PeopleSoft Goes To Oracle

codecool writes "It is final. Peoplesoft's Board of directors finally relented and agreed to let Oracle have them for $26.50 per share. Finally, it all comes to an end." Closing date is set for mid-January timeframe.

This is going to be painful

[Amiga Trombone]

My shop is running a massive PeopleSoft implementation. Now what? Since Oracle wants to discontinue the line I wonder how much longer they'll be offering support for it. I also have to wonder what our alternatives are going to be to replace it.

This is going to suck big time.

Re:Total value...

[jchawk]

Considering that Oracle made 10.30B last year alone, I think this is probably a wise investment for them. PeopleSoft's software fits nicely within the framework that Oracle is already able to build and offer to it's customers. This move will surely broaden the markets with which Oracle can move into and deploy their products...

Re:Competition

[lucabrasi999]

who will be Oracles competition?

SAP is the major competition in the ERP market. If I remember correctly, SAP has a larger customer base than Oracle and PeopleSoft combined.

Re:Refunds???

[Sein]

Probably not - that was just a "Poison Pill" to make the takeover/buyout completely unprofitable for Oracle and their stockholders.

Poison pills are almost never in the stockholder's best interest - they're mainly used by entrenched boards and management who see their jobs threathened by any takeover, be it "hostile" or "friendly".

Since Oracle launched a lawsuit challenging that particular little gem, I think it's unlikely that anyone can take advantage of it before Oracle gains operational control and cancels the offer.

Re:open source

[Wudbaer]

Now show me the great Open Source product being able to replace SAP, PeopleSoft and the like and everything will be jolly good.

Oh, I forgot, I'm supposed to write it myself. My stupid.

Re:What about the poison pill?

[pcardno]

My company uses Peoplesoft a hell of a lot for accounts, HR and so on. A refund would be utterly useless, as the cost of the software itself is nothing compared to the cost associated with implementing and integrating a brand new general ledger, HR system and so on..

Re:open source

[durdur]

Large corporate applications like PeopleSoft are complex - it is not something a couple of guys can knock out in a year. Some apps are tightly tailored to particular industries, but even so, purchasers need a lot of customization to make the software work for them.
So it's not a "write it once, use everywhere" piece of software like the Linux kernel. Plus, a lot of companies who buy this stuff are not software experts - that's not what their business does. So writing their own solution is not an attractive option. They want to sell more widgets, which is what they know about, not set up a software development shop and compete with the likes of Oracle and PeopleSoft.

Re:open source

[jacobcaz]

• Hiring a couple of in-house programmers for a year to do development is probably not much more expensive (perhaps even cheaper) than paying the proprietary software to begin with, espessailly once you get customizations done.

Hiring a couple of in-house programmers for a year will get you jack squat progress towards a full-blown home-rolled ERP system.

I will wager you could pull off something like a inventory management package or order management interface that would work in a small company, but there is no way a "couple of in-house programmers" could produce anything close to an Oracle/PeopleSoft/Great Plains/SAP type system.

The system flexability, business knowledge requirements, legal issues, tax issues, GAAP requirements, Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, etc. would overwhelm any small team. Couple that with the need for on-going support and upgrades, regulatory updated (taxes, SoX, etc.) and you've got a team of hundreds working on the project.

"But it's open-source!" you cry, "We'll give it to the community and let them extend and build it!" Without a in-stone development plan you would just have a ton of people all working on various bits and it would be difficult if not impossible because you would have a hard time determining where someone would fit into the project based on their desire to contribute and their skills/background.

If you could manage to pull all this off - you would have to offer some type of 24x7 support if you wanted anyone else to use your software. No company that would need an ERP solution would touch one without serious support backing it up. So you setup a division to charge for and provide 24x7 technical support (and don't forget you'll need to provide functional support too).

Guess what; you just re-built an SAP or a PeopleSoft.

Re:open source

[IdleTime]

Writing an OS is easy, writing Oracle Apps, SAP or Peoplesoft is much more complicated. Why? Simply because it has to be adapted to local laws in all countries it will be sold in, differences in accounting practices etc. You need patches for every country and every minor change in laws. You need support 24/7 since it is a vital product for most companies, withouit it running, you have no idea who owes you money and vice versa etc.

Re:So, what happens to the Peoplesoft-IBM Alliance

[Software]

>Will the contract language leave Oracle in the embarrassing position of promoting DB2 as the preferred database platform for Peoplesoft and JD Edwards?

The press release says nothing about PSFT (now ORCL) having to promote DB2. It's IBM that's promoting DB2 as the database of choice for PSFT. I highly doubt that the contract says anything about PSFT promoting DB2. At best, it might specify that PSFT has to remain compatible with DB2 for a specified period of time, but even that's unlikely. I'd bet that 90% of the contract is about how to divvy up the revenue from joint sales.

These types of "strategic alliances" are ordinary in the enterprise software industry and mean very little. Companies typically have them with just about every other company in the space except for direct competitors. This one will go the way of the dodo eventually, but it wasn't much to begin with.

Whoops, forgot

[TychoCelchuuu]

In Korea, only old people acquire Peoplesoft :D Contrary to a bunch of the people here, I think it's nice that we can get more consolidation. The sooner we get it down to 2 or 3 gigantic competitors, the sooner more small people can start up and fill the gaps. Assuming they aren't stifled by the big people already in place. Oh well. Good luck, new startup companies! If there are any. I'm sure there'll be at least one.

Damn shame.

[rscrawford]

From the Computer World article: "After careful consideration, PeopleSoft's board decided that Oracle's latest offer provides good value for PeopleSoft's stockholders, the company said. The agreement ends a long, emotional struggle, it said."

I hate it when execs say things like this, because they don't mean a word of it. What they really mean is, "After careful consideration, PeopleSoft's board decided that they would make a hell of a lot of money, and screw the little guys -- like customers, employees, etc."

Oracle wants nothing with PeopleSoft except to destroy it utterly. They don't want any competition in the marketplace, and PeopleSoft is their only competition. Ellison, the madman, said so himself way back at the beginning of this fiasco.

My father-in-law and a very good friend of mine are both software consultants for PeopleSoft. They may get to keep their jobs, since Oracle doesn't currently have a CRM product, but I expect they're both going to be looking for work before 2005 is done with.

Simply more proof that the world is going to hell.