IBM posts good number yet how frustrating is this...
Not a technical support thread: it's a marketing/branding gripe sparked by press coverage of IBM's quarterly results, which credited growth to "DB2" and the Information Management line without naming Informix. Gumby argued IBM mislabels the pillar (renamed Information Management around 2005) and doesn't know how to sell IDS, especially in SMB; Serge Rielau countered that DB2 and Informix are now separate brands under IM, which helps Informix. Others added complaints about UK channel/partner cuts and lack of Informix marketing, plus a link showing IM grew 18% with no product breakdown. No resolution — it ends as unsettled opinion and speculation.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
\
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > From el Reg: > "IBM's software business - which is driven at least in part by its > mainframe, Power, and x64 server platform sales - rose by 3 per cent > in the quarter to $6.4bn in revenues. In constant currency, it grew at > 9 per cent. The key branded middleware products in its Software Group > - WebSphere, DB2, Tivoli, Lotus, and Rational brands - accounted for > 61 per cent of software sales in the quarter and grew at 6 per cent. > That's only because database and information management products had a > great quarter." > > -=- > Ok on one hand, 'database and information management' done good. > > Yet they still call the Information Management pillar DB2. (The name > was changed back in 2005.) Where did he say "pillar" in the above quote? One of the things that has happened last year is the branding of IDS and DB2 software underneath IM. That is a pre-condition for marketing. Also keep in mind that the elephant here is DB2 for zOS. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab
> One of the things that has > happened last year is the branding of IDS and DB2 software underneath > IM. Correction: that would be Informix. -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab
> From: srielau@ca.ibm.com > Subject: Re: IBM posts good number yet how frustrating is this... > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:27:19 -0500 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > From el Reg: > > "IBM's software business - which is driven at least in part by its > > mainframe, Power, and x64 server platform sales - rose by 3 per cent > > in the quarter to $6.4bn in revenues. In constant currency, it grew at > > 9 per cent. The key branded middleware products in its Software Group > > - WebSphere, DB2, Tivoli, Lotus, and Rational brands - accounted for > > 61 per cent of software sales in the quarter and grew at 6 per cent. > > That's only because database and information management products had a > > great quarter." > > > > -=- > > Ok on one hand, 'database and information management' done good. > > > > Yet they still call the Information Management pillar DB2. (The name > > was changed back in 2005.) > Where did he say "pillar" in the above quote? One of the things that has > happened last year is the branding of IDS and DB2 software underneath > IM. That is a pre-condition for marketing. > Also keep in mind that the elephant here is DB2 for zOS. > > Cheers > Serge Serge! You're alive! Nice try on spin. What do you call Websphere, Lotus, Tivoli and Rational? They are not the names of the products but the names of the pillar. So when you include DB2 in that comment, you are referring to DB2 as the pillar. Oh and the Information Management 'branding' didn't happen last year, it happened in 2005. I guess it takes about 3 years before people in the pillar got the memo. ;-) (Yeah, those of us who were customer facing had to change our .signatures and business cards to reflect the change.) With respect to the 'elephant' yeah, that *is* a problem. Didn't 'cha know that the mainframe is being replaced by the 'cloud'? Actually I did get a call from a head hunter about a customer here in Chicago who's moving 16+ TB off the mainframe on to a cluster of Microsoft boxes. So long big iron DB2 and IMS, hello Microsoft cluster! (In 5 years when the project is done, I'll wager I get a call about converting it, or if Moore's law continues to hold, Microsoft might work...) But hey! What do I know? I was just 'informed' that IDS *is* the lead database for the SMB market. You know, the space that IBM doesn't know how to compete in? It just goes to prove my point. IBM can't sell a product they don't know anything about. They get their partners to do it for them. -G _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009
*sigh* Of course you knwo more than I do because you are not with IBM anymore. "DB2 Software" and "Informix Software" are brands under the IM Pillar. It was quite visible at IOD, but you didnt go there of course... And as you quite correctly point out that is a change from having only one brand: "Information Management" as it has been for the past few years (I take your word that that was done in 2005). If you would be a tad open minded you would see that this is a good thing for Informix. Someone has realized that IM (which is responsible for the lion share of revenue in SWG) is now too coarse. Cheers Serge -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab
On Jan 21, 8:28 am, Serge Rielau <srie...@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > *sigh* Of course you knwo more than I do because you are not with IBM > anymore. > That's funny Serge. I just happened to look at some of my last batch of business cards that I had to yet again get when Pam McG. sent out the memo ... That was back in '05. Since then I believe she moved over to IGS/BCS. I could probably find an old PC that still has notes on it and pull up an archive and find the memo. Assuming that my old PC still works... But you still prove the point that it took 3 years for you to get the note that DB2 became IM. Not really your fault, just that it goes to show how slow things move within IBM. (Except when it comes time to make people redundant, then things get done real fast. ;-) Lab Services goes by a different name now. I think they're called 'Center of Excellence' something from the Websphere team. (Websphere was using that term back in '03 when I did the SIAC deal). As to Informix. Informix died when IBM acquired the database division from Ass-n-tail. IDS was the product, Informix was the brand. Actually you had SE, IDS and XPS as the products. Now you really have IDS. But why quibble points. And yes, the I in IDS stands for Informix. ;-) The real interesting fact is that IBM is pumping up the volume and trying to break out of their Aligned and Integrated accounts. They are slowly learning that they are losing ground in their hallow marketplace. Unfortunately, IBM doesn't know how to sell IDS. I mean IDS is outselling DB2 in the SMB space and if they want to get in to the SMB market, they need to know what's selling. Of course if your OnePoint (Ron) or Oninit (Paul and now Art) it means easy money. IBM has to pull them in to deals in order to close. Maybe that's why they don't have any IT Specialists learning Informix these days. I'm sorry if I keep using Central North as an example. I haven't kept tabs on the other regions. So what have we learned. IBM still doesn't market anything but at a divisional/pillar level and has done a poor job at letting the world know that Information Management is the new name for the DB2 pillar.
