Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oracle's Hostile Takeover Bid For PeopleSoft

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the what-do-the-vapors-say dept.

Businesses 229

rkuris writes "Oracle has launched a 5.1 billion dollar cash hostle takeover bid against Peoplesoft. PeopleSoft's CEO Craig Conway (a former top executive for Oracle) called Oracle's offer 'atrociously bad behavior from a company with a history of atrociously bad behavior.' 'Obviously it is a transparent attempt to disrupt the [1.7 billion dollar friendly] acquisition of J.D. Edwards by PeopleSoft announced earlier this week.' The week's events have reopened old wounds between the companies, which have a history of hostility and name calling."

cancel ×

229 comments

fool post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140399)

fp!! had to be done! im sorry ageag -- h to the goatse

oonten gleeben glauben globen... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140653)

how do you say 5 in def leppard speak?

if I had PeopleSoft stock (2, Insightful)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140400)

I would sure as hell be selling it to Oracle.

how could anyone but a Zelot pass up that offer?

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (5, Interesting)

tupshin (5777) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140429)

I'm assuming you misspelled zealot, and I'm also assuming you're an idiot. Why would you sell it to Oracle (for $16/share) when you could sell it on the open market for more (almost $18/share right now)?

It seems obvious that this offer was designed to intimidate PeopleSoft, disrupt the JD Edwards acquisition, and cast doubt on the future of PeopleSoft's products so that customer's would be less likely to buy.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (4, Informative)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140450)

it was not 18 bucks per share the other day when this offer was first anounced.

it was around 10 dollors per share.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140463)

It was not $10 a share. Oracle offered ~6% over the trading price, so it was $15 and change.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (1)

tupshin (5777) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140468)

You would still be an idiot not to sell it for the going price of $18 if you wanted to sell at all. The previous price is now irrelevant. If Oracle wants to be serious about this attempt, they are going to need to significantly raise their bid.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140540)

I was not privy to the new market price....the offer was made 2 days ago or so and that is when I read about it on OSNews.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (1)

tupshin (5777) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140586)

You were too lazy to check it on any of the hundres of free web-sites that provide stock quotes? OMG.
"Not privy to" implies that you were not able to have the information. Not true.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140763)

i don't think it implies any ability to have information, just the lack of having the information.

I do agree with your setiment though, since the poster is replying to a post that states the current market price, thus his response doesn't make sense.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140570)

I'm assuming you're an idiot 'cos "customers" doesn't need an apostrophe.

Re:if I had PeopleSoft stock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140571)

And you're an idiot to assume that he can go forward in time and sell stocks 2 days in the future.

So read the goddamn posts before calling someone 'idiot'.

Fucktard

Oracle is shit (-1, Troll)

ringbarer (545020) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140403)

Shit business practises and shit software. But companies still buy their overrated hack jobs.

Why? The marketing. Just goes to show what happens when PHBs don't listen to their technical people.

And I care because? (-1, Troll)

autopr0n (534291) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140407)

Who are these peoplesoft people? I've never heard of 'em.

Re:And I care because? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140422)

All I know is they make a huge database program for the U.S. Coast Guard (where I work). It has to be the worst piece of crap software I have ever used. Hopefully Oracle is better.

Re:And I care because? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140451)

You've never used JDEdwards World or One World...

hostle? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140410)

open source spellcheckers suck

Some bad, some bad (4, Interesting)

Sean80 (567340) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140426)

Bad - I can't imagine it's a whole lot of fun working for Peoplesoft right at the moment. From what I've read, Oracle would lay off a large number of their employees. Given the state of the jobs market in Silicon Valley, and the fact that an entire company will disappear, with all of its associated technologies, processes, and so forth, what will the people there do?

Bad - I don't know about you, but I was pretty pissed off when AT&T sold their cable unit to Comcast. I got a call one Saturday morning from some company that I have never personally signed up with, offering to change my channel selection for me. Imagine paying a few hundred thousand dollars after having chosen Peoplesoft, only to have Oracle call you up one day, and say, 'hey, you're our new customer!'

Good - I suppose this'll be good for Oracle, and maybe, at the end of the day, customers will win because of the integration of two not-too-bad software suites.

Re:Some bad, some bad (3, Informative)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140520)

customers will win because of the integration of two not-too-bad software suites.
Nope. No integration is planned. Just migration. See this article at the Register [theregister.co.uk] .

Re:Some bad, some bad (2, Interesting)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140543)

Umm, the register isn't exactly a Paragon of Truthful Virtue, you know. In a sense, they're a perfect representative of British news - the picture isn't exactlty fake, and the facts aren't technically wrong, but you inevitably come away with an impression of the events that has very little to do with what actually happened.

Re:Some bad, some bad (3, Interesting)

finkployd (12902) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140538)

You are correct, Oracle has a history of buying up companies and pissing off current customers. Recently they bought Steltor (maker of CorporateTime) and pretty much told all existing CorporateTime customers that they would now have to buy Oracle's crappy backend server bundle if they wanted to continue running CT. As a result quite a few Universities are dumping CT and throwing their efforts behind the open source Chandler calandar system.

