Positionierung MBS Axapta
Quelle: Data Research DPU, www.dpu.se
In January 2002 I forecasted dramatic changes among ERP vendors. Some vendors have merged
with competitors. PeopleSoft will acquire JD Edwards. Last week Oracle made a bid on PeopleSoft/JD
Edwards. Their three products are all in the borderland between Star and Cash Cow in the Boston
Matrix. There is a parallel with Baan and BPCS. The reasons for the merges have been to strengthen
their market shares and market positions. That has happened and will be happening next two years.
Instead the vendors should think of replacement products. To feed a new Baby product can do that.
That is hard. It is lot easier and cheaper to buy a Baby.
Another phenomena are that large ERP vendors have turn their interest to target small and mid sized
customers. A good example is SAP, which have launched SAP Businenss One. The product
originates from Israel. Another example is Oracle, which has launched Oracle Small Business in
United States, UK and Australia. The vendors have found their normal customer segment is replete
and are looking for new customers in new segments. The market for ERP systems for Small and
Middle Business, SMB, is expected to grow very fast the next coming years. It will be interesting to
watch, if they can or are able to understand SMB requirements. Normally, new competitors will appear
from underneath. Right now new competition will appear from the big dinosaurs like IBM, Microsoft,
Oracle and SAP.
It is remarkable that few Baby products have entered the market lately. Many ERP systems in the
Cash Cows phase are on the way to enter the Doggie phase. Many Baby products should show up
right now to replace the Doggies. There is an enormous demand to integrate ERP systems with
products like e-Commerce and Customer Relations Management systems. Those systems are often
located on different technical platforms. Firewalls and other technical obstructions have made
integration hard. Most leading ERP systems are not originally designed for collaborative systems
environment. SAP has done an extensive and costly redesign. Another way is to start all over again to
make a complete new system. Intentia has chosen that approach, which is even more costly.
New entrepreneurs are normally more cost effective compared to large well-established vendors,
when to develop new ERP systems with new technology. I assume that Larry Ellison knew that, when
he 1998 invested 40 million dollars into a new company called NetLedger. Year 2000 was NetLedger
launching their new ERP system. It is completely web based and is targeting small businesses. More
than 6,000 licenses are sold. 40 million US dollars will do for development and extensive market
activities. The system is also marketed as Oracle Small Business Solutions. Large companies are
more costly when developing new ERP systems. Intentia did spend more than 150 million US dollars
just for development of Movex Collaborative. Marketing was not included. If Oracle had developed
NetLedger, the bill had been even higher than Intentia’s development of their new system. Larry
Ellison is a wise man.
Why not try the system on the web:
and notice the smell of future ERP systems
Ataio have similar technology as NetLedger, but are targeting middle-sized companies. They can
become a competitor to Axapta, Dynamics, IBS, IFS, Intentia or Jeeves. Two entrepreneurs have
started Ataio. They are behind NetLedger in the Boston matrix. When will the Ataio Company be for
sale? XOR Connect is a child of the same age. There are probably more entrepreneurs around. They
are working in the dark. The time is right. New demands with corresponding technology are available.
Scala have been through an admirable reconstruction of the company. They have cut all financial
interests in resellers and have included a very attractive face-lift on the system. This has repositioned
Scala backwards from Doggie to Cash Cow with iScala. They have strengthened their economy. The
owners can choose if they will buy a competitor or sell to a competitor. Within 5 year Scala must
replace their ERP products with a more modern platform.
<---- End June 2003 comment. ------>
How to read the Boston Matrix
Life cycles for Business Applications and ERP systems
A well performed business application or ERP package can be sold and maintained at most in 15-20
years. In late stage the package have old architecture and contains of "spaghetti code". It is hard
(sometimes impossibly) to make changed in the program code without hazardous damage the
systems stability. For instance it was easier to make new systems year 2000 and EMU proof than in
There is a possibility to "face lift" older systems with modern tools e.g. with Microsoft Windows
interface. Those "face-lifts" can extend the life cycle for the package some years. But they will certainly
speed up the appearance of "spaghetti code" and force the package into the Doggie stage. In
attachment we have mapped many of the common packages in the Boston matrix.
Ideal is to find mature "STARS" in selection of packages. STARS are often subject to
development, the vendor makes lots of profit, the remaining life time for the package is satisfactory
long and most of the bugs are gone. But very few systems are for the moment found in this section of
the Boston matrix.
