Re: SSA Global acquired by Infor

Mr. Jedrzejewicz,

What about the black helicopters! Have you seen them too?

You are correct that I should have done more research regarding your 
previous postings. I apologize for that, but you had just gotten on my 
last nerve, and this is an emotional issue with me. I have worked with and 
consulted BPCS since 1997, and before that MAPICS for 18 years (and that 
does not make me an expert, but I have seen a lot come and go during this 
time). I spent two years working with one of the first companies 
installing BPCS version 6.0, which was anything but pleasant. I have 
worked with every version from 4,05 to 8.1 with as many as 40 different 
companies. My point is that I believe that SSA finally got it right with 
version 8.X for companies that need what I will call "advanced 
functionality" to address Lean Manufacturing, etc. I now am forced to 
accept another unknown entity (Infor) and trust it to provide good 
stewardship for this product. Your counter points regarding government 
intervention make sense, but SOMEBODY should care about the 37,000 
customers and the potential impact that these "mergers" may have. Your 
counter points regarding an improved product, I still believe are 
subjective without more knowledge and experience about the Infor mode of 
operation after an acquisition. Will they continue to develop and improve 
the product, or will they sit back and collect the revenue until it fades 
into obsolescence? I try not to react to gossip, but some of the initial 
feedback I have received has not reflected an active involvement by Infor 
with the companies they have acquired. I hope I am wrong again, and I hope 
that you and I are not the only ones willing to talk this out (even 
emotional talk is better than complacency). 


Frederick C. Davy, CPIM, PMP
Business Systems Analyst
Interface Solution, Inc.
Phone: (315) 592-8101
Fax: (315) 592-8481
e-mail: fcdavy@xxxxxxxxxxxx




"Tom Jedrzejewicz" <tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: bpcs-l-bounces+fcdavy=sealinfo.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx
05/18/2006 01:47 AM
Please respond to
"SSA's BPCS ERP System" <bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
"SSA's BPCS ERP System" <bpcs-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: [BPCS-L] SSA Global acquired by Infor






On 5/17/06, Frederick C Davy <fcdavy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Tom Jedrzejewicz (an alias, no doubt), I am not familiar with past
> postings authored on this forum. Can it be you represent an interest 
very
> close to Infor?

So you think that I am an Infor sock puppet, who joined this little
list to shout the praises of the merger from the rooftops.  Are you
kidding me?  Do you watch for the silent black helicopters too?

For the love of Mike -- did you even check before you sullied my
(rather uncommon) name?  I did a search of the archives for my last
name and got 1764 matches.

> At any rate, l want to respond to your counter points (which I might 
point
> out are extremely "company" centered).

I don't like intrusive government, and I don't like activist
government.  The alternative to "company centered" is
government-directed, which is usually far worse.

You think my comments are "company centered"; I think yours are
socialist.  Which philosophy has proven better for humanity in the
last 100 years?

> 1. You say that acquisition (if done right) equates to improving your
> product?? A product does not become "improved" because you eliminate the
> competition.

Done properly an acquisition can improve the product line, and can
bring features and functions that are better.  That is almost
certainly the case here, because of the variety of similar packages
coming under common ownership.  Some PRMS functions are better than
the BPCS alternative, and vice versa.  PRMS has things BPCS doesn't,
and vice versa.  Together, a better product can be made.

> 2. What would you suggest would represent a compelling reason for
> anti-trust enforcement?

About the only compelling reason I can think of is when there is so
little competition for a necessary product or service that supply and
demand no longer applies.  I think there is a good case that
Microsoft's Windows desktop OS is a monopoly.

Which kind of makes my point.  If government can't get that right, why
would we think that it would get the highly complex ERP market?

> Wait until several thousand customers suffer
> extreme business disruption to the point they go out of business.

Why is it the responsibility of government to keep businesses from
failing?  If a company fails because Infor raises maintenance and
doesn't deliver, the fault is the management of the company, not Infor
and not the government.

> The EU
> and our government has spent a lot of time analyzing Microsoft, but no 
one
> (especially the EU) is worried about SAP? When does it become compelling
> enough and how long will the recovery need to be, before it means
> something.

The idea that there are anti-trust issues in the ERP market is
nonsense in my view.  No one has more than 50% of the market, and
there are lots of small players doing well and making money.

> The Oracle shareholder are free to sell? That's not very
> reassuring to the thousands of PeopleSoft customers, but then I forgot, 
we
> don't care about the customers, do we. I wonder who lined the pockets of
> the company (like SSA) for many years.

Every time a customer purchases or renews, they make a choice, and
there is an exchange of value.  These exchanges are not done at the
point of a gun, but rather entered into willingly.  There are always
been alternatives, although they may not be easy or as inexpensive.

Infor is probably going to draft a path to get all of it's iSeries
customers onto a small number of platforms.  Part of that path will
likely be pricing incentives that make staying on old versions
unpalatable.  And the customers get to choose; upgrade, stay and
renew, or stay and don't renew.

> You say we shouldn't expect SSA to
> be "forced" to stay in a business they no longer care about. SSA expects
> and get contractual agreements with their customers to make sure we pay
> our share. Do we not have a reasonable expectation that they in turn 
will
> ensure that our investments in their products is safe? What a concept!

These transactions have terms; all parties should live up to those
terms.  Certainly, Infor will be required to live up to the terms in
agreements SSA entered into with customers.  Beyond that, they owe
their customers nothing.  There is no implied promise to stick around
as long as the customer thinks they are needed.