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > (Websphere was using that term back in '03 when I did the SIAC deal). Gumby, I don't mean to offend, but if you drag up one more of your desperately dull and boring "war stories", I'm afraid I'm going to have to get on a plane to Chicago and kill you. -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.
On Jan 21, 9:29 am, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > (Websphere was using that term back in '03 when I did the SIAC deal). > > Gumby, I don't mean to offend, but if you drag up one more of your > desperately dull and boring "war stories", I'm afraid I'm going to have > to get on a plane to Chicago and kill you. > Geez and here I thought you Brits and faux Brits wanted to come to Chicago for the shopping. :-P Ok, you're right. I guess I don't need to trot out the old examples of what I did or have to prove that I know more that I'm legally allowed to talk about. The point of this thread was to show that yet again, IBM drops the ball. When it comes to reporting the financial numbers, you don't just blame the IM execs, but you have SWG and IBM senior execs themselves for this blunder. I think that its pretty sad that every year IBM IM execs trot out and with a wink and a nod say a few things that they shouldn't to a few people in the know. Yet even if true, IBM IM doesn't capitalize on Informix. As Serge so brilliantly points out, IDS sells in SMB land. IBM wants to get more in to SMB land because the 20 of the 80/20 rule is shrinking. IBM can't sell a product they don't know. So if IBM wants to expand their footprint, how come they aren't expanding their sales force's expertise in a product that they own and is selling in their target marketplace? I keep hearing that things are getting better. Yeah sure. IDS is getting better and there's yet another con-call with Jerry about IDS's road map. But when is IBM IM execs going to get their collective heads out of their collective arse and wake up and see what IDS can do for them? One thing to note: In the press, IM didn't grow double digits.... I wonder what the rumors are about IDS growth... -G
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > One thing to note: In the press, IM didn't grow double digits.... I > wonder what the rumors are about IDS growth... I wonder too. :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.
Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > That's funny Serge. What would be funny Michael, would be if you actually read what I wrote. -- Serge Rielau DB2 Solutions Development IBM Toronto Lab
"Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gumby@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2689f9b5-80a7-4407-8c8b-a4ef72c4a795@a39g2000prl.googlegroups.com... >> The real interesting fact is that IBM is pumping up the volume and trying to break out of their Aligned and Integrated accounts. They are slowly learning that they are losing ground in their hallow marketplace. Unfortunately, IBM doesn't know how to sell IDS. I mean IDS is outselling DB2 in the SMB space and if they want to get in to the SMB market, they need to know what's selling. Of course if your OnePoint (Ron) or Oninit (Paul and now Art) it means easy money. IBM >> has to pull them in to deals in order to close. Here in Blightly, IBM has for 2009 drastically cut back its Channel support. Every Business Partner and VAD I know has lost its Software Group Business Partner Manager and new ones have not yet been announced even though it's now late January. There are rumours that none will be, and IBM is instead to channel (pardon the pun) its efforts into *direct* sales to SMB (or whatever it's called today). IBM's really good at understanding and selling to small businesses, so this will obviously be a roaring success.
