« June 26, 2006 | Main | June 28, 2006 »
supercalifragilisticexpi - SIP – idocious
June 27, 2006
Here is my unedited Outlook from the July 2006 issue of SIP Magazine.
----------
The proliferation of contact numbers and addresses is staggering. I have tried to keep my e-mail accounts to a minimum and I still have five. I have 5 different contact phone numbers and then there are fax lines for the various locations. On top of that I have addresses for Skype and other VoIP services. For all the advancement we are seeing in the world of communications we are just adding more and more confusion to our personal and business lives. What we need to do is simplify the world of communications.
The people at Communigate may disagree. Their mantra is SIPifying communications and they have solutions that allow an e-mail address to be the single address for users regardless of whether they want to communicate via voice, video, or text messaging. They are driving the world towards an e-mail-based communications model allowing users to focus less on devices and more on a single address for their regular communications.
This is not a new concept and others have lamented the concept of VoIP islands that don’t speak with on another. If e-mail worked the way VoIP does today then when I e-mail from a Hotmail to an MSN account, someone would have to read the Hotmail e-mail and retype it on the MSN system. In other words, calls from one provider to another have to go over the PSTN. The concept of VoIP peering certainly can reduce PSTN usage but this line of reasoning will be taken at a later time.
Getting back to Communigate, they have recently taken their CommuniGate Pro v5.1 software and added an XML API and a Flash client for subscriber mobility. Their goal is to be the middleware that SIP enables the two billion e-mail addresses in the world. Can you imagine if every user was on a common communications system that allowed free communications? What an amazing place the world would be.
If we can get the ILECS to generate revenue from this transformation some how even they might embrace the concept. Then there is that whole USF issue. Again we will take that road at a later time as well.
This new software comes with a new client called Communify that has a Flash-based client and uses XIMSS, an XML API for messaging, scheduling and signaling. The company believes this is the way to drive a full IMS strategy and as you guessed, service providers are their target market. Well their product is touted to scale from the size of an SMB all the way up to the largest of carriers so they have a pretty large audience to address.
There is also support for XMPP or the Jabber protocol meaning Communigate users can now connect with users of other IM systems such as Google Talk. It is worth pointing out that SIP phones will also work with the system.
What excites me about companies like Communigate is that they change the way the world can communicate and they simplify er SIPify the world of communications. It is natural to believe that one day soon we will all have a single identifier and some sorted computer aided logic behind the scenes deciding what calls to take and when. It is also logical to believe that this identify will be presence-enabled and likely use SIP or SIP version XX.
If the future is what I describe above then surely the first step to getting there is by embracing some of the concepts laid out on this page. I am not sure if everyone agrees so feel free to just send me a message to the non-SIPified (for now) address rtehrani@tmcnet.com.
Link this |
Email this |
Leave comment
Trackback URL: supercalifragilisticexpi - SIP – idocious
Technorati
Del.icio.us
BoingBoing
Slashdot
Digg
Spurl
Furl
Salesforce.com and Contactual
June 27, 2006
------------
Behold The Virtual Salesforce
I can tell you from personal experience that managing a sales force is one part art and one part science. Sales managers fulfill the simultaneous roles of parent, friend, confidante, coach and counselor. One of the trickiest issues is knowing when you have succeeded. Whoever coined the old adage, "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it" was spot on. Perhaps he or she was a sales manager.
It can be difficult enough to manage your "direct reports," or the people who work in your organization. An even more complicated issue is how to manage partners or other companies that have been tasked with selling for you.
Often, the management of these activities is accomplished via spreadsheets. Managers pore over these documents for hours at a time, looking for ways to make sense of the data and determine whether the organization will adhere to it budgetary restrictions and sales goals.
Problems such as these are the inspiration for a new service from Salesforce.com, aptly named Partnerforce, which Salesforce bills as its very own "Partner Exchange." Partnerforce connects enterprises and partners through the power of Salesforce.com's AppExchange. In layman’s terms, this product creates a virtual salesforce.
The advantage of Partnerforce, according to the company, is twofold. Partners receive access to CRM software, and the corporation can better manage what those partners are doing. Integrated dashboards are used to allow managers to see what is happening in the sales pipeline throughout the buying cycle. To keep the pipeline full, lead distribution is added into the mix, allowing leads to be distributed to the internal sales team as well as the channel partners. In this way, deals are basically "registered" and fully documented from the start, so the potential for conflict and misunderstanding is minimized from the start. The portals can be branded by each partner, if they so desire, as they are highly customizable.
