Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

But this program is open to any and all ISVs.  It is not a special relationship
of any kind, and I don't believe there is a provision to reject an ISV based
on them also being a competitor.

    
    Indeed, there may not be a provision to "reject an ISV based on
    them also being a competitor," but I would imagine that if ever
    there were such a time to do so...
    
    My impression of the article is that Oracle is taking a few of
    the "percs" of being an ISV and bloating them up to make it 
    appear that it extends much farther than it actually does.
    (They wouldn't do a thing like that, would they?  Nahhhhhhhh.)
    
    I have two problems with this: First, perception is often reality
    in this market.  If they can say it, if they can tout it, if they
    can puff it up, then the world will think that Oracle and DEC are
    in close company with each other.  WE may know what ISV is about,
    but what about those customers left with the impression that "DEC
    and Oracle are working closely together, therefore DEC must actually
    SANCTION Oracle.
    
    Secondly, if we are going head-to-head with Oracle, if we are always
    trying to find Oracle knock-offs, if we are always losing database
    sales to Oracle (and much to the dismay of all concerned,) then
    why on Earth would Digital do ANYTHING to give them an advantage?
    Why give them the competitive edge by giving them early release
    of DECWindows?  Developer kits?  Labs?  If this is really true,
    I would think we'd soon run out of feet to shoot.  8^(
                                                                   
    I would add, though, that it's not the first time I've seen something
    like this happening; Once I went into a distributor account.  One
    of the techs was running a DEC application on a non-DEC workstation.
    We had *given* them the application... so that they could demo the
    box... and the box directly competed against our own workstations.
    (Or something similarly twisted like that.)  I asked one of my peers
    how this could be so, and he replied "If it makes Digital any money,
    then it's good business practice."
    
    That may be so, but I still fail to see how giving up the tools
    and giving up the database can be a good business practice in this
    case.  Oh yeah, we keep the CPU sale.  Right.
    
    

    The programs are available to many, and some make the extra PR/
    Marketing efforts to tout their "closeness" to Digital.  The press
    is loaded with constant stories/testimonals by 3rd parties who are
    working with Digital, and how they have a "close" relationship
    with us in the technical, marketing, and sales areas, and how Digital
    is "investing" in their products.  ORACLE is one of the more PR
    oriented firms, and leverage it to their advantage.  Maybe we could
    learn a thing or two about the power of perception.
    
    The Distribution agreement is focused on ULTRIX, and given that,
    we should not see too many Rdb competitive issues on VAX or RISC.
    The Special Sales agreement is available from Digital for those
    customers who require a "prime" or single-point-of sales/service
    selling model.  Digital has closed a few large visible deals with
    ORACLE, and these have been written up in LIVE WIRE and Digital
    has made press releases and stories available.
    
    Given that ORACLE, and many other competitive 3rd parties, are going
    to get their share of the business, let's make sure the largest
    part of that is on Digital's VAX and RISC platforms.  The margins
    on a 3rd party VAX win may be low, but they are larger than a 3rd
    party IBM, HP, Sequent, Tandem, Convex, UNISYS, NCR, SUN, etc win.
    

    The "margins" are indeed very low, sometimes even negative when we win
    hardware sales without owning the software involved in the sale.
    
    Further, such sales are usually one-time sales. There is little to no
    account penetration and control at the hardware level.
    
    Additionally, if we have a box and no software on the system, is there
    really much difference between that and no hardware at all. Since the
    user interface will be third party and all the applications will as
    well, there will be no loyalty to Digital.
    
    ---- Michael Booth
    
    

    Well field reality is pretty scary.  The sales force, even though
    all the points mentioned in the previous reply are well known, continues
    to see little difference between VAX-Rdb and VAX-ISV solutions.
    In fact since they know they can reply on slick demos and plenty
    of snake-oil from Oracle and Ingres, as opposed to the
    stick-to-the-facts-soft-sell they'll get from internal software
    presales people on Rdb et al.  So why even bother with Rdb to an audience
    susceptible to hype and flash.  At least they'll sell the $2.74
    profit margin hardware.
    
    Very scary.

    If indeed you are still seeing "stick-to-the-facts-soft-sell" I'd
    really like to know about it. 
    
    I'm really not trying to provide all this competitive info just for my
    health. I'd like to see it routinely used in competitive situations.
    
