When I arrived in the San Francisco airport last week, I saw a large banner for GoToMeeting over the terminal entrance. Citrix is a partner/competitor (yes, both) to Lou’s company, so I pointed the banner out with amusement. As we walked towards the AirTrain, Oracle and McAfee logos greeted us as well.
It was a swift, albeit strange, reminder than SF is a hub for technology. Oracle’s appearance is what put us in ’strange’ territory: I often think the bay area is more for young startups preferring free MySQL and Postgres. In my mind, New York is the Oracle market, skewing towards mature, established companies with the need and money for enterprise-level infrastructure, administrators, and licenses. I realize that is probably why O is advertising in SF and not in New York — SF needs the convincing — but I was still surprised to see that red logo so quickly. I would have expected the Blinkx.com video search billboard on Rt 80 in its place.
My observations there aside, there was a particular SFO banner stating the following:
“10 of the Top Ten Hotels use Oracle.”
I’m sure this is true, but I wonder why Oracle didn’t say ‘exclusively’ or ‘for critical systems’. It was probably a marketing decision, based on length, space, and psychology, but statements of this type are definitely a little grey. What if the 10th hotel uses Sybase*, with only a single application that they bought externally lying atop an Oracle engine?
I was once in a position to choose my department’s survey software. Our current vendor was small, Linux-based, and clunky, with questionable amounts of revenue, but a solid client list and the ability to script. We could upgrade to get what we needed, or we could go elsewhere to a better, shinier application. I spoke to Vovici, an industry leader, who had an asp.net-based web interface and millions of dollars of contracts. Their software was slick, easy, and fulfilled our requirements, but would not let us do any customization. It was also cheaper.
At one point, in one of our calls, my Vovici representative asked what we currently used. When I told him, he said he had never heard of it and went to their site to check them out, then noted his surprise at seeing large company X on their client list. Company X already did millions of dollars of work with Vovici. He noted that X was so big that perhaps some random department gave them a survey once or twice.
It seems likely. I don’t think our vendor was lying. I don’t think Vovici was lying. It’s possible that our vendor had no idea X did business with other survey companies all the time. If they asked, that department in X might not know or be willing to say anyway.
But it is misleading. Any time some company lists only a client list, or a number of clients, with no qualifications like exclusivity, contract size, relationship length, etc., it’s like a list of Facebook friends. People just collect them to have them. You have no idea if they were bar acquaintances or Top Ten.
This is obvious, of course. You always take such things with a grain of salt. My real point is that I don’t see malice or even a mistake in this case. What could our scrappy Linux vendor do? A qualified list that was arbitrarily shorter than their competitors?
We ended up sticking with them. I was pleased because I felt guilty for supporting an MS-based, non-customizable, corporate software over a Linux-based, small-biz one. Vovici was a better product, but there were other factors (administration, maintenance, and infrastructure) outweighing it. As for the client list, it was only important in that we were already on it.
*It is telling I had to look up “enterprise database” to get Sybase. Oracle is the only one I could immediately think of.