Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : EXLN - Excelon -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Keith Monahan who wrote (432)	4/17/2000 4:39:00 PM
From: Bob Trocchi	Respond to of 811

Kieth... >>It has been my experience that any projects of significance (i.e., over $1 million) typically do not originate from the development groups in large companies.<< I agree with you. I was however not talking about the developers in companies. I should have used the term, Application Providers or something like that. My point is that selling to people who will constantly utilize EXLN's products in their solutions is what gives the greatest leverage. Now I surely can be off base in that perhaps the users or early adopters of EXLN's products will most always be large corporations. IN that case, perhaps direct selling is the only option. If that is the case, then I would believe that a good number of them would rather deal with EXLN rather than an App'l. Developer. On the other hand, every industry has several very leading application providers that supply probably 70-80% of the solutions that companies use in that industry. Getting them to use EXLN in their products will give a fantastic amount of sales leverage. Then these app'l. providers use their sales force and their relationships which are critical to sell their products with EXLN automatically embedded in the solution. Maybe you can help me understand this better. Thanks Bob T.

To: Keith Monahan who wrote (432)	4/17/2000 5:23:00 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 811

Great response Keith. Goldman mentioned that with the B2B integration server, Swiss Re took a manual update process that took 40 people 30 days to complete and trimmed it to 2 people completing the process in one week. This is a powerful story that will spread quickly from the visionaries who are the early adopters of EXLN's products to other companies. Even "old economy" dinosaurs will listen when they hear about headcount reductions like the one noted above. Why? Because they risk being left behind when their competitors cut all that fat out. You guys complained how expensive the product is.....but let's see how expensive it could be to not use it. This is what will sell it. Stories like that spreading like wild fire. This is exactly the kind of efficiency that the information age promised and is only now able to deliver.

To: Keith Monahan who wrote (432)	4/17/2000 6:26:00 PM
From: hasbeen101	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 811

Certainly in the finance industry I would say that 90% of the software spend is on packaged software, and only 10% is on in-house development. That leaves 10% of the market. Then the chances of getting an in-house project off the ground with (say) EXLN instead of ORCL is about 1%. It doesn't matter that EXLN has better technology, because the CEO who you promote as the ideal customer couldn't understand the technology. And ORCL's sales rep just took him to lunch last week and promises that he can give just as much head-count reduction as EXLN anyhow (once again, whether this is true or false is irrelevant to who gets the sale when the decision maker has little grasp of technology). That leave 1% of 10%, i.e. one-thousandth of the market as the maximum potential penetration. I think that helps to explain whay this company has actually shown negative revenue growth over the past 5 quarters. If you have better technology, you should sell through technologists. If you have a better brand, you should sell through the CEO. As a first-order approximation, EXLN does not have a brand. I would wager that way less than 1% of CEOs have ever heard of the company.