These are reflections from having spent a few days at the annual Salesforce.com event, Dreamforce. We hope they are valuable to people who need an executive summary-level understanding of the company and its position in the cloud and SaaS marketplace. Full disclosure, the company paid for my flight and hotel to attend Dreamforce.
Salesforce wants to be the dominant cloud platform for business. Their view is that computing has seen two waves: the first was the mainframe, and then the PC client server, and now the third is cloud computing. They have been consistent about this since their inception in March 1999, so this is no recent bandwagon hopping.
They have a powerful mix of capability and relentless focus. They have the resources -- cash, cash flow, clients, track record, management team, and so on -- needed to execute on this vision. Their competitors are bigger, but Salesforce has the advantage of focus. They are pure play, and they have no legacy to protect.
Having attended a few big rah-rah events, such as Java One, I see that Dreamforce compares well on scale, details, and flair. Its messaging and visuals were consistent and powerful, and everything just worked well. This all costs a lot of money (which relates to the next point), but that money has to be well spent, and they seem to be doing that. The presentations had real flair and humor. Benioff knows how to be controversial to get press. They are a billion-dollar business that still acts like a start-up. Even the music was good.
There are many lower-cost competitors to their base CRM application. Now that SaaS is increasingly accepted, due in part to Salesforce's evangelical marketing, smaller competitors spending a tiny fraction of what they spend on marketing can undercut them. Their most visible competitor is Zoho, and it does not look like Zoho is going to shy away from this battle, and they have staying power. So Salesforce is fighting on two fronts. On the one hand they are competing with Oracle and SAP for big enterprise accounts. On the other hand they are fighting low-cost competitors, such as Zoho. This will require all their marketing and management skills.
They got their early big traction in the last downturn around 2001 and 2002 and have never looked back. They are greedy while others are fearful. They spend more, grow, and hire, while other firms lay off people. The basic economic advantages of cloud computing, such as lower capital expenditures and a faster time to market, resonate in a downturn to the point that they overcome the resistance of conservative buyers to cloud computing.
Salesforce knows that this matters. This is the lesson they learned from Microsoft. Will they move into the spaces currently occupied by vendors? Of course they will. Vendors will have to be agile; that is just how the game works. But today, in these tough markets, we see vendors that are profitable, growing, hiring, and raising money. The winners in many segments are being defined now. It is a great time to be an entrepreneur in this space. Salesforce knows how to leverage all its capability to make a few winners do very well and then promote that success big time, thus inspiring others to come on board.
They refer constantly to their "multi-tenant kernel," which sounds very techie for a such a marketing-driven company. It does appear that they are not suffering from the scaling and reliability problems that we have seen affecting consumer Web 2.0 ventures such as Twitter and Facebook.
They wheeled out large companies, such as Google, Facebook, and Amazon, as partners. The message was, "We are at the center of an eco-system with big partners." This makes large conservative enterprise buyers feel comfortable.
They have a predictable and focused R&D plan, with a major theme each year. This again makes large conservative buyers feel comfortable: they know what to expect.
They are adding so much functionality and so many partners that they face the danger of users getting confused and going to simpler point solutions. That "hairball-of-complexity" problem bedeviled Microsoft as it grew fast, but Microsoft enjoyed a lock-in that Salesforce cannot count on. The SaaS world is naturally lock-in resistant, with low switching costs. There is no sign of this being an immediate problem for the company, but it is something they will have to look out for.
See also our most recent story about Salesforce: Salesforce.com Says Hello World.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Guys, come on, this is sales! (pun not intended) Don't screw up R/RW like this.
Posted by: Fred Oliveira | November 20, 2008 7:29 AM
You can find that multitenant architecture described in this article, which I published recently on our Force.com platform developer community site. And no, that's not sales ;-)
Jon (community manager @ Developer Force)
Posted by: Jon Mountjoy
|
November 20, 2008 7:51 AM
Salesforce.com went through its own growing pains about 4 or 5 years ago. There were unexplained outages during the middle of the day, which resulted in lost leads and lost sales for my company at the time. They subsequently made infrastructure improvements and helped to rectify the communication problem by launching trust.salesforce.com so that clients could see the current status of the system.
While the use of the word "trust" may seem a bit Orwellian it also exemplifies the contribution of their Marketing Machine to ongoing success.
Posted by: Tom Blossom | November 20, 2008 8:47 AM
Fred, with respect you're wrong. Bernard put the disclosure on the post, but the topic is a worthy one. If anything we probably don't post enough on salesforce.com - compared to Google, Yahoo and other bigcos.
Posted by: Richard MacManus
|
November 20, 2008 10:52 AM
No mention of SugarCRM?
Zoho, but not Sugar?
Sugar is favorably-competitive on price as well as features.
It's mature. It has an active development community. It's capable and open source.
I've deployed Sugar a few times. Out of the box, it rivals Contact Managers (the predominant use of CRM) from Lotus Notes to PeopleSoft, even Act and Filemaker in functionality and ease-of-use.
I have found their "professional services" as well as their Vendor Eco-System to be lacking (e.g. I've had difficulty finding VARs in NYC; the one I used from Massachusetts couldn't project manage their way out of a paper sack). As their GPL, this has always smelled like tremendous opportunity ...
It's surprising RWW made no mention of it.
Posted by: smcnally | November 20, 2008 5:24 PM
Agree with smcnally. No one is choosing Zoho over Salesforce. Sugar, however, is a considerable competitor considering it is essentially a low/no-cost copy of Salesforce that you can host yourself or have it hosted.
Posted by: pwb | November 21, 2008 2:57 AM
Had experience of using them with our enterprise company. What they delivered was extremely good and its obvious that they are and will continue to be successful.
Posted by: Kris | November 21, 2008 7:16 AM
This will require all their marketing and management skills.
Posted by: mirc addon | November 24, 2008 3:54 AM
Don't forget that Salesforce.com is basically replicating all the tabs of Siebel and other previous CRM applications, but doing so using a SaaS model. The problem is that it requires lots of clicks to update the data and, as they mature, the complexity increases and the flexibility decreases. Also, you can't work effectively offline-- and saying the mobile client is the solution is not the solution. We talk with lots of companies who own Salesforce, but their reps don't fill in the data-- especially when there's a lot to update. Non of the companies mentioned have figured out how to let users work offline and share changes from within the prefered UI environment-- spreadsheets.
Posted by: JB Kuppe | November 24, 2008 11:25 AM