    ---- Michael Booth
    
    The current Rdb slide show (#863) has all kinds of places to
    conveniently emphasize capabilities that competitors can't. In
    addition, subtle "digs" can be included any number of places.

This is still stick-to-the-facts softsell.

Where is OUR nationwide seminar program?   This give Oracle, RTI, and SYBASE
a foot in the door by having their slick marketing and/or technical people
present directly to the customer.  We rarely apply this level of direct
marketing of Rdb/VMS to a customer, except maybe AFTER they have started
their database search and have already heard the Oracle et al message.

Where are OUR flashy demos?  These other vendors have put together demos
that show off the flashiness of their products.  What are we going to demo, SQL?
Where is OUR forms interface, where is our windowing interface, where is
OUR report writer?  We do not demo these things because they aren't part
of Rdb/VMS, they are separate and unrelated products.  We get our ass kicked
in the slickness department because of this.

Where is OUR CLEAR 4GL message?  The lack of an integrated product isn't just
a slickness problem, its a real marketing/sales dilema.  Instead of the
field having a clear strategy on what to sell, and significant expertise
in that product set, we instead have an every man for him/herself situation.
Some people are Rally/Teamdata fans, some Ingres Tools, some Cognos, some 
Smartstar, etc.  Its great to give the customer a choice, but without
a preferred solution that is highly tuned to take advantage of Rdb/VMS both
technically, and in marketing, sales, and service, we are at a competitive
disadvantage.

Where is OUR advertising?  The other vendors keep their message, and some false
assumptions, in front of the market at all times.  We only give our message
to those who ask to hear it!

We are, at best, fighting a holding action on the marketing front.

    That's one view, Hal. 
    
    Another would be that in the last year:
    
    1) For the first time, we have a slide show that at least has an
    "edge".
    2) There is a competitive presentation on line that anyone can get.
    Yes, it is really intended for internal use, but the information can be
    used to leverage sales.
    3) There are people assigned to work with industry
    consultants/analysts/press people. These people, in DBS, spend many
    hours attempting to get the message out.
    4) Our literature has improved drastically in the last year.
    5) My newsletter goes out every two weeks telling people in the field
    exactly what is happening in the database marketplace.
    6) We are getting reprints of relevant magazine articles.
    7) A marketing newsletter goes out quarterly to inform other segments
    of Digital what DBS marketing has been doing.
    
    No, Digital does not have a strong 4GL position. Yes, it needs one. In
    the meantime, I am trying to develop more thorough comparsion sheets on
    what is available. And yes, there is currently such a comparison
    on-line as well.
    
    We, DBS Marketing is also attempting to get published more often.
    
    Yes, we need to do more. But we have done quite a lot this year. Also,
    let's remember that some of these problems we can fix, and some are
    corporate difficulties (i.e advertising).
    
    We are trying to cover all the bases with, as you should know, a small
    staff. It is not easy. Time is rationed for all of us.
    
    If you have specifics in mind, call me. Otherwise, please don't make it
    sound as if no one is doing anything. I believe you will find the field
    is receiving more and higher quality marketing assistance on Rdb than
    it had ever received in the past.
    
    We will, of course, continue to improve as quickly as possible.
    
    ---- Michael Booth (DBS Marketing)

DBS marketing is doing lots of good things and no one, certainly not I, denies 
that.  It's just that it is still in the class of soft-sell just-the-facts stuff
from the customer's viewpoint.  And, this has
nothing to do with DBS as it is all corporate related restrictions.

The point was that you implied we were somehow matching Oracle et al in 
marketing, and the truth is that we aren't even playing the same game.  In
many many cases, we have lost the sale before the competition ever starts.

    A little insight into the game that Oracle is playing goes a long,
    long way.  Now, if only it reflected reality!
    
    I found the following article a couple of weeks ago while on a trip
    to California.  I've not transcribed the article previously due
    to time constraints, but I think that it might be appropriate here.
    
    It makes for VERY interesting reading; Digital is mentioned, both
    in a positive and negative light, and it shows the basic philosophy
    by which Oracle sells.  It should serve to remind us of what we are
    up against when dealing with Oracle.  To make a possibly poor analogy,
    it seems from this article that DEC is assuming a Queensbury-like
    stance against Oracle, while Oracle is gonna kick us, scratch us,
    pull our hair, and then follow with a kick in the groin.  How can
    you win with that?
    
