SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mike Buckley who wrote (5021)8/21/1999 2:56:00 PM
From: voop  Respond to of 54805
 
As an example, I am aware of some facts about Qualcomm's stock that in the context of gorilla-gaming implications are, frankly, mind-boggling positive. Yet I haven't posted those facts for fear that some lurkers I'm not aware of who might have less discipline than others of us might not absorb those facts in the conservative context we would prefer.


Would you mind providing your thoughts via a PM to a Q bull?

Voop



To: Mike Buckley who wrote (5021)8/21/1999 3:13:00 PM
From: gdichaz  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
A link to the One Gorilla, One King, One Significant Other:

For anyone who follows Qualcomm, JDS Uniphase, and Safeguard Scientifics

Performance this year to date.

techstocks.com

Note: While I chose the Q and Uniphase long ago, the SFE choice is relatively new and I call it a "Significant Other" since I do not see it as either a gorilla or royalty but simply a way to participate in the internut area with the equivalent of a basket of companies.

Also while I am comfortable with both QCOM and JDSU as a gorilla and king respectively, since I try to keep up with telecom equip suppliers, I have very limited knowledge of the internuts. Teflon on this thread knows much more about SFE than I do, so he would be much better equipped to answer questions on it or the internuts generally than I.

Note: This "game" was established for fun and to watch its relative performance.

Cha2



To: Mike Buckley who wrote (5021)8/21/1999 3:22:00 PM
From: Brian K Crawford  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
Mike,

Re: Seibel.

I have been evaluating this one for addition to my portfolio. I like what I see. They appear to be well along in developing their niche markets in the bowling alley. Maybe even in a front office tornado.

The fear that has kept me from purchasing:

Oracle and SAP move in with a bundling strategy that incorporates Front Office into their enterprise wide offerings.

I am thinking in terms of what Microsoft did with their Office product strategy to Lotus, WordPerfect, and the other standalone apps.

How do you see this risk playing out?

Brian



To: Mike Buckley who wrote (5021)8/21/1999 3:38:00 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
Mike Buckley, thanks for your QCOM rebuttal (we were counting on you <g>). Re: Siebel, this from today's Barron's. Any impressions? Greg

August 23, 1999




Software Hardball
More than egos are at stake as Oracle takes on fast-growing Siebel

By Bill Alpert

The Dark Lord of Oracle Systems, Larry Ellison, has cast his Death Star's shadow on one of America's fastest-growing public companies. That company is Siebel Systems, which presides over a prospering corner of the software universe called Customer Relationship Management, or CRM. Since the spring, Oracle has been advertising its CRM ambitions throughout the galaxy, targeting the San Mateo, California-based firm that Tom Siebel has pushed to a $600 million revenue run rate and a $6.5 billion stock-market value. Silicon Valley papers have reported an amusingly ugly clash of e-mails and lawyers' letters, proving at least that the two firms are squaring off over something big. Indeed, Siebel figures the CRM market is already worth a couple of billion dollars in annual sales and is growing 50% a year. So investors in Siebel-and a dozen other hot CRM firms like BroadVision, Vignette and Clarify-want to know if Oracle's CRM Death Star is fully operational.

It isn't. But the schematics for Oracle Sales Version 11i show vaunting ambition, and Ellison has a team of 900 programmers slaving away toward its realization. Oracle also is courting influential consulting firms like PricewaterhouseCoopers, which have been instrumental in Siebel's success but historically hacked off by Oracle's in-house consulting troops. Industry insiders think proof of Oracle's success or failure in its CRM scheme won't appear before yearend. If it works, however, Oracle CRM could pose the only real obstacle to Siebel's ascent to tech heaven.

Siebel's Tom Siebel
In contrast to formerly hot products for the factory and the back office sold by the likes of SAP and PeopleSoft, CRM software like Siebel Sales -- designed to help win and retain customers -- is one of the few exciting sectors in the enterprise software universe. Less expensive solutions for small sales forces are offered by SalesLogix and Onyx Software.

Siebel and its rivals Clarify and Vantive also sell software for maintaining customer profiles in a call center, so that a request for information or support becomes a personalized sales opportunity. In marketing departments, software from such firms as Exchange Applications and the privately held SAS Institute analyzes transactions to identify the most profitable customers for targeted marketing. The newest channel for the CRM vendors is the Internet, where outfits like BroadVision, Vignette and SilkNet help personalize the experience of online customers.

Table: Companies Selling CRM Software

Annual spending for CRM could reach $25 billion by 2005, in the estimation of the Boston firm AMR Research. That's why Siebel claims the market for products like his Siebel '99 suite is only 5% penetrated.

"It's a big, big market," says Siebel, in his distinctive, growling voice. By next year, he predicts, his CRM industry's sales to the "front office" should surpass the back-office sales of Enterprise Resource Planning products from SAP, Oracle and Baan. In the quarter ending next month, he adds, his company should become the second-largest application software seller, hot on the heels of SAP.