Salesforce Partner Edition has many, though not all, the features of Salesforce’s flagship CRM product. In addition to the base subscription of Salesforce Enterprise or Unlimited Edition, pricing for Salesforce Partner Edition is $1,500 per partner per year for five partner employees. These are cumulative employees; it's acceptable if one partner has two employees and another has eight, for example.
I spoke with some very enthusiastic individuals at Salesforce.com in my quest to learn more about this new offering: Bruce Francis, vice president, Corporate Strategy; Elay Cohen, product manager; and Kendall Collins, vice president of product marketing. (The three kept passing the discussion back and forth during the course of my conference call, so I will them all joint credit for the information in this article).
The common idea I came away with is that all three believe that Partnerforce is essentially the next "killer app." I certainly believe it has the potential to be a killer app, but I also believe there may enough apathy in the marketplace to make this service irrelevant. Don’t get me wrong, it has all the bells and whistles it needs. It's just that partners are an incredibly tough group of people to get motivated. There is a great deal of inertia, and many people continue to find Excel the application they love to hate. It is just so tough to break a bad habit sometimes.
Doing my part as evangelist of useful technology. I will go out on a short limb and say that partners should definitely try this service, as it genuinely seems designed to make life easier and allow everyone to focus on the most important element - the customer.
Our industry loves buzzwords, so I will at this point introduce the term PRM, or partner relationship management. The term became fashionable at the time of the dotcom boom, and then abruptly went out of style (very much like the dotcoms themselves). Salesforce.com thinks they have discovered the ultimate recipe to make PRM stick this time. If raw enthusiasm is the sole criterion, then based on my conversation, Salesforce.com is in a great position to make it happen.
One part of the solution that impressed me very much is its partner incentive area, where partners request marketing dollars for a specific event. The company would use the system to submit proof of performance (as an attachment) before they receive approval and, subsequently, a check. This is a slick way to get partners used to using the service. After they try it, they might just find they like it. (Just like Mikey and his Life cereal back in the 1970s.)
Another great feature of the service is as follows: when a partner registers a deal, even if they don’t end up selling it, they can benefit by having concrete proof that they were responsible, in part, for the sale.
So where I am skeptical, Salesforce.com sees opportunity. After all, they say that 70 percent of sales are indirect. They are right - there is great potential here. The question remains: will their customers have enough carrots to dangle in front of their partners?
Opinions About An Old Rival
While I was on the phone with Bruce, Elay and Kendall, I had to take a moment and ask what they thought of the acquisition of Siebel by Oracle. After all, the rivalry between these companies is the stuff of CRM legend. Their answer was that they don’t see Siebel as much anymore. Siebel, as they say, doesn’t exist anymore. They indicated that Larry (Ellison, of course) has depressed real estate values on the peninsula (meaning that there are so few Siebel people left). They went on to say that these are “dark days for Oracle and Siebel," as Oracle is tasked with consolidating seven CRM products: a difficult challenge under any circumstances.
I mentioned the good earnings recently posted by Oracle, and Bruce, Elay and Kendall paraphrased Mark Benioff, Salesforce.com’s very quotable CEO, who said that Oracle has "assembled a Shady Pines Retirement Home of enterprise software," or an organization that benefits primarily from rich maintenance revenues.
I will be sure to keep you posted on any updates on Salesforce.com or Oracle as they arise.
[Sidebar]
From Hosted CRM To Hosted Contact Centers
Mansour Salame is the illustrious leader of a company called Contactual (formerly White Pajama or White PJ). His company went through difficult times after the technology bubble burst. While some tried to sink the company, he wrestled back control and has turned it into a success: Contactual recently announced that it has received $9 million in funding. I was intrigued and had to learn more, so I sent Mansour a series of questions via e-mail, and here are his responses:
RT: You recently received funding…congratulations. What will you be doing with the money?
MS: Thank you, Rich. We are going to leverage the investment in the following areas: product development and distribution through partnerships and direct sales
RT: How are sales doing?