Finkployd

Re:Some bad, some bad (1)

Morky (577776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140560)

Customers won't win. They will lose choice. If I have a PeopleSoft installation, the last thing I want to do is go through the hell of installing another ERP. If forced to move off PeopleSoft, I most likely would not move to Oracle Apps. In fact, in that space I would probably move to J.D. Edwards. Oh, wait a minute.... See? The whole thing sucks for everyone.

Re:Some bad, some bad (0, Offtopic)

Fishstick (150821) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140684)

OT Comcast:

Slimy bastards. They called me up (well, my wife took the call) and offered a discount on a 'new' package with showtime, cinemax and a few others. She went ahead and took it, figuring we could cancel later if it wasn't a good deal.

Then a bunch of channels dissapeared (well, tivo tought they were still there, recorded a few shows with "you don't get this channel" message for an hour or so.

Called up -- what gives? We signed up for these other channels and a bunch went away -- did you screw up?

No. They're not in the 'new' package.

Wait, I still get the HBO and ENC in the other package you're still charging me for, what happend to Starz, Action and TechTv?

Oh, we're phasing those out -- they would go away eventually anyway.

Ok, so cancel this new package and give me back those channels.

Nope, can't do that -- it doesn't work that way.

Turns out they were going to chop some channels, decided to try to get people to sign up for additional channels hoping they wouldn't notice the others were gone.

Now, if you're going to drop channels, fine. Send out a notice, I can survive without Starz and TechTv. I thought this was pretty crappy way to try to put one over on the subs.

Oracle is the good guy (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140433)

Oracle is one of the BIG supporters of Linux. They are now running their own operations on Linux and are in the process of converting their customers to Linux. Oracle is the good guy in this fight. They are a good friend to Linux and deserve our support. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Remember, the IT world is a shark tank -- it's eat or be eaten. Someone's going to be doing the eating, and it is better Oracle than [ name of comany in Redmond omitted ].

Re:Oracle is the good guy (4, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140481)

They support Linux purely because it's a buffer against Microsoft, who they see as their biggest potential competitive threat - largely because Microsoft is large enough to put Oracle out of business, if they try and Oracle doesn't fight hard back.

Oracle really hasn't supported the open source and free software communities beyond allowing their closed products to co-exist peacefully with them (and run under them.) They're not IBM or the much-undeservably-maligned Sun, both of whom regularly contribute to open source and free software projects. I wouldn't call them good guys, merely interested observers.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (5, Interesting)

aralin (107264) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140553)

Well, if you are talking about the community contributions, Oracle is heavily pushing clustering support for Linux. They are doing everything possible to make Linux clusters a perfect replacement of your big unix iron. The linux porting group in Oracle is growing way too fast and quite a lot of their work is on the kernel and libraries and is GPL'ed and contributed back to community either directly or in form of patches available on Oracle web. I'd say IBM is doing more to help Linux, but I am not sure about Sun. Really.

Besides, Ellison hates Gates. Its personal. So his support of Linux is very Slashdot-like. :)

Re:Oracle is the good guy (2, Informative)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140585)

I'm glad to hear Oracle is helping with the clustering support. That's the first I've heard of Oracle's involvement in anything free or open...

I didn't say Sun was helping Linux specifically, I said they are with Open Source and Free Software. In addition to many public and open standards and implementations thereof, Sun is most famous recently for providing a completely open source and free software office suite with a feature set close to that of the industry standards. I'd say that's a pretty significant contribution.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140737)

Both IBM and SUN have hardware business and they benefit directly by selling Linux hardware. Oracle supports almost all of their products on Linux with nearly 100% of the functionality. As far as I know, it is the only large company to do so. Also, their releases on Linux typically doesn't lag or lag by 1 version where it is waiting for next version of Linux kernel to stabilize. Oracle is also strong supporter of Java. Most of their products comply well with the international standards. Consider the fact that their app server supports more databases than Bea webserver. Oracle database runs on more versions of windows than MS SQL Server.

I don't know why Oracle wants to buy PeopleSoft, so I can't comment on that. But if I were PeopleSoft shareholder, I am not sure how beneficial deal with JD Edwards would be. They have little products overlap, so the savings in combined operations is barely anything. So the company together is same as two companies separately. OTOH, they are paying a heavy premium to JD Edwards stocks. Once the deal goes through, it would be harder for PeopleSoft to be acquired and their stocks would be diluted too. So if their profit doesn't increase, their stock will go down.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (5, Informative)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140521)

Wow, talk about a severe lack of perspective.

Oracle is using its cash on hand to cannibalize another company, steal its customer list, terminate development of its products, lay off 8000 tech workers, and turn Silicon Valley into even more of a smoking crater than they have already by outsourcing so much of their own development work to the Third World.

But they support Linux, so that's all OK! Oracle deserves our support!

