Re: iSeries (non-) Marketing - part 24,566

[Evan Harris <spanner@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Hans

> First, note that I'm just some programmer lackey buried somewhere deep in 
> this organization who has absolutely no input into the company's ad 
> strategy. But I have some idea of what business this company wants to be 
> in, and as far as I can tell, the current ads we see are consistent with 
> that strategy. (And I actally like some of those ads!)

Fair enough Your response just happened to be the one I picked ! :)

> Second, it's not really appropriate to compare IBM's strategy with that of 
> other companies. MS (and others) are pushing specific products. But things 
> happen so fast in this industry that it's very easy to get caught out. And 
> so basically IBM's "product" is services. (That may well be an 
> over-simplification.) That is, whereas MS's business model depends on 
> extracting as many licenses as possible for a single piece of software on 
> a single machine, IBM's business model is less sensitive to changing 
> technology since we seem to be embracing many different technologies. 
> Also, MS has this nasty habit of getting into competition with it's 
> business partners, which is also a game we don't want to play.
>
> My point here is that comparisons with other companies, especially MS, are 
> meaningless.

Well I'd agree with you here because right now IBM is playing a very 
different game, however you have left out the other two brands I 
_deliberately_ included in my comparison and moved the discussion to MS's 
business practises, not the product/marketing difference I was pointing at.

Your (i.e. IBM's) competitors are standing in front of the customer saying 
"we recommend our product for your business needs and it will do everything 
you want it to and more." IBM is standing in front of the customer and 
saying "if you like Oracle, or Sun, or Microsoft, or Dell we can do 
something like all those (only better), once you decide whether you want a 
database on unix, or a database on intel."

Without drawing this not-so-imaginary conversation out the end result is 
that IBM no longer proposes a solution, or at the very least is at pains 
not to makes too much of a pitch in any one area, but says take any 
solution and I can help you with it.

If IBM is unwilling to propose solutions, or back vendors who are proposing 
solutions (as per Mark's reply, which is similar to what I have also 
observed out in the real world) they destroy the credibility you need at 
the negotiating table to seriously propose a _different_ solution like an 
iSeries. I mean, how does it look when a BP proposes an iSeries and the 
manufacturer won't stand up and say that it is the best solution ?

My experience in the market is that IBM is not willing to propose or 
unreservedly support an iSeries solution because it is scared of missing 
out on a sale. Consequently it proposes solutions that are middle of the 
road, wishy-washy, dare-to-be mediocre efforts, which will always be 
subject to competition for hardware, software and services on an on-going 
basis because they are the same proposals every one else is making, except 
with different badges.

Not only is the iSeries a great machine, but if IBM invested the effort to 
get the iSeries into accounts it would reap the benefits for a lot longer 
than the short term gains it is currently looking for, as it already has 
for many years.

I would even go as far as to say that the current ability to fund 
advertising for xSeries and consulting is largely an outcome of IBM's past 
courage in pushing it's own barrow and thus (still) providing a solid cash 
flow from its "legacy" systems to allow the xSeries and pSeries solutions 
to be put into accounts at a massive discount to get a sale "right now".

The only problem with this solution is that you get to fight the fight 
every day of the week and eventually you lose some customers, you win some 
customers, you reduce your margins... ad infinitum

At least with an iSeries or Zeries solution once it is in has to be won 
back the hard way. The other companies sales people then have to argue on 
IBM's terms not their own.

> Thirdly, personally, I don't disagree with the need for more iSeries 
> exposure, provided it's in the right place. But the right place, in my 
> opinion, is the trade publications, not the general media.

I am not so concerned about this, but I would like to see a situation where 
IBM dared to be a little different and promote its own creations instead 
of  having a "me too" mentality.

The problem with the strategy IBM is undertaking is that the logic is 
beguiling but its the same lazy logic that got Andersens into so much 
trouble (not that I'm suggesting IBM is doing anything crooked ! ) It's 
just that the idea that consulting and services can make all the profit and 
you can forget about what got to where you can offer those solutions is 
just absurd. The credibility to offer the solutions and services is 
actually derived from the success implementing and delivering IBM's own 
solutions.

> Finally, I wonder if there are zSeries or xSeries fans who are complaining 
> about lack of ad exposure in their particular arenas! ;-)

> Cheers! Hans