MS: Sales are doing really well. We are seeing incredible demand, both through our partnerships and the direct sales channel. We are growing globally and will be opening an office in Japan, an announcement we made on July 11th. We are also establishing a presence in Europe - the announcement of that new office will come shortly.
RT: There is so much interest in hosting today, are you seeing customers more readily accepting the hosted model?
MS: Absolutely. In our traditional market of less than one hundred seats, we are seeing very robust demand. We also receive unsolicited inquiries for contact center deployments of hundreds of seats, whereas before we rarely saw demand for hosted contact centers of over 100 seats. We believe the market is shifting to this model.
RT: Who is educating customers about the benefits of hosting?
MS: We try to. We are always working on white papers and case studies that educate the reader on the benefits of the on-demand contact center model. Please review the white papers and case studies we have posted on our Web site (www.contactual.com) to be downloaded for free. We are currently working on several more to be released shortly.
Also, consultants who used to push the on-premise contact center model are now seeing the results of early adopters having great success with hosted contact centers. These consultants are advising their clients to consider a hosted alternative to traditional systems.
RT: What are the biggest roadblocks to increased hosting success in contact centers?
MS: People have the wrong perception of hosted contact centers. They remember the first-generation hosted applications and their inability to provide a feasible solution to the contact center market. These perceptions have created a number of myths that reinforce the superiority of the on-premise solutions. However, the new generation of on-demand contact center applications, such as Contactual, provides a clear advantage over the on-premise systems in terms of cost, flexibility, reliability, scalability and ease-of-use. Shortly, we will be releasing a white paper that addresses these myths in detail. You will be able to download it free of charge from our Web site.
RT: What do you think of the Telephony@Work acquisition by Oracle?
MS: It looks like acquisition by Oracle was the only exit for Telephony@Work. It wasn’t a sustainable company; it is unclear whether it would have survived if it weren’t acquired. Telephony@Work’s customers are worried about how they will be treated now, and they should be. We were recently approached by several of them.
RT: Where do you see the hosted contact center market going in five years?
MS: By 2011, the majority of the new contact center seats will be provided on-demand.
RT: Thank you, Mansour.
Link this |
Email this |
Leave comment
Trackback URL: Salesforce.com and Contactual
Technorati
Del.icio.us
BoingBoing
Slashdot
Digg
Spurl
Furl
A CNBC Morning
June 27, 2006
This morning on CNBC I woke up to talk about net neutrality and an analyst who said Google makes a good buy regardless of what happens with net neutrality. From net neutrality the program went on to Comcast customer service -- I think they might have been focusing on heavy machinery while I was in the shower -- it is tough to tell with the water running. Someone apparently videotaped a Comcast customer service representative sleeping on their couch while waiting an hour for the Comcast office to pick up the phone. This reminded me a of a Comcast customer service blog entry I made almost a year ago. Add Comcast to the list of companies being publicly ridiculed because of poor customer service. AOL must feel relief that the spotlight is moving off them.
Then the newscaster discussed VoIP providers contributing to the USF and what a disaster this new development will be to the industry and Vonage. Unfortunately there was an analyst on the program who basically painted a doom and gloom scenario. Explaining that the cost difference between VoIP and the PSTN is these fees that VoIP providers now have to pay.
Of course this whole argument forgets the most important point – Vonage already pays into the USF. Whoops – it is tough to make a point when you have none.
Beyond that, there is more cost savings using VoIP than just the USF savings. Worse, this analyst failed to mention that perhaps less than 0.1% of the population knows what they pay into the USF. In the world of cell phone service where fees and taxes seem to equal the actual cost of wireless service, most of us buy plans that are $69/month, etc. Never have I known what the USF fees will be on my phone bill ahead of time. And after the fact, I have never canceled my phone service because of these USF fees and various taxes.
But this was not a surprise to me as I predicted the USF issue would be used as a way to slam Vonage regardless of whether it makes sense or not. My exact quote was: “I expect Vonage to be hit hard by this news as Wall Street seems to be looking for reasons to punish Vonage. This will likely be another one."
Many in the VoIP market are concerned that Vonage has become the poster child for not only VoIP but for the broader IPTV and IP communications spaces. Companies have told me some investor opportunities have slowed or been paused because of the “botched” Vonage IPO.