Re:Oracle is the good guy (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140581)

You can deal with the world the way it exists, or you can dream. PeopleSoft is a prime target for takeover. Would you rather Bill Gates grab it? In the world we live in, Oracle is a very good alternative. Consolidation and takeovers are now a fact of life. About all you can do is hope for the best. In this case, Oracle looks pretty darned good.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140610)

Look at it this way:
It's always polite to hold your friend's coat while he's kicking somebody else's ass.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (2, Insightful)

Kunta Kinte (323399) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140627)

Oracle is using its cash on hand to cannibalize another company, steal its customer list, terminate development of its products, lay off 8000 tech workers, and turn Silicon Valley into even more of a smoking crater than they have already by outsourcing so much of their own development work to the Third World.

...But in doing so Oracle manages to dominate the global multi-billion dollar CRM/ERP/Business Services market and increases in size, unseating the German company SAP and brings in millions to its American shareholders and creating new American jobs.

We should not protect 'weaker' players in this competitive market. Doing so benefits neither them or the consumer. If PeopleSoft can not fend of Oracle, it would be beneficial for their stockholders to take the money.

Here's something to think about, the Oracle offer may be a cheap move by Oracle, it may also be a symptom of PeopleSoft's vulnerability.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (1)

aralin (107264) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140761)

Here's something to think about, the Oracle offer may be a cheap move by Oracle, it may also be a symptom of PeopleSoft's vulnerability.

It might be also a result of Oracle hiring recently [forbes.com] that a software analyst that watched PeopleSoft for Morgan Stanley for years.

It might be also result of a question in Larry's recent (2-4 weeks) performance, which touched the subject and reminded him that PeopleSoft refused his polite offer a year ago.
He does not like a 'no' for an answer. :)

Re:Oracle is the good guy (3, Insightful)

Morky (577776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140545)

Have you any idea what it takes to install an ERP? Imagine you've been working on a PeopleSoft installation for the past 10 months. You spend most of your day, every day, in a room of consultants and key users trying to figure out how to make the thing work for your business. You're almost there, just a few more data conversion issues to deal with. You expect this system to run the business for the next 10 years. Now imagine a company buys your ERP vendor and says it will discontinue the product you've been spending millions on installing. Oracle is not the good guy here. Less choice=bad.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140614)

PeopleSoft could only benefit from a takeover such by Oracle. From someone who has been on a PeopleSoft development I can vouch that it is one of the biggest pieces of shit on the ERP market. Their interface is terrible and their consultants are unfamiliar with their own product. Large Universities have wasted millions of dollars on their PeopleTools software only to find that the software is inadaquate for their needs. The overall user interface of their version 7.X looks like it was written by someone who just checked a VB for dummies book out of the library. I seriously hope Oracle takes over PeopleSoft and lays off all those dead-wood programers.

Re:Oracle is the good guy (1)

jthj (556846) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140635)

I heard from a freind who works with People Soft products that people soft is going to be releasing versions of all of their products including development tools for Linux. So People Soft supports Linux too.

What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Interesting)

mark-t (151149) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140434)

For those of us who are clueless about this sort of thing, would someone care to enlighten the masses?

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Informative)

Courageous (228506) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140446)

While someone with more in depth information regarding securities training could probably elaborate, it's basically an attempt to purchase shares in the company sufficient to control it without the acquiesence of the company's board of directors. For example, on form of "hostile takeover" is simply acquiring sufficient controlling shares on the open market. If you have > 50%, you control the company.

C//

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (5, Informative)

Usagi_yo (648836) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140555)

White Knights, Green Mail, Poison Pills and Proxies.

Oracle is trying to gain controlling interest in People Soft without the blessing of the board of directors of People Soft.

Proxies can be considered the voting rights of the stock.

Green mail is two things, primarly it would be People Soft bribing Oracle by buying back whatever shares Oracle accumulated -- giving Oracle a nice profit. Another form of Green Mail would be Oracle offering to buy huge blocks of stock off of People Soft stock holders at premium prices -- or simply gaining the proxy of them.

Poison Pills would be People Soft doing things to wreck the company and make it not so attractive as a takeover. Poison pills are usually a package of things they do. But the most adverse is to take out huge loans to buy back its own stock, Licensing company IP, and even awarding employees huge stock options. Basicaly they are throwing road blocks up and salting the earth.

White Knights are 3rd party corporations that come in and start buying People Soft and forcing the stock price up and making Oracle have to deal with two companies rather then just one. White Knights often really Gray Knights in disguise and are trying to make a profit too. Usually hostile takeovers are preceeded by months of slowly accumulating the stock of the takeover target. However there is a point, I think 5% at which the company has to notify the other company that they are targetted for aquisition. And I think the targetted company can get an injuntion against the other company enjoining them from buying more stock until the shareholders meet.

They are long and costly bloody battles that are usually done to scuttle or destroy the targetted company and the real benefit to the company initiating it is gaining market share, intellectual property, and other desired assets to the detriment of the targetted company.

Hey, I think we oughta code this up and make an mmorpg out of it!