    But most importantly, a side article dismantles a typical Oracle
    ad.  Fun stuff!
    
    It's long (@ 400 lines) but definitely worthwhile.  Have a go at
    it, and then let us know what you think...
    
    Bob H.
    
    
    
    The following article is reprinted without permission from the San Francisco
Chronicle, Monday, April 10, 1989.  



		   ORACLE PLAYING TOUGH IN SOFTWARE WAR
                   ------------------------------------

BY DON CLARK
Chronicle Staff Writer

   Larry Ellison's office is known for its Oriental art.  But Oracle Corp.'s
chief executive talks more like a samurai than a Buddha.

   When he speaks of competitors, for example, he recalls a Japanese friend's
attitude toward other American managers.

   "You live and let live, we'll compete to the death - then we'll see who 
wins," Ellison said.

   Oracle is winning.

   The Belmont-based database software company has doubled its sales in 11 of
its 12 years.  Oracle should easily grow another 100 percent to top $500 
million for the year ending in May, possibly exceeding Microsoft Corp.'s
quarterly sales pace to become the No. 2 U.S. software company.

   A symbol of the growth: On Friday the company announced one of the biggest
deals ever for office space on the San Francisco Peninsula.  Oracle will
lease five buildings and 530,000 square feet on the old Marine World site
in Redwood City for a new corporate headquarters.

   Ellison, 44, owns three houses, a red Ferrari and a $1,400 bike he rides
20 miles to work.  His 28.4 percent stake in the company's stock is worth
$426 million at current prices.

   But he is not content.  Oracle's target is $5 billion in sales in four
more years.

   Databases are a stepping stone to that goal.  They are the foundation
layer of software needed whenever computer hardware is used to store and
retrieve information.

   Oracle's customers, for example, use its products to custom-tailor systems
to control everything from banking transactions to manufacturing plants to
ship movements for the U.S. Navy.  The company started delivering databases
on Digital Equipment Corp. minicomputers, but now offers products ranging
from a $99 development kit for Apple Computer's Macintosh systems to a
$162,000 license to use Oracle at an IBM mainframe installation.

   Ellison now is moving beyond that $2.8 billion database market.  The
company has begun selling add-on application software to carry out specific
jobs like accounting, plus services to help users integrate its software
with computer from many different vendors.

One-Stop Outlet
---------------

   As more and more of these computing tasks are shifted from large computers
to desktop machines on complex networks, Oracle is driving to become a one-
stop-shopping outlet - possibly even reselling computers.

   "Oracle is going to be the agent of change that allows companies to convert
from centralized to decentralized computing," predicted Roger McNamee, a vice-
president and portfolio manager a T. Rowe Price Associates.  "I view it as the
most exciting idea in technology in the next three or four years."

   Some other reviewers aren't so positive.  Oracle's boastful magazine ads,
for example, have upset everyone from competitors to Edgar Codd, the former
IBM scientist who invented the "relational" database technology first comm-
ercialized by Oracle.

   "They don't have any ethics when it comes to what should be in advert-
isements," Codd said flatly.

   Ellison admits a fondness for hyperbole as a technique to attract attention
(see related story, below).  One well-known ad, for example, portrays Oracle
as a fighter jet shooting down a biplane labeled as competitor Ashton-Tate.
But Oracle does nothing unethical, he insists.

   "We do not tell lies in our ads," Ellison said.  

Analyzed in Many Ways
---------------------

   Relational databases began to take over in the 1980s.  Earlier systems,
in essence, allow users to easily find and update data in a specific file.
Relational systems organize those files into tables that can be analyzed in 
many ways: a user <text illegible> - ware to schedule faster payment to
every supplier that has delivered on time.

   It's a fiercely competitive business.  Relational Technology of Alameda,
Sybase Inc. of Berkeley and Informix Inc. of Menlo Park also jumped into
relational databases early, and also have grown swiftly.  Giant IBM and
Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) now sell similar products.

Yet Oracle's relational database sales are larger and growing faster.  The
company will add about 1,800 employees in the current fiscal year, bringing
its total to 4,000.

