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 : Mbrane (NASDAQ: MBRN) - An enterprise solution? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Shinie who wrote (313)	3/27/1999 3:41:00 PM
From: flickerful	Respond to of 1238

Procurement Shifts To Portals (03/26/99, 6:56 p.m. ET) By Richard Karpinski, InternetWeek Commerce One will move beyond electronic procurement next week and lay out broad plans to enable the building of open-trading marketplaces worldwide. The move, which was expected, nonetheless shakes up the rapidly growing business-to-business market where buyers and sellers of goods and services connect via the Internet. Commerce One will introduce MarketSite3.0, the latest version of its software platform to build and link online trading communities via a flexible XML<Picture>-based architecture. It also will unveil new deals with international carriers BT and Nippon Telegraph and Telephone, which will join MCI WorldCom in the United States in hosting large MarketSite trading communities. With MarketSite 3.0, those three umbrella-trading hubs can be linked via XML, as well as to any future communities built with the platform, said product manager Mike Micucci. "We fundamentally believe closed trading communities don't work over the long term," Micucci said. While Commerce One would argue that its vision of open trading networks is broader, many rivals are also building trading portals. Ariba Technologies and Intelisys Electronic Commerce have detailed procurement portal plans. And Clarus, which this month unveiled a new version of its procurement software, will shortly launch a hosted portal service. Suppliers said portal can speed catalog delivery. "Time is money. The faster we can get a buying organization a Staples catalog, the better," said Anne-Marie Keane, vice president of contract marketing for Staples, the office supplier. An open approach is key for buyers as well, said Forrester Research analyst Stan Dolberg. "You don't want to get locked into enterprise software that is completely hard-wired into one portal or aggregation hub," he said. MarketSite includes support for content management, automated transactions, supplier-catalog construction, and hosted applications. Also included are business services, built with partners, to smooth the buying and selling process. These include payment services from American Express, tax services from Taxware, and freight services from agreements with TanData and United Parcel Service. Also next week, Commerce One will debut a new version of its MarketSite.Net Web portal, which runs on the MarketSite software. The portal will support not only Commerce One's own applications, but others as well. Rightworks ProcureWorks and SAP's R/2 and R/3 purchasing modules, as well as store-building software from Intershop Communications, have been tested with MarketSite.

To: Shinie who wrote (313)	3/27/1999 5:25:00 PM
From: Veiko Herne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1238

Thank Cathy. What Do You think about it? We made also a CTD Repository project management interface using Net.DB. If somebody is interested about this, please contact me mailto:veiko@financials98.com. We are in position to reevaluate our financials98 modules packaging. The following letter has been sent out and if somebody here have any ideas, please write them: When we decided about the concept to our Financials98 accounting module, most of the accounting products was built for postings and tax reporting. We built our product different, like: GL postings can be in most cases automated as summarized results of business process applications; There must be high flexibility to build up account chart and GL to fit in different businesses and different analyze needs; Several different and easy to built reports (like income statements, balance sheets, cash flow statements) must be allowed for different groups (management, owners, IRS), budgeting and financial analysis must be directly integrated to GL. Based on the marketing feedback people are expecting to buy budgeting and ratio analysis modules separately. Do we must change our strategy and start to sell versions of those modules without a GL integration? For our customers need, we have built additional modules like sales&invoicing and to follow those payments a cash-flow management, project and and task management and depreciable assets and long term costs management. We included previously all those modules to one package - Financials98+. Currently we believe, that future of invoicing and cash-flow management is outsourcing them to financial institutions and e-commerce companies. So are we making a right decision to forget those modules within general accounting application? For project and tasks management, we built a separate product using web interface. With WEB interface, we extended the functionality to help-desk and job-cost functionality and added easy and flexibility for user interface design by webmasters. The web interface also allows self service and minimizes the extra job to manage projects. As there have been very minimal interest to this web based module, do we made a wrong decision or haven't we yet market it to right customer base? We believed, that new media and computer software companies will love this. Lot's of governments have been reduced the regulations for depreciable assets, but in US there are very tight regulations about those assets and long-term costs. As we see US as one of our future market, our idea is to include our asset management version with basic accounting package. Will this be a good decision or do customers still want to purchase a asset management separately? Any feedback about those issues are welcome. Veiko

To: Shinie who wrote (313)	4/10/1999 8:00:00 AM
From: Veiko Herne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1238

Hi I just got a BETA program agreements from Centura to new Net.DB version. Those agreements are very tight, what I can do and can't do and must do. Those agreements must be signed personally and send pack. Interesting concept, previously there has been no such tight control and beta programs was more public. Personally I like it, because I have struggled on same problems delivering evaluation copies over internet and find out, that Anonymous and public downloads don't generate sales and leads. So we decided also to make evaluation contract, signed by internet (this is done btw using Net.DB at financials98.com. We had some problems with local teenagers, who liked to input false information and stupid words to it, so we even made a special clause to estonian version of evaluation agreement, which says that for inputting false information, You are liable to pay us $XXX plus all the cost to solve Your identity. The problem was gone away after this. Same meaning is in Centura's contract, which says that if You don't delete the product after beta program end date, Centura will charge You. Veiko