The appearance of new systems design and technology means often that new things becomes
possible to do and gives the users many advantages. There is no easy way to include new technology
in older systems. Compromises and "spaghetti code" is often the result in those cases.
No vendor have made two continuous rounds in the Boston matrix ..........
Characteristics for technology, vendor, support, functionality, liability, costs and installation base can
be classified in following way:
Comments to the January 2002 update
SAP AG is still the market leader for ERP systems. The company is the largest vendor of ERP
systems. Their global market share is 12%. SAP have done a powerful redesign in order to integrate
SAP R/3 with CRM, e-Business, SCM, APS and other new extended ERP applications. They are a
leading actor of corporate portals by acquisition and usage of TopTier (See
http://www.sapportals.com/ eller http://www.gartner.com/reprints/sap/99677.html)
Intentia have poorly sold their new Movex Collaboration so far. The official launch came at the end of
2001. Beta versions have however been around since 1999. Hopefully they have cured most of the
teething troubles. Intentia have successfully established new channels for marketing in order to reach
non IBM AS/400 clients. Perhaps Intentia will have their thaw soon ……
Most interesting is perhaps Axapta from Navision. Their ERP system is originally designed for an
extended ERP environment with CRM and e-Business functionality. Other vendors than Intentia and
Navision have accomplished that with extensive redesign and many compromises as result. The users
seem to be satisfied, which is unusual for new ERP systems
Most of the actors are Cash Cows entering the Doggie stage. Some of them are already there. What is
going to happen with them? And how can Intentia and Navision use these circumstances? No one has
made two complete rounds in the matrix before.
Next update can mean dramatic changes.
Comments to the February 2000 update
DATA RESEARCH DPU UPDATES THE BOSTON MATRIX WITH MOST LEADING ERP SYSTEMS
JD Edwards is well suited to take over the leading position from SAP. OneWorld, from JD Edwards, is
a reliable object oriented ERP system.
Intentias OO MOVEX can be a runner up. OO MOVEX has a better concepts than OneWorld has, but
will the users accept it? They have to relieve all the child hood diseases. OO MOVEX has finally left
the beta phase and is extensively widening its target market. They will not only support IBM OS/400
Since last update GEAC/Smartstream and SAA/BPCS have not progressed in the Boston circle at all.
They have hard to get into "Cash Cow" stage with their new products.
The pure Client server ERP systems have now entered a stable phase. They have finally become
mature Stars. The vendors are not too many. Few have managed to develop C/S systems with true
Most of the actors are Cash Cows entering the Doggie stage. What is going to happen with them? And
what is going to happen with SAP? No one has made two complete rounds in the matrix before.....
Next update can be a nightmare.
Business applications and ERP Systems mentioned in the Boston matrix (keywords): Scala Polaris,
Prosit for Objectives, Ergosoft WIN, OO ASW San Francisco, OO Movex, BPCS, JD Edward's One
World, Navision, IFS Applications, SmartStream, XOR Control, Jeeves, VISMA Business, Maconomy,
Axapta, Agresso, Baan ERP, PeopleSoft, SAP R/3, Concorde XAL, Exact, Bravad, Orion, Prosit Open,
Bravo, IM*ESS, Oracle Application, CROM Pro, adeEKO, Prosit Open, JD Edward's Classic, Devis
· Technology: Hot and un-mature
· Vendor: New vendor or established
· Support: Improvised
· Functionality: Basic
· Liability: Childhood sickness
· Costs: Low
· Installed base: None/ few
· Technology: Mature modern
· Vendor: Growing or established
· Support: Structured
· Functionality: Many add on's and new possibilities
· Liability: More and more stabile
· Costs: Moderate
· Installed base: Rapid growing
· Technology: Face-lifts
· Vendor: Established
· Support: Bureaucratic
· Functionality: New add hoc's
· Liability: Stabile
· Costs: High
· Installed base: Large
· Technology: Old
· Functionality: Declining
· Support: Passive without actions
· Functionality: No development
· Liability: Unstable
· Costs: Unacceptable
· Installed base: Declining
Back to other white papers
Look how the users rate their systems!
Give your rating of any system and get a market analyse report free of charge!
Give your rating of any IT vendor and get a market analyse report free of charge!
Link to evalu8IT. More than 650 evaluations concerning computer software, hardware and vendors
Data Research DPU
for Evaluation of Information Technology and Computing
[ Order | More info | Suggest new evaluations ]
[ Consulting | Price List | Mailing List ]
[ Email to DPU ]
Back to Data Research DPU top page.
Number of samples are listed within parenthesis.