Thats my bastardization of hostile takeovers.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140708)

Speaking of poison pills, perhaps it would be a good idea for PeopleSoft to Open Source their products and change their business from development to support. Considering their target audience, support should be a viable business and a takeover would be less attractive to Oracle as they wouldn't gain control of the source.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Informative)

ffatTony (63354) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140452)

here you go [everything2.com]

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140458)

=P

Acquisition of a company that doesn't want to be acquired by purchasing a controlling interest in the corporation (often through a leveraged buyout), booting out the board of directors, and installing your own management. Requires a lot of capital, some very good accountants and a large number of very mean, very expensive lawyers. A trend popular among the corporate raiders of the 1980's, though they still occur occasionally. They're much more difficult than standard mergers because once you've got the company, you have a whole lot of disgruntled employees and shareholders on your hands. Unless your objective was to buy the company out of existence, in which case you have a whole lot of disgrunted former employees.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Funny)

dimator (71399) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140535)

TWO clicks later, I'm at this node [everything2.com] , and am now going to waste anywhere from 1 hour to the rest of the day clicking nodes... thank you very much for linking to e2.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (1)

Firestorm_Rising (666286) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140454)

One company takes over another by merely buying more than half of their company through stock. Without that company's consent. Then, they use their stock to elect their own president, etc. Or else they have the company's headquarters under siege. Either of those are hostile takeovers, I believe.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Informative)

tupshin (5777) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140456)

In very simple terms, a hostile takeover is when the management of a company rejects a takeover offer, and instead the offer is presented to the individual shareholders. If enough shareholders sell, then the takeover is effectively complete because the acquiring company has enough votes to install their own management. There are various ways of defending against hostile takeovers (do a google search on "poison pill"), but if the offer is high enough, they can be overcome.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (4, Informative)

Shishak (12540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140461)

Normally with public companies there isn't any one person with a majority share of the business. Business decisions are made by the CEO and board of directors. The board is made of industry leaders and share holders. share holders vote on the board to make major decisions and to elect corporate officers (CEO, CFO, CTO, EIEIO, etc.). A hostile take over is when a company starts to purchase as many voting shares as possible in order to gain control of the board. It is typically done by offering a greater than market value price for the shares. Most share holders don't have their blood sweat and tears into the company. It is an investment for the. When given the option to cash out and make a bunch of money they will. So, Oracle is putting up a huge amount of money to try to buy the shares from those willing to sell. It is hostile because oracle isn't really buying the company. It is buying control of the board. If it works Oracle will have control of the company and will be able to appoint its own board and CEO.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140517)

unless your Martha...she owns 96% of the shares in her company

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140646)

It is hostile because oracle isn't really buying the company. It is buying control of the board.

No, it is hostile because their target doesn't want to sell itself to Oracle, and Oracle is forcing the issue. Oracle IS buying the company, by buying its shares. How else do you buy a public company? What else do you call buying up shares if not buying the company?

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (1)

smallpaul (65919) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140469)

Corporations are owned by shareholders. They are run day to day by managers supervised by a board of directors. A hostile takeover is one where the managers and the board of directors do not want to be bought but the purchaser buys them anyways, simply by buying shares from the shareholders.

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (3, Informative)

illuvata (677144) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140479)

you offer to buy shares above the price they are traded on the open market.
once you have more than 50% you control the company, so decided that it should merge with your company, or die, or whatever

Re:What exactly *IS* a hostile takeover anyways? (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140505)

a company or a person puts out a public offer to pay x amount for anyones shares (normaly it is more than the stock price)

if the person gets more than 50% of the shares in the company then he/she/it has succeeded in the take over.

Sounds like... (mildly OT) (4, Interesting)

nounderscores (246517) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140441)

The Roman Takeover of Gaul

Read the pricewaterhouse coopers analysis [pwc.com]

and this other commentary [endlessrealms.com]

____________________________________
The Spiders are coming [e-sheep.com]

Back to the old "dot com" days again? (1)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140561)

Actually, Oracle's hostile bid for PeopleSoft reminds me a lot of heyday of dot com companies, when fights between friendly and hostile takeovers were quite common.

$5.1bn ? (0, Flamebait)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140442)

That's a bunch of money. I didn't realize Oracle was that rich. I don't know Oracle that much, but I thought they basically sold a sequel database on steroid, and did related services : can anybody inform me here ?

Re:$5.1bn ? (4, Informative)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140455)

Let me put it like this: my bro. in law is a GM at a industrial trucking company. He's got a masters in probability and statistics but isn't "in the business" per se. When he talks to me about "his weekly Oracle having problems," he's not thinking of a database -- he's thinking of the Oracle Apps reports that come out on his printer.

In enterprise, "Oracle" is like "Xerox" or "Kleenex" -- it's the apps, the engine is invisible. If Peoplesoft bought J.D. Edwards, they'd challenge Oracle on that level.

If Microsoft had any sense they'd sell the biz apps. The DB is irrelevant -- it's the schemas that people buy.

Re:$5.1bn ? (2, Interesting)

Sean80 (567340) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140480)

Well, I wouldn't say -irrelevant-. The day your data center goes down in flames, and your db admin spills beer on your backup tapes is the day you remember why you spent so much money on the database - its enterprise features.

Re:$5.1bn ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140487)

Thats why MSFT bought Great Plains. Watch for the business apps to make a large impact later this year.

Re:$5.1bn ? (2, Interesting)

Kunta Kinte (323399) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140673)

If Microsoft had any sense they'd sell the biz apps. The DB is irrelevant -- it's the schemas that people buy.