On Jan 21, 12:38 pm, Serge Rielau <srie...@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > That's funny Serge. > > What would be funny Michael, would be if you actually read what I wrote. > Serge, I did read what you wrote. "Where did he say "pillar" in the above quote? One of the things that has happened last year is the branding of IDS and DB2 software underneath IM. That is a pre-condition for marketing. " The fact that you're trying to defend IBM on this is pretty pathetic. The pillar has been Information Management since the end of '04 or early '05(I forget the actual date the name change became official. Like I said, I'm sure I can go back and search through my Notes database of e-mail.) So the fact that an author relaying financial information stating DB2 as the pillar is just plain wrong. As far as branding. DB2 is the product name. IDS is the product name. Informix... that's a name from the past, just like Lab Services. Informix the company ended after they acquired Ass-n-tail and then Ass- n-tail management took over. Informix the brand ended with the acquisition by IBM, which was completed Jan 1, 2001. Now that we have that out of the way... Why don't you tell us if IDS sales still have been growing double digit yr/yr and qtr/qtr ? Not that I want an exact number but just a comment to say that the growth has been sustained. Of course we all want to know if those are net new customers or just large customers growing the number of licenses. :-) I guess its too bad DB2 is dragging the Information Management numbers down. :-) -G
On Jan 21, 1:30 pm, "Captain Pedantic" <theharlequi...@hotmail.com> wrote: > "Ian Michael Gumby" <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:2689f9b5-80a7-4407-8c8b-a4ef72c4a795@a39g2000prl.googlegroups.com... > > >> The real interesting fact is that IBM is pumping up the volume and > > trying to break out of their Aligned and Integrated accounts. They are > slowly learning that they are losing ground in their hallow > marketplace. Unfortunately, IBM doesn't know how to sell IDS. I mean > IDS is outselling DB2 in the SMB space and if they want to get in to > the SMB market, they need to know what's selling. Of course if your > OnePoint (Ron) or Oninit (Paul and now Art) it means easy money. IBM > > >> has to pull them in to deals in order to close. > > Here in Blightly, IBM has for 2009 drastically cut back its Channel support. > Every Business Partner and VAD I know has lost its Software Group Business > Partner Manager and new ones have not yet been announced even though it's > now late January. There are rumours that none will be, and IBM is instead > to channel (pardon the pun) its efforts into *direct* sales to SMB (or > whatever it's called today). > > IBM's really good at understanding and selling to small businesses, so this > will obviously be a roaring success. Do I detect a hint of sarcasm? ;-) I think that its a sad decision. When IBM acquired Informix, the channels group stayed pretty much intact. Charlie Ills killed off most of the Informix sales force because of the large amount of overlap. (Ok so Charlie Ills was US and not *global*) Then Charlie went on to kill BEA. The point was that IBM admitted that Informix did channels better. It would be interesting to see what happens in channels moving forward. But hey! I guess since DB2 isn't really a major channels product (who but IBM wants to sell it?) maybe thats why they're killing off your support. :-P -G
> One of the things that has > happened last year is the branding of IDS and DB2 software underneath > IM. That is a pre-condition for marketing. Now that all pre-conditions are met, which took IBM only 8 (lost) years since the takeover of Informix, when can we expect that IBM actually starts the marketing machine for Informix ? We probably have to wait another couple of years until IBM has put their processes in place and starts advertising IDS. During that time the big O is even getting bigger, SUN will make it's way into the enterprise with MySQL and MS SQL server will bypass IBM in terms of database marketshare (:- But who cares as long as IBM makes this world a "Smarter Planet" :-)
eric@herber-consulting.de wrote: > > But who cares as long as IBM makes this world a "Smarter Planet" :-) Indeed, the irony of IBM encouraging everyone else to be smarter is palpable. :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.
> One thing to note: In the press, IM didn't grow double digits.... I > wonder what the rumors are about IDS growth... > > -G Mike, here is more specific statement regarding the numbers: http://www.itjungle.com/bns/bns012109-story01.html "This growth came in large part from IBM's so-called Information Management product line, which includes DB2, other databases, and related tools and which had an 18 percent spike in sales in the quarter (up 25 percent at constant currency). That kind of growth rate in this kind of economy for these kinds of products is impressive." But unfortunately no break down of the numbers. My guess is that "Cinderella" (IDS) once again saved the quarter for IBM IM.
On Jan 22, 6:38 am, e...@herber-consulting.de wrote: > > One thing to note: In the press, IM didn't grow double digits.... I > > wonder what the rumors are about IDS growth... > > > -G > > Mike, > > here is more specific statement regarding the numbers: > > http://www.itjungle.com/bns/bns012109-story01.html > > "This growth came in large part from IBM's so-called Information > Management product line, > which includes DB2, other databases, and related tools and which had > an 18 percent spike > in sales in the quarter (up 25 percent at constant currency). That > kind of growth rate in this > kind of economy for these kinds of products is impressive." > > But unfortunately no break down of the numbers. My guess is that > "Cinderella" (IDS) once again > saved the quarter for IBM IM. Eric, Thanks. My sources for the IBM 'numbers' come more from the financial community where they don't break it down beyond the pillar, if even that. What the financial community cares about is if IBM hit their Wall St. estimate or not. Beating the street means that the economy isn't as bad as it could get. I think that IDS *is* saving someone's bacon, along with Ass-n-tail as an ETL tool. -G