   More than half of those employees are involved in selling that software,
maintaining and servicing it at large corporate computer sites.  Like Ellison,
the sales force is sophisticated and cocky.

   "Ellison's personality infiltrates and directs the entire organization," 
said Chris Nicholson, founder of a Seattle company that designs add-on
software for databases.  "They are out to dominate the marketplace and
everybody knows what they are going to do."

Understanding and Style
-----------------------

   Ellison, who once taught physics at the University of Chicago, combines
a shrewd understanding of the technology with a style some find abrasive.  
At a database conference last year, for example, he got in a near-shouting
match with Informix Chairman Roger Sippi over software speed claims.

   "Larry really gloats with arrogance," said Mike Seashols, a venture
capitalist who was fired as Oracle's vice president of sales in 1986 in a
conflict over management styles.  But he adds: "No question, of all the
people I have worked with, Ellison is the best."

   Ellison left Ampex Corp. to found the company with colleagues Robert Miner
and Ed Oates in 1977.  Instead of using venture capital money, they boot-
strapped development of their first product with fees from a contract
programming job.

   Oracle now recruits large numbers of top graduates from Stanford, Caltech,
and the University of California at Berkeley.  The work environment is
described as stressful even by Silicon Valley's frenetic standards.  Employee
turnover at times has been frequent.

   "Basically, it's a burnout shop," one former employee said.  "You hire 
bright young people, work them until they drop and then say goodbye."

   But they are treated well in other ways.  Around one-fourth of Oracle's
U.S. sales force make more than $200,000 in commissions; its new Redwood City
campus will have a full-length pool.

Portable Software
-----------------

   One of Oracle's key early decisions was picking a technology called
structured query language (SQL) that was later endorsed in IBM products.
Another was designing its software to be portable - able to run on nearly any
vendor's hardware.

   The latter choice came about, Miner recalls, when its first database 
program for DEC minicomputers was made obsolete by DEC's later VAX machines.
The founders vowed not to let that happen again.

   "It may look like it was incredibly insightful, but it was obvious," said
Miner, now a senior vice president of the company.

   Portability, Ellison argues, makes it possible for customers to buy the
newest, cheapest hardware that keeps coming along.  For that reason, it is 
a threat to vendors that would like to lock customers into sticking with
high-priced proprietary systems.

   DEC, he points out, was recently forced by competitors to begin selling a
faster workstation based on an outside vendor's technology, a machine that
will not run the database DEC sells for its VAX machines.  By 1992, Ellison
predicts, more will be forced to follow suit.

A Free Bundle
-------------

   Some observers say DEC may yet derail Oracle's growth.  The computer
giant's salesmen once made joint calls with Oracle's; now DEC is aligned 
with competitor Relational Technology.  And last week, DEC began bundling
its database software free of charge when it sells a computer.

   "What would you pay for a database management system that didn't allow
you to run your applications on DEC's newest line of fast, inexpensive 
computers?  Nothing," Ellison retorted, with characteristic sarcasm.  
"Well, DEC thinks so too and that's what they are charging for it."

   Lately Ellison has been winning the argument.  A recent survey of buying
intentions by Computer Intelligence of La Jolla shows that 26 percent of DEC
hardware installations expect to buy Oracle in the next 12 months.  
Relational Technology is second at 18 percent.  Only 8 percent of those users
expect to buy from DEC, though its database software is used by 36 percent
of all the sites.

   Other hazards?  Software designed to work on all machines doesn't excel on
any of them, customers and consultants say.  Sybase frequently beats Oracle
in bidding contests determined primarily by speed.

   Moreover, big names in software like Microsoft and Ashton-Tate are 
joining in technical alliances to link easy-to-use personal computer databases
with mainframe systems.  Oracle seems determined to do it all itself.

One-Size Philosophy
-------------------

   "In practice, this one-size-fits-all philosophy does not work and users are
not buying into it," said Umang Gupta, a former Oracle employee whose Menlo
Park company is now working on PC databases with Lotus development.

   Others contend that Oracle wants to lock customers into its software, 
just as IBM and DEC want users to commit to their hardware.

   "While Oracle is protecting a company from IBM, who's going to protect the
company from Oracle?" asked Ed Esber, Ashton-Tate's chief executive, in a
recent debate with Ellison.