They do http://microsoft.com/BusinessSolutions/ [microsoft.com]

Microsoft just got in the CRM market recently, which had PeopleSoft really pissed. I believed they made a statement concerning pushing other platforms or something.

To be honest, I have to say, I'm with Microsoft on this one. CRM/ERP companies have been charging whatever they feel like for software and training for a while now. Companies like Microsoft and Salesforce are now commoditizing that market, and maybe we will start getting CRMs with price under $300/user soon.

Re:$5.1bn ? (1)

smallpaul (65919) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140482)

Oracle is the second biggest software company after you know who. They make a ton on those "related services." Yes, they also sell apps as someone else pointed out but it is my impression that they've never made a ton of money on the apps compared to the database and services. In fact they give away some apps like their portal.

Re:$5.1bn ? (1)

instantkarma1 (234104) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140486)

Oracle was the database of databases. Now, IBM's DB2 has caught up on the high end, while Microsoft's SQL Server has been catching up on the low end. Still, Oracle is the one everyone compares to when talking databases.

Oracle also has many financial and business applications which, guess what? run on top of the Oracle database.

Many of it's competitors in the business applications market also use the Oracle database to power their applications. For example, at a previous employer we went through an SAP implementation (it was hell..you don't want to know). Anyway, while running SAP R3, we were using....yep, you guessed it..an Oracle database. At the time, it was simply ubiquitous.

Re:$5.1bn ? (2, Informative)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140559)

I don't know Oracle that much, but I thought they basically sold a sequel database on steroid,

And Microsoft, Sun and Apple basically sell operating systems.

A relational databases on steroids can be very valuable. Almost every large profitable computer company uses a relational database on their back end.

It is not uncommon for a small business to pay $50,000 for an Oracle setup.

There are many mid-to-large organizations who have Oracle setups that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, running on large disk arrays that cost over $1 million.

And yes, one of my coworkers almost dropped one of these babies on my foot! My boss made a crack like "It's cheaper to fix your foot then it is to fix this big computer". But he was just joking... I think.

oracle is rich++ (0)

rusko (666916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140566)

yes, they make the biggest, baddest and hardest to debug (grin) rdbms. if you don't know why they are so rich, give them a call and ask for a quote =]

paul

Re:$5.1bn ? (3, Insightful)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140592)

Oracle's got the dough, as you'll see here [yahoo.com] . With $1.15 cash in hand per share, at 5.24 Billion shares outstanding, that's around the $6 billion mark right there. A large portion of this purchase could be made in Oracle stock or by arranging a loan (the technique made famous in the 80's, the Leveraged BuyOut or LBO) as well, reducing the need for cash.

Either way, this story is only just beginning. Analysts portend a consolidation wave coming in the software field. Also consider that Oracle's standing offer amounts to $16 per share of Peoplesoft, but the stock price on Friday closed at $17.82. That means the folks who know best (investment bankers, merger arbitragers) see this as the first step in a longer auction process.

Re:$5.1bn ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140656)

No they don't. They have an SQL database. They also have an application server, and related middleware servers and professional/consultibg services to support them. What is the sequel database you speak of?

So who exactly (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140448)

even gives a shit? News? Not news, technology? Barely, noteworthy? No freaking way.

Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & People (4, Insightful)

reporter (666905) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140464)

The key quote in the article, "PeopleSoft calls Oracle bid 'atrocious' [com.com] ", is the following.
The corporate cultures of Oracle and PeopleSoft couldn't be farther apart, according to some former employees. Oracle is a haven for aggressive personalities who thrive on intense competition. To motivate the sales staff, managers have posted an individual's progress in achieving his or her sales goals on the wall during quarterly meetings. The competitive atmosphere leads to routine reorganizations. By contrast, PeopleSoft, founded by a Cornell University graduate, Dave Duffield, projects a Hewlett Packard-like image of being more collegial. The sales staff often relies on customer recommedations to complete a deal. To some extent, this was necessary because the applications market had already been well established by Oracle and SAP by the time PeopleSoft emerged.

Instead of looking at this acquisition from a purely rational, coldly analytical perspective, we should and must begin to look at the quality of the lives of the employees. I would prefer to work for an organization like PeopleSoft. It is an organization that cares.

Oracle is cut from the same cloth as Sun, Siebel, and Cisco. Brutal, cut-throat, survival of the fittest. Increasingly, with the influx of H-1B's and "free" trade, American companies are becoming the ruthless of ogres of the early part of the 20th century. Most of my American colleagues do not want an America where employees are savaged. We gladly accept a small reduction of economic expansion in exchange for a kindler and gentler American workplace and society.

It is this kindler and gentler America that has drawn tens of millions of immigrants to this country.