Other VoIP providers are looking to differentiate themselves from Vonage when a few months back they were looking to emulate this New Jersey based VoIP service giant.
That is not to say that funding in the market has ceased. It just seems it may have slowed for the moment. Many sit on the edge of their seats wondering whether Vonage will have good numbers in the next few quarters. Their success or failure will have extremely broad ramifications throughout the IP communications markets. But as I have said before, with so much easy money out there, perhaps it can't hurt to have a further drag on the IP communications market. This hopefully ensures that investors will proceed cautiously. I don’t think it is in anyone’s best interest to see investors fund hundreds or thousands of competitors with the same business model. This is too reminiscent of the dotcom/CLEC days.
While I am righting wrongs, I thought I should correct the newscasters and journalists who continue to promote the fact that Vonage is the only public VoIP company – they forget about companies like Packet8 for some reason.
If the Vonage IPO is not a positive for the IP communications space at the moment, at least it is keeping things very fluid. Whether that is good or bad depends on your perspective.
Then the newscaster discussed VoIP providers contributing to the USF and what a disaster this new development will be to the industry and Vonage. Unfortunately there was an analyst on the program who basically painted a doom and gloom scenario. Explaining that the cost difference between VoIP and the PSTN is these fees that VoIP providers now have to pay.
Of course this whole argument forgets the most important point – Vonage already pays into the USF. Whoops – it is tough to make a point when you have none.
Beyond that, there is more cost savings using VoIP than just the USF savings. Worse, this analyst failed to mention that perhaps less than 0.1% of the population knows what they pay into the USF. In the world of cell phone service where fees and taxes seem to equal the actual cost of wireless service, most of us buy plans that are $69/month, etc. Never have I known what the USF fees will be on my phone bill ahead of time. And after the fact, I have never canceled my phone service because of these USF fees and various taxes.
But this was not a surprise to me as I predicted the USF issue would be used as a way to slam Vonage regardless of whether it makes sense or not. My exact quote was: “I expect Vonage to be hit hard by this news as Wall Street seems to be looking for reasons to punish Vonage. This will likely be another one."
Many in the VoIP market are concerned that Vonage has become the poster child for not only VoIP but for the broader IPTV and IP communications spaces. Companies have told me some investor opportunities have slowed or been paused because of the “botched” Vonage IPO.
Other VoIP providers are looking to differentiate themselves from Vonage when a few months back they were looking to emulate this New Jersey based VoIP service giant.
That is not to say that funding in the market has ceased. It just seems it may have slowed for the moment. Many sit on the edge of their seats wondering whether Vonage will have good numbers in the next few quarters. Their success or failure will have extremely broad ramifications throughout the IP communications markets. But as I have said before, with so much easy money out there, perhaps it can't hurt to have a further drag on the IP communications market. This hopefully ensures that investors will proceed cautiously. I don’t think it is in anyone’s best interest to see investors fund hundreds or thousands of competitors with the same business model. This is too reminiscent of the dotcom/CLEC days.
While I am righting wrongs, I thought I should correct the newscasters and journalists who continue to promote the fact that Vonage is the only public VoIP company – they forget about companies like Packet8 for some reason.
If the Vonage IPO is not a positive for the IP communications space at the moment, at least it is keeping things very fluid. Whether that is good or bad depends on your perspective.
Link this |
Email this |
Leave comment
Trackback URL: A CNBC Morning
Technorati
Del.icio.us
BoingBoing
Slashdot
Digg
Spurl
Furl
Intel Transaction
June 27, 2006
I am trying to find out if Intel’s Communications division AKA Dialogic will be part of the $600 million dollar Intel transaction involving Marvell. As you recall, I gently broke the news back in May. EE Times did an in-depth story subsequently that put much of this in perspective.
Here is Greg Galitzine's response:
no way. not for 600 mil. that's just chips --
i still expect an announcement soon about the Dialogic group in NJ, but I don't think this is it.
still, it's big news.
He is likely right because the communications division was sold for about $900 million around 8 years ago. I still I haven't found out either way.
Update:
I have confirmed that the communications group was not included in this transaction. Stay tuned.
Link this |
Email this |
Leave comment
Trackback URL: Intel Transaction
Technorati
Del.icio.us
BoingBoing
Slashdot
Digg
Spurl
Furl