   Ellison tends to lump such remarks under the category of sour grapes -
from competitors who are getting bloodied.

   "We think the market isn't stupid," he said.  "We think customers can tell
the difference between a good technology and a bad technology.  The market-
place has decided that Oracle has a better product than anyone else."


                         *** End of Main Article ***

*** Side Article ***

                 ANATOMY OF AN ORACLE CORP. TRADE MAGAZINE AD
                 --------------------------------------------

   How far does Oracle Corp. go in its marketing?  The answer may depend 
on your perspective.

   The software company admits to bragging a bit, but nothing out of the
ordinary.  Some outsiders think it stretches reality a bit further, both in 
its magazine ads and when it promises to deliver new products.

   "Most people put their toes on the line," said Mike Seashols, a former 
Oracle sales and marketing vice president who generally praises the company.
"Oracle puts their heels on the line and then they bend forward."


   Oracle...<text obscured> ad that ran in January in trade magazines.  Head-
lines asked readers, amongst other things, to name:

   * The industry's fastest growing company.

   The ad noted that Oracle increased its sales by 137 percent in fiscal 
1986, 135 percent in 1987 and 115 percent in 1988.  In smaller type, it
states, "No other fortune 1000 company is growing as fast as Oracle."

   Actually, Fortune magazine hasn't put out a listing of the top 1,000
companies in three years, said Mark Rawlins, director of marketing comm-
unications.  So the company, which doesn't make the Fortune 500 list, did
its own review of corporate financial data published by Forbes magazine, 
limiting the exercise to companies of a comparable size.

   * The only software product in history that has been a success on
     mainframes, minicomputers, and PCs.

   The statement is accompanied by pie charts listing percentages in each
computer category for Oracle and other key vendors.  In personal computers, 
for example, it give Oracle <obscured text> percent compared with 25 percent
for Ashton-Tate.

   The charts are based on a survey by Datamation magazine of sites with
IBM-compatible mainframe computers, the ad points out.  What is not stated,
however, is that the percentages represent respondents' plans to buy in the
future, not past sales.

   A research report by PaineWebber estimates that Oracle accounted for only
9 percent of personal computer database sales in 1988, compared with 67 percent
for Ashton-Tate.

   o The world's fastest relational database management system.

   The ad lists three performance records that Oracle claimed last summer,
including an "all-time" record of 265 computer transactions per second on
an IBM-compatible mainframe system.

   In a note below it adds: "Audited benchmark results are available upon
request."  Actually, no audited benchmark results are available for that all-
time record.  That is mainly because Oracle ran out of time on an Amdahl
computer that was borrowed to run the time-consuming speed test, said Pete
Tierney, an Oracle senior vice president responsible for marketing.

   Codd and Date, a San Jose-base consulting firm, audited results for the
other tests on Digital Equipment Corp. and Unix-based computers.  Edgar Codd,
a well-know former IBM scientist, complained in an interview about the way
his firm's auditing work was portrayed in other Oracle ads.

   "They mentioned us in such a way as to imply we had done the auditing of
all three," Codd said.  "I generally find their ads very objectionable."

Tierney denied trying to mislead anyone.  The ads never state that Codd and
Date audited the IBM-compatible test, he noted.  Moreover, the consulting
firm saw ad copy before it was run and did not object, he contends.

   The whole episode, Tierney said, was triggered by audited speed claims
made by competitors in the months leading up to a major new version of Oracle's
database software.  Oracle has always believed the only meaningful test is
running a specific customer's application software, he said.

   The confusion over contradictory speed claims last summer helped spur the
formation of an industry council aimed at setting up reliable speed test,
Tierney said.

   "We admit to hyperbole in what we do but isn't that the essence of 
advertising?" he said.  "We don't fool our customers."

                    - Don Clark

                      *** End of Side Article ***



A table was included in the main article...