We shareholders should oppose this hostile takeover and send Larry Ellison back to the Orient that he so admires.

drawn tens of millions of exploited suckers (0, Offtopic)

screwthemoderators (590476) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140506)

It has been deception and greed that suckered immigrants into America... Most were exploited mercilessly, but hoped that their children would do better. It is the Myth of a kinder gentler America, a myth perpetuated by the aggressive ogres. We have already live in an America where employees are savaged, and it is getting worse

Re:drawn tens of millions of exploited suckers (1)

The Bungi (221687) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140609)

I don't think this "savaging" is limited to immigrants. Across the board, in companies that don't care or simply champion this type of thing, employees are being asked (forced) to do more and more with less, at the cost of many things, like family life and one's own health.

The never-ending quest for bottom line will eventually come back to bite these companies. They're exacting revenge for the few years where the job market was spinning out of control and employees ruled, but it's getting out of hand.

Re:Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & Peo (5, Insightful)

bug506 (584796) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140576)

The problem with this quote is that it refers to the sales force.

As a developer in the server technologies division of Oracle, I'd have to say that I don't see the "intense competition" that is mentioned. Within my group of about 50-100 (that is, all of the people below the closest VP), there is a true spirit of cooperation. If I have a problem with a specific line of code or a new technology I am learning, there are many other people on the team who are willing to help (just as I am willing to help them), even if they are not working on the same project as me. I know it sounds idealistic, but that's what the real situation is in development.

This cooperation even extends to the H-1Bs, and all of the other recent immigrants with whom I work. I'm one of the few people in my group that was born in America and speaks English natively. However, I look at having this diversity in the group as a positive and not a negative as it brings different viewpoints to technical discussions and makes non-technical discussions a little more interesting.

Now, sometimes there is a level of competition between teams, as each team thinks it knows the best approach to a given problem. But that is healthy, and it forces a detailed refinement of the approaches so that the "higher ups" can make a decision regarding which approach is most appropriate.

So, I can't speak for the sales force, but I don't know if the development cultures are as different as the quote suggests.

Re:Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & Peo (1)

Kunta Kinte (323399) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140599)

Instead of looking at this acquisition from a purely rational, coldly analytical perspective, we should and must begin to look at the quality of the lives of the employees. I would prefer to work for an organization like PeopleSoft. It is an organization that cares.

Oracle is cut from the same cloth as Sun, Siebel, and Cisco. Brutal, cut-throat, survival of the fittest. Increasingly, with the influx of H-1B's and "free" trade, American companies are becoming the ruthless of ogres of the early part of the 20th century....

Why does it always have to be "us versus them"?

How does one take a story about Oracle's CEO pushing to increase his company's market share and make it a war cry against "foreigners" and the assult on American values?

Truth is capitalism, is based on competition. And America was built on capitalism, in large part.

Globally, the US is one of the more agressive trading partners. Vigorously defending its National interest ( eg. Steel ) while pushing for open trade, trade with smaller countries that couldn't possibly compete due to economies of scale. But that's fine because business is not pretty.

If Oracle treats it's salesforce badly, over the long run, with competition, they will lose their good sales people and faulter.

Re:Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & Peo (1)

ektor (113899) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140642)

Oracle is cut from the same cloth as Sun, Siebel, and Cisco. Brutal, cut-throat, survival of the fittest. Increasingly, with the influx of H-1B's and "free" trade, American companies are becoming the ruthless of ogres of the early part of the 20th century. Most of my American colleagues do not want an America where employees are savaged. We gladly accept a small reduction of economic expansion in exchange for a kindler and gentler American workplace and society.

Companies should always look for ways to be more and more efficient and productive. Doing that maximizes the benefit that a company contributes to the global economy. The key word here is global.

If you want companies that don't look at their bottom line you have a couple of options:
a) Start your own damn company and be nice to everybody. That's the beauty of capitalism.
b) And/or join the socialists or whatever they are called.

Re:Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & Peo (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140748)

I would prefer to work for an organization like PeopleSoft. It is an organization that cares.

It is an organization quite likely to not survive.

Re:Quality of Work Environment at Oracle & Peo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140768)

Look at the statistics of number of employees laid off by Oracle and you will find that it is one of the lowest of any high tech industry in Bay area. In fact, they have slashed bonuses, frozen pay and allowed voluntary attrition rather than laying off people. HP was a good company in taking care of employees, but is no more. Don't know much about Siebel, Cisco or Peoplesoft.

*BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140472)

It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

How would this affect linux? (4, Interesting)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140473)

How would the Oracle purchase of Peoplesoft affect Linux? Oracle has been pushing Linux for a while. Peoplesoft is mostly installed on Windows (apparently Peoplesoft has pretty spotty support for Linux & Solaris).

A number of large businesses and private and public universities in the SF Bay Area have been installing Peoplesoft. The name "Peoplesoft" keeps coming up in discussions, and is usually accompanied by some cussing by the people who use it.

IIRC, UC Berkeley and Cal State Hayward are both moving from their inhouse solutions to Peoplesoft for the student record database (Causing many headaches among the students and staff). I've talked to some Unix admins at both places who griping about having to learn Windows and Peoplesoft.

These Universities are cutting budgets, but are still spending money on hardware, Windows licences, staff, training, training, and more training to accomodate the new Peoplesoft solution. The HR dept says this will save them lots of money.

But if Oracle takes ownership of Peoplesoft, will we see more Linux support in the future?