Oracle's Larry Ellison
For the six months ended June, Siebel Systems rang up revenues of $299 million, up 82% from the year-earlier period, with profits of $47 million, or 44 cents a share, compared with year-earlier profits of $9 million, or nine cents (which suffered a 13-cent hit from merger costs). Morgan Stanley Dean Witter analyst Chuck Phillips thinks Siebel could earn about $1 a share this year and $1.50 next, calling the $60 stock an outperformer.

"There is a big dog in CRM and it's Tom Siebel," says Adam Klayber, who manages the 1,600 CRM consultants at PricewaterhouseCoopers. "They really own the sales-force automation market for top-tier companies." And thanks to last year's acquisition of the call center software firm Scopus, says Klayber, Siebel's got a hunk of that market, too.

Starting amid a crowded field five years ago, Siebel's firm powered its way to the top with good software, strong alliances and old-fashioned salesmanship. While Oracle was making enemies throughout the business, Siebel teamed with complementary software vendors such as PeopleSoft, JD Edwards and Great Plains Software, as well as hardware makers like Compaq Computer. More important, Siebel recruited the consulting firms that recommend and customize CRM products, firmly securing the commitment of Andersen Consulting through Andersen's acquisition of Siebel stock. Just this month, Siebel added an impressive new consulting partner in IBM, which ditched an internal CRM software project that could have rivaled Siebel's products. News of the elimination of IBM as a potential rival was good for an 11% pop in Siebel's shares. Oracle entered the CRM market in May, with a product called Oracle Sales Version 3i, which the Redwood Shores company claims was worth almost $45 million in May quarter revenues. Mark Barrenechea, Oracle senior vice president in charge of CRM, says one of the first customers is Oracle itself. "We'll certainly eat our own dog food," says Barrenechea.

No one's cavalier about Oracle's potential. The database giant had revenues of $5.1 billion from services and $3.7 billion from software in the year ended May 1999, on which it earned $1.3 billion, or 88 cents a share. Oracle has plenty of large customers already using its applications for Internet commerce, finance or back-office software. Among the first commercial Internet installations was Diamond Multimedia Systems in San Jose, where chief information officer Bernie Miller says a compelling reason for trying Oracle's CRM product is its promise to mesh with the Oracle ERP software Diamond already uses.

That's just the blueprint for Oracle's 11i sales software. "Oracle doesn't have all the pieces today," reports Adam Klayber, of PricewaterhouseCoopers. "But they have a strong group of people working toward that result."

At the same time, Oracle is trying to make up for all the mean things it has done to consultants. At Keane, CRM practice manager Ken Rudin says he met last week with Oracle's team, which offered Keane's consultants free software and training. "Right now they are very hungry," says Rudin.

A key battleground for CRM, say consultants like Adam Klayber, will be the 'Net. "The Web is the defining piece for all these vendors," says the PricewaterhouseCoopers consultant, who believes that Siebel, Clarify and the now-struggling Vantive have already won the war for sales-force automation and call centers. Because the e-CRM war has just begun, however, it figures greatly in the plans of Siebel, Oracle and Web-centric CRM outfits like BroadVision, Vignette and SilkNet, as well as the smaller Primus Knowledge Solutions, Pivotal and soon-be-public E Piphany.

Tom Siebel sees no shadow in his path, except his own. "If and when Oracle releases a functionally complete product, we'd expect them to become a competitor," says Siebel. "But Oracle today is just not a factor in the market."


Return to top of page | Format for printing
Copyright © 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



To: Mike Buckley who wrote (5021)8/21/1999 4:26:00 PM
From: gdichaz  Respond to of 54805
 
Addendum to the One, One, One post:

Mike, your recent posts on the Q here are among the best of yours I have seen over many years. Know I overdo the kudos sometimes, but these were very very very helpful in dealing directly with the Q's supposed weak spots, and your approach on avoiding group think thoughtful. Enough of that.

Re the Q and JDS Uniphase.

Thinking about it, I want to try to make it clear that the game I have put together is just that - a game.

As one who has followed the Q carefully for a long time I have no hesitation in my choice of the Q as the gorilla for my game.

To a somewhat lesser extent, I am comfortable in choosing JDSU as a king. But a king is much more fragile IMO than a gorilla. And it is important to recognize that JDSU has a competitor of considerable growth prospects in its own right SDLI. Since the metrics of JDSU make JDSU dominant in fiberoptics component equipment supply with more than a 2 to 1 market compared to SDLI, I do consider JDSU a full king. But in fairness, suggest that anyone interested in the field of fiberoptics look beyond JDSU. And the first candidate to consider due diligence on IMO is its nearest competitor SDLI. And going out a bit further afield to fiberoptics systems a look at HLIT could be worthwhile. Neither SDLI nor HLIT are kings, much less are they gorillas, but they are worth a look nevertheless in the context of considering JDSU - for example HLIT uses JDSU's widgets.

Finally, SFE was added to the game on a whim, since I couldn't stand not having the game have a small piece of the internut action and SFE seemed like a way to participate "conservatively" - how is that for an oxymoron? :-). As I said, Teflon knows the internuts, I am just beginning my learning process.

And the weights are Q 1/2, JDSU 1/3 and SFE 1/6.

Cha2