                     ORACLE SYSTEMS
                     AT A GLANCE

   o Business:  Oracle Systems Corp. sells relatioonal database software,
                financial and other office automation packages, consulting
                and systems integration services.

   o Headquarters:              Belmont, CA
   o Employees:                 4,000
   o CEO:                       Lawrence Ellison
   o Friday's Stock Price:      24 5/8
   o 52-week high-low:          25 � to 14 �
   
                    OPERATING RESULTS
                 in millions, year ended May 31

   o Revenue                                 $600 
                                          *   
                                          *   450    (Well, it looked better
                                          *           in the article!)
                                          *   300
                                     *    *
                                     *    *   150
                                 *   *    *
                         -    *  *   *    *     0
                       --------------------------
                        '84 '85 '86 '87 '89*

   o Net Income                           *  $ 80 
                                          *   
                                          *    60   
                                          *         
                                     *    *    40
                                     *    *
                                     *    *    20
                                 *   *    *
                         -    *  *   *    *     0
                       --------------------------
                        '84 '85 '86 '87 '89*


                   * Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette estimate


*** End of All Articles ***

    Thanks, Hal.   You are right on the money, from what I can see.
    
    Lets throw field training into the same flame.   We are losing a
    current deal in my office to RTI not only for all the reasons Hal
    flamed about but also for the fact that the RTI tech support guy
    blows the doors off what this district can provide.  This guy is
    not only flash, but also knows the Ingres internal optimizer algorithms
    backward and forward.  His counterparts in this office cover about
    35 products and are lucky if they've ever even USED the product
    they're trying to give presales support for.  They provide ZERO
    knockoffs against the competition because in most cases they have
    NO idea what the competition can and can't do.  99% of the people
    in this office think Oracle is 10 times faster than Rdb. Etc, etc.
    
    I've worked in engineering and I've worked in the field.  If we
    don't get some semblance of that high powered engineering talent
    out here to help sell, you guys can invent 'till the cows come home
    and no one will buy it.
    

    

    
    The good guy in me says,
    
      "Gee, Mike (Booth), sorry to open this can of worms.  I didn't
       expect that we'd get into ~flaming~ as we have!"
    
    While the bad guy in me says,
    
      "OK, the last entry was 4-27.  Let's redirect.  Perhaps it would
       be useful to discuss how some of the field people have gotten
       *around* such situations.  True, it's easiest to discuss how
       we've all been burned by lack of expertise, lack of focus in
       product or communication, or simply from the 'other guy' being
       'slicker'.   Would anyone care to relate how, if ever, they've
       been able to circumvent these situations?  Cases where they've
       used techniques to de-fuse the 'other guy' before the customer
       had been sold by slick marketing or technical knowledge?
      
      "Or, rather, what you would have needed to accomplish the same?"
    
    Frankly I've found this dicussion rather interesting, 'cause I'm
    pretty much in the same boat as many others... I love database,
    I've been doing it for years, but I always find myself a bit behind
    the times - a little bit lacking in some cases.  I've got multiple
    customers, multiple salespeople to support, multiple products to
    know, and yet only a single minute left over in any given day.
    
    "What can I use to make my job easier?  More effective?  Efficient?"
    
    BH

    Potential Cartoon:                             
                                                   
    Picture of a partially opened door with the title 'DEC Director
    of Corporate Advertising Policy'. On the wall you can see a framed
    saying of 'And the Meek Shall Inheriet the Earth'.        
                                                              
    I agree with Michael Booth the message the field is delivering is
    more agressive but is still very low tone above our level.     
                                                              
    Don't forget that the world revolves around metrics. How is an ORACLE
    salesrep measured? SOFTWARE SALES. How is a DEC rep measured? HARDWARE
    SALES. Now I know that a certain componet of a rep's budget is SPG
    but ... You also have to remember that a salesrep always is looking
    at the amount of time and risk associated with trying to close business
    with a certain strategy. One way to reduce time and effort and risk
    is to support a customer wishing to buy ORACLE. Now we all know
    that a DB purchase is a long term benefit for both the customer
    and DEC but most salesreps I know are not on the same account longer
    than 2 years. The reality is that we measure our sales force on
    short term goals.                                        
             
    But, we are getting there. We have significantly increased RDB sales
    in this district largely due to specialists merrily dancing on
    salesreps heads to the point of refusing SW support on an account
    if RDB was not position as our prime solution.
    
    We've been pushing the message of why the DB is
    important. The sales organization has also had a couple of close
    calls with customers looking at SEQUENT! This last point hit them
    where they live.                               
    
                                                   
    But just think what we could gain by running one ad in DIGITAL review
    with the true market share and license numbers!