Re:How would this affect linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140497)

Hard to say. PeopleSoft recently announced that they would soon (end of this year I believe) support all their applications running on Linux.

However, if their Solaris support is indeed poor, then this might not be worth much.

Re:How would this affect linux? (2, Insightful)

johnpelster (531169) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140606)

According to this article [forbes.com] , PeopleSoft is already to jump on the Linux bandwagon...

As far as the cussing associated with PeopleSoft, I am very sympathetic. :) But, as someone who has worked with both PeopleSoft and Oracle's ERP suite, I can safely say that there is plenty of swearing going on thanks to Oracle.

The implementation makes all the difference... Both can be great application, or huge headaches depending on how they are done.

Mod down parent please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140618)

> Peoplesoft is mostly installed on Windows (apparently Peoplesoft has pretty spotty support for Linux & Solaris).

Yay, another slashbot who comments on something about which they know nothing.

To use the old version of Peoplesoft (Version 7 and below) you need to use windows client software.

The new version is web based, so any up to date client (IE, Moz, Opera, etc.) will do. Server side runs on Oracle (take your pick of OS) or MSSQL (one size fits all) for the DB with a Bea Tuxedo server (runs on NT, Solaris, AIX? don't know what else).

If Berlkey is dorking around with winblows clients then they're using the old client, probably due to licensing fees. I certainly wouldn't want to be rolling out the old software, thats for sure.

But axeing the custom piece of software in favor of COTS software should save them money, presuming they don't modify it so much it effectively becomes in-house...

Re:Mod down parent please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140670)

PeopleSoft 8 also runs on IBM DB2, but it isn't that great.

ERPs (1)

j0taj0ta (605516) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140478)

Ain't Peoplesoft an ERP maker? Ain't SAP one of Oracle's most important client-bringers? Why do I fail to see that this makes any sense?

Re:ERPs (1)

Morky (577776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140519)

Yes, and JD Edwards and PeopleSoft bring Oracle a lot of customers, too. But Oracle doesn't just make databases. They have their own ERP, which hasn't been a great success. What I fail to see is how killing a really nice, deployable ERP like PeopleSoft make Oracle's ERP any better.

Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (4, Insightful)

wareadams (185080) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140493)

I've been wondering what this would mean for the MySQL/SAP deal announced a week or so ago.

To date SAP has wanted to be agnostic to the underlying database that their software runs on, so you could view the MySQL deal as a nice headline but not really something that was going to have SAP's salesforce pushing MySQL into enterprise customers.... They'd be just as happy if those customers ran Oracle as long as they ran SAP on top of it.

However, if Oracle owns PeopleSoft they suddenly become SAP's largest competitor. As soon as that happens a major SAP infrastructure provider is now the enemy, and SAP might suddenly have reason to push another solution vs. allowing the customer to choose. After the deal with MySQL that solution might well be MySQL.

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (0, Informative)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140564)

Doubt it...

MySQL sucks, is all...

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140637)

No doubt these news are boosting MySQL's development, which is already very fast

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (1)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140666)

MySQL sucks, is all...

Well, MySQL is a triple-threat -- simplicity, stability, speed. It's easier than Oracle, it "just works" and keeps working, and it returns results just as fast as Oracle does, even under heavy load. We recently had MySQL processing 169 queries per second (Sun E450, running Apache, MySQL, and PHP) during our peak time, and while the site was slower than off-peak times, it was still responsive and enjoyable to use. Some people just don't need the high-end features -- or more to the point, for some people, the "high-end" features are stability & speed.

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140651)

Actually Oracle is a R/3 competitor. Oracle sells a lot more than just database engines...

The whole reason SAP got into SAPDB was because of what you describe. They just realized it wasn't worth the fight.

Perhaps the database market just isn't ready for another big player. Oracle, Microsoft, IBM... that is pretty much enough choice for the people willing to pay. As an open source project, it SAPDB just wasn't that clean of a code base. Very old...

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (1)

Rasta Prefect (250915) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140657)

However, if Oracle owns PeopleSoft they suddenly become SAP's largest competitor. As soon as that happens a major SAP infrastructure provider is now the enemy, and SAP might suddenly have reason to push another solution vs. allowing the customer to choose. After the deal with MySQL that solution might well be MySQL.

Yeah, except Oracle is already a major player in this market.

Re:Impact on SAP/MySQL deal (1)

(H)elix1 (231155) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140680)

SAP has a deal with DB2 [theregister.co.uk] ... Not that IBM and SAP are huge buddies either. But there are lots of options out there if you want to spite someone.

Would Reduce Our Choices By One (3, Interesting)

Jackson (87371) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140500)

Faced with the need for an ERP program, traditionally you could hire some programmers, wait a couple of years for them to create the software, and see if it worked, or was a big disaster.

Or, you could purchase from Oracle, Peoplesoft. Datatel, SCT, etc, gamble a lot of money, maybe discover you have to change your business processes to fit the software, and in a couple of years you may be .... kind of up and running.

I worry that if Oracle buys Peoplesoft, we lose a choice, such as it is. It's already a complex dynamic, and this may make the choices a bit more narrow.

