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 : i2 Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AE who wrote (946)	11/10/1998 1:16:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Respond to of 2339

AE: for one thing we like to think i2 is the dominant player in SCM, you will know why (I think) if you can spare a few minutes to read some of the posts here on the thread,just skip over the irrelevant ones like some of the ones from me for example.

To: AE who wrote (946)	11/10/1998 8:15:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Respond to of 2339

i2 Technologies Vs Manugistics. AE: Have you had much luck finding the information you have been looking for? Since I don't know much about MANU, except that they are a competitor of i2 in the SCM segment,I can not comment on MANU specifically. When I replied to your post earlier I didn't have any specific information on SCM segment leadership but since then I found some information which might be of interest to you,so here goes. BTW you can get to this report from the URL I just posted to Jay. Hope this helps. Good investing. =========================================== 'In August 1998, Gartner Group released an update to its Magic Quadrant report identifying i2 as the overall leader in the supply chain planning field. Gartner attributed i2's success to the company having the best combination of completeness of vision and ability to execute.' source:i2 website -------------------------------------------------------------------- SCP Magic Quadrant Update: It's a Horse Race August 7, 1998 Gartner Group Research Note: Markets Author: B. Enslow The race to deliver products before ERP vendors start delivering better SCP solutions has caused SCP specialists to break into a sprint. We review which vendors gained and lost ground. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Core Topic Business Applications: Supply Chain Planning Key Issue: Which vendors will lead the demand and deployment market through the late 1990s? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For enterprises trying to pick a winning supply chain planning vendor, the SCP market is like a horse race on a dry track, where a cloud of dust obscures true vendor capabilities. Overhyped horses can disappoint, while less heralded steady runners can deliver tactical value even though they may never lead the pack. 2H98 will be a critical management time for SCP specialists (i.e., non-ERP). They will need to maintain their momentum while the market growth rate stalls as many enterprises focus on year 2000 projects and lengthen their decision cycles to evaluate their ERP vendors' SCP plans (see Figure 1). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Leaders Quadrant: The most significant change in our leaders quadrant is i2 Technologies' pulling ahead of last year's leader, Manugistics (see Note 1). Two factors contributed to this move: 1) i2's success in integrating acquisitions to provide a broad suite of functionality, though still geared more to discrete repetitive manufacturing through ATO and MTO manufacturers; and 2) its ability to position its offering as clearly differentiated in its optimization capabilities over the ERP vendors' forthcoming solutions. Manugistics remains significantly more robust in process manufacturing scheduling and in implementation methodology for consumer-oriented companies, but it must successfully execute planned changes to its Supply Planning products in 1H98 to maintain clear functional leadership over forthcoming ERP offerings. Manugistics' functional vision has expanded to include products for the discrete, industrial manufacturing world, but it is still working to deliver robust, proven constraint-based manufacturing functionality for this market. As a result, its ability to execute its vision has dipped. ................ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ...........(continued..)