in some period of | | 6 | time after the dot-com bubble burst that there was | | 7 | a reduction in tech spending by companies, | | 8 | correct? | | 9 | A. Yes. | | 10 | Q. Over what period of time did you see | | 11 | that? | | 12 | A. It dropped quite rapidly in 2001, and the | | 13 | thing is I would like to distinguish -- you use | | 14 | the metaphor "dried up." It really didn't dry up, | | 15 | but it dropped down. I realize it's just a | | 16 | metaphor, but it did drop down to a lower level | | 17 | and then people always talked about, gee, we're | | 18 | going to have this recovery. We're going to have | | 19 | this recovery. And recovery didn't come. | | 20 | Recovery didn't come. And I made several speeches | | 21 | saying there wasn't going to be a recovery if what | | 22 | you meant by recovery was a return to the year |
| 00219 | | 1 | 2000 or 1999, that there was never going to | | 2 | happen. | | 3 | And, in fact, people had been spending -- | | 4 | if you look at the curve, their IT spending just | | 5 | shot up precipitously and actually returned to | | 6 | what I would call a more normal level. And I | | 7 | think as much as it dropped -- now, industry by | | 8 | industry. If we look at the telecommunications, | | 9 | which just got killed, and the suppliers, you | | 10 | know, to those industries. Cisco dropped | | 11 | precipitously and other suppliers. Lucent dropped | | 12 | precipitously. Nortel, those suppliers really got | | 13 | hurt as tech suppliers. But, in general, whether | | 14 | you looked at Oracle or Microsoft or IBM, HP, any | | 15 | of the major tech companies, our sales dropped | | 16 | down, but it wasn't -- you know, it wasn't -- it's | | 17 | not going to be a curve that looks like this, down | | 18 | and then back up. You are going along nicely with | | 19 | normal growth. You had some huge spike and now | | 20 | you just slip back to where you would have been | | 21 | had that spike not occurred. | | 22 | And there were a lot of reasons for that |
| 00220 | | 1 | spike. The year 2000 phenomenon, the -- my | | 2 | counsel said the mass hysteria of the dot-com | | 3 | investment boom, all these companies being formed | | 4 | and taken public, and them buying software and | | 5 | computer systems and doing all this stuff and they | | 6 | hadn't shown a penny of profit. All that should | | 7 | have never happened. So I don't think this is a | | 8 | valley we're going through and then it's going to | | 9 | go back up again. I think the environment we're | | 10 | in right now is the tech environment for some time | | 11 | to come. It will grow slowly with the economy, | | 12 | but it's not going to, quote, recover to its | | 13 | former glory, nor should it, because they were | | 14 | spending way too much money on tech in those days. | | 15 | Q. Within Oracle, do you see any signs that | | 16 | the spending for technology has increased over the | | 17 | past twelve months? | | 18 | A. You know, maybe a little, but I'll | | 19 | emphasize, just a little. Again, I publicly said | | 20 | I don't expect there to be a comeback. This is | | 21 | the recovery. This is it. | | 22 | Actually, the economy is doing quite |
| 00221 | | 1 | well. The people don't think so. The American | | 2 | people don't think so necessarily, but | | 3 | unemployment is lower now than it was in the | | 4 | 1970s, 1960s, 1980s, 1990s. The economic growth | | 5 | is really quite good. We've added a lot of jobs | | 6 | recently. The economy is not doing badly at all. | | 7 | So this is it. There is not going to be a sudden | | 8 | upturn coming. So the competitive climate -- I | | 9 | know you just said is competition tougher now. | | 10 | This is it. This is the environment we live in | | 11 | and will be living in for some time. | | 12 | Q. You saw less business available with | | 13 | essentially the same number of competitors after | | 14 | the dot-com bubble burst? | | 15 | A. Right, because that was an abnormal | | 16 | demand spike. In a rational world it would not | | 17 | have occurred. | | 18 | Q. And the level of business available that | | 19 | you saw after the dot-com bubble you don't expect | | 20 | to get significantly higher? | | 21 | A. No, I don't. | | 22 | Q. So either the same number of players will |
| 00222 | | 1 | be going after that level of business or some of | | 2 | those players will fall by the wayside. | | 3 | A. And, again, I publicly stated that the | | 4 | industry is going to go through -- as this | | 5 | industry matures, we'll go through a | | 6 | consolidation. We have to. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ellison 05-23-04 |