Re:Would Reduce Our Choices By One (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140687)

This is too true. My University "changed" to peoplesoft software. To make it work, they had to change the name of subjects to courses and courses to programs. If I was paying the millions of dollars that my University paid to get this system I would expect two things; 1) that it was flexible enough to make such trivial changes and 2) the seller was prepared to do it for me. It isn't and they didn't.

Company for Sale (3, Insightful)

Arandir (19206) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140514)

When you offer your company for sale, you have only yourself to blame when someone makes a bid to buy it. And offering your company for sale is exactly what you're doing when you issue stock.

I have no sympathy for companies that want to be publicly traded corporations but then pretend that they're a private firm.

Re:Company for Sale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140572)

Aren't you supposed to preface your post with "I am not an Accountant" or something like that? Maybe you should try to understand what is happening before you post.

Re:Company for Sale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140685)

Why? I agree with the poster. The day you issue stock (ie: sell chunks of your company to raise capital) for expansion or whatever, is the day you've lost control over it. You really should not be surprised when someone bent on owning you (or burying you) comes along and takes advantage of this situation by buying up all these shares. This is a reality many small business owners face when their enterprises become successful: keep going at it slowly, or go big by selling shares (either on the open market or to private investors)? Even if you pick your investors very carefully, they will usually demand a controlling interest; at the very least YOU will lose the controlling interest. No serious investor will stand for you owning 51% of your company. Basically, you've SOLD OUT, and when the investors and their board and their management trashes your company, there's little sympathy for you.

Luckily... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140550)

... I saw an AC post this story here two days ago.

Why the hostilities? (1)

Gazateer (132671) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140577)

"It was like Larry was driving by, spotted a really nice wedding in progress, crashed it with a shotgun and said, 'This bride's going to marry me at the end of a barrel,"' - Craig Conway, CEO of PeopleSoft from Reuters.

I find this interesting they dislike each other so much - don't most of PeopleSoft's big applications run on huge Oracle clusters anyway - something I'm sure Ellison doesn't mind at all.

Better not wake the Giant. (4, Insightful)

LibertineR (591918) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140601)

PeopleSoft runs mostly on Microsoft Servers. The thought of losing a potential revenue stream might cause Ballmer to dip into petty cash and settle this argument overnight. Oracle is not going to integrate PeopleSoft; they are buying a customer list and less competition, in addition to kicking a few more thousand geeks to the curb.

Microsoft could pick them up, keep them as a separate line of business, with management autonomy and shareholders would go for that in a heartbeat. This could turn out to be a very bad move by Oracle. If Microsoft so mch as raised an eyebrow, Oracle stock goes down, making the aquisition more expensive even if Microsoft doesnt play. I see a lot of ways that Oracle could end up regretting this big time.

Consolidation of bad software? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140611)

Oracle, the DB, is fine, but that's not the part that competes with PeopleSoft. That would be Oracle, the business application suite [oracle.com] .

At two previous jobs I used PeopleSoft's suite and found it lacking. At one I did a bit of reverse engineering on the database, and I had perl scripts generating better reports than their $x million software, which also crashed daily. (Nobody seemed to know exactly what x was, but afaict everybody who had to do with the decision to use PeopleSoft no longer worked there. Which might tell you something.) Oh, and for all the article's 'PeopleSoft is (used to be) a caring company' lines, I can assure you that once they have your money they don't care the slightest about their customers, even when you're still paying for service.

On the other hand, during that same period, I talked to a number of people about Oracle's suite (Oracle E-Business Suite, OEBS) as a potential replacement. There are lots of sites talking about all the money and time people save using OEBS, just as there are for PeopleSoft. But every person I actually talked to said, essentially, that it was crap and they regretted it, but don't tell anyone.

So, I guess my point is that both of them are basically crap software that got their reputation because no public company would ever admit to their shareholders that their well-researched software decision was a multi-million dollar disaster. So they deserve each other.

And on that note, I think I'm going to post this anonymously, since even though it's all true libel suites are time consuming.

The United States's Hostile Takeover of Irak... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140615)

The United States's Hostile Takeover of Irak... and probably soon... enough said .. if you talk about cold hard cash its going to be "hostile" ...sorry Peace and good night...

I am (4, Informative)

CptChipJew (301983) | more than 11 years ago | (#6140659)

A PeopleSoft employee, and I can tell you that we aren't selling to Oracle.

Acquiring JD Edwards is going to make us #2 in the field, and Oracle #3, which is why Ellison wants to take us over, kill our product, and terminate all of our jobs.

Craig Conway (PeopleSoft CEO) has already told all of us that he won't let "Ellison kill PeopleSoft".

On top of all that, the offer made to PeopleSoft by Oracle per share is now lower than the price it's trading at. Take that into account, plus what the company will be worth after acquiring J.D. Edwards, and Oracle won't be able to convince the shareholders to go along with it.

Hostility against whom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6140674)

So if Oracle buys Corel with all its jinxed and hexed software (that they just leave somewhere, collecting dust) - who is acyually the hostile part in this? Oracle for being stupid enough to byu Corel, or Corel for being malicious enough to be sold to Oracle?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...