To: Gene Hooker who wrote (816 ) 2/3/2000 8:42:00 PM From: Mohan Marette Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1938
The equal splitting of Net Rev applies only to that portion of the Net Revenue generated through GM's TradeXchange. GM and their suppliers (GM has over 30,000 suppliers) intend to conduct their Buy/Sell transactions via the TradeXchange,the suppliers can also bring in their suppliers and trade associates into TradeXchange to conduct transactions independently using the Xchange,let us call it a 'multiplier effect'. Also note the sharing of Net Revenue will be 'after the repayment of both parties' expenses' . If memory serves me correctly GM has spent some $10 mil to develop TradeXchange which runs on Commerce One's Technology, I don't know what the value of CMRC's investment in the project is. I am also not sure about the % they will charge as trasaction fees. GM is expecting to conduct $50 bil worth of transaction through the site the first year (2000). As you may know GM is also trying to get other Auto Manufacturers under the umbrella of the Xchange, also there are plans to rope in companies other than auto manufacturers. This being the case GM gets 19.9% of Commerce One,with an option to increase the stake to 25% after 3 years is what I am gathering. Net Revenues generated outside of GM's TradeXchange (Now called MarketSite I think) via Global Trading Web would be treated separately I believe.As you may know Commerce One has already roped in a nice list of global giants as customers, such as Shell,Swiss Telecom,Boots,Schlumberger,Cable & Wireless,Siemens,Weyerhouser,Warner Lambert and others, you can find the customer list at this URL commerceone.com Anyway GM gets 19.9% of CMRC, plus they get 50% of the net revenue of TradeXchange, on the other hand Commerce One gets access to GM's huge supplier base, 50% of net revenue generated through this venture and gets a very strong partner who will hopefully help enhance the business further. I fail to see anything negative about the deal and I don't think Commerce One got shafted either. Mind you, I gathered these information from publicly available sources so I can not vouch for its accuracy. I am sure a call to the CFO or even a call to the Investor Relations department of Commerce One would clarify the issue further I am sure. If anybody is out there who has contradictory views or better knowledge about the situation please post your opinion.