editorial
The 4Cs of Channel Nirvana
T
he Channel Champions survey is one event we all look forward to at CRN as it provides rich insight into the way the channel functions and what leads to its alignment with one vendor over the other. The survey is not just a quantitative exercise. There is a qualitative side to it which involves each of our reporters interviewing over 40 VARs to supplement the quantitative findings arrived at from the online poll. This year the CRN team interviewed nearly 200 VARs across the spectrum. At one end there were large tier-2 systems integrators, at the other small resellers in upcountry locations catering to micro businesses. Of course, everyone had their own views on the right market strategies for various products and solutions, as well as their own expectations from vendors. Despite the different views, on close analysis what they expect from vendors boils down to four elements which I like to call The 4Cs of Channel Nirvana. I have spoken about the 4Cs in the past, if I remember rightly, in the Editorial of the Channel
Volume 4, Issue 21
Managing Director : Sanjeev Khaira Printer & Publisher : Sajid Yusuf Desai Director : Kailash Shirodkar Executive Editor : Dhaval Valia Contributing Editor : Ramdas S Assistant Editor : Sonal Desai Principal Correspondent : Abhijeet Mukherjee (Mumbai) Design Art Director : Deepjyoti Bhowmik Designers : Yogesh Naik, Shailesh Vaidya, Jinal Cheda Marketing Senior Executive : Arshi Khan, Sejal Acharya Advertising Co-ordinator : Jagruti Kudalkar Operations Head—Finance : Yogesh Mudras Head—Operations & Administration : Satyendra Mehra Sales bangalore Regional Director : Anees Ahmed anees.ahmed@ubm.com (M) +91 98450 32170 Deputy Manager—Sales : Satish Kutty satish.krishnankutty@ubm.com (M) +91 98452 07810 Delhi Regional Director : Pankaj Jain pankaj.jain@ubm.com (M) +91 98101 72077
4
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Champions 2008 edition. However, I believe it is important to revisit them lest we miss paying attention to them. The first C is Commitment, which is the first step to every relationship. The second C is Consistency, which drives relationships. In any bilateral relationship, the two parties need to behave consistently within the boundaries of their engagement (commitment). Channels expect consistency in policies, channel management, pricing parity and the like. The third C is Clarity. Once the relationship is established, it is important to clearly define the parameters of the commitment. What this means is that both vendors and channels must specify their expectations with regard to targets, prices, warranty policies, rebate structures, etc. The fourth C is Communication. The channels desire regular communication from vendors regarding price cuts, new products, policy changes, promo schemes and so on. It also calls for regular engagement with vendors to understand each other’s changing expectations and resolve differences.n E-mail me at dhaval.valia@ubm.com
Deputy Manager—Sales : Sanjay Khandelwal sanjay.khandelwal@ubm.com (M) +91 98117 64515 Mumbai Head Business Development : Salil Warior salil.warior@ubm.com (M) +91 99875 80188 Deputy Manager – Sales : Sagar Nanal sagar.nanal@ubm.com (M) +91 98202 81302 production Deputy Manager : Prakash (Sanjay) Adsul Logistics Assistant Manager
: Bajrang Shinde
Subscriptions & Database Manager : Manoj Ambardekar manoj.ambardekar@ubm.com Senior Executive : Deepanjali Chaurasia deepa.chaurasia@ubm.com Head Office UBM India Pvt Ltd, 1st floor, 119, Sagar Tech Plaza - A, Andheri-Kurla Road, Saki Naka Junction, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400072, India Tel: 022 6769 2400; Fax: 022 6769 2426 Printed and Published by Sajid Yusuf Desai on behalf of UBM India Pvt Ltd, 6th floor, 615-617 Sagar Tech Plaza - A, Andheri-Kurla Road, Saki Naka Junction, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400072, India. Executive Editor: Dhaval Valia Printed at Indigo Press (India) Pvt Ltd, Plot No 1c/716, Off Dadaji Konddeo Cross Road, Byculla (E), Mumbai 400027
Associate Office - Pune Jagdish Khaladkar, Sahayog Apartment 508 Narayan Peth, Patrya Maruti Chowk, Pune 411 030 Tel: 91 (020) 2445 1574 (M) 98230 38315 email: jagdishk@vsnl.com
USA Huson International Media David Steifman david@husonusa.com Tel: 212 268 3344 ext. 102 Fax: 212 268 3355 April Ramirez april@husonusa.com Tel: 408 879 6666 (M): 408 429 4516 Fax: 408 879 6669 Japan Pacific Business (PBI) Hiroshi Okawa okawa-pbi@gol.com Tel: +81 3366 16138 Fax: +81 3366 16139
Taiwan Transaction Media Ryan Huang r yan@transactionmedia.com Tel: +886 (2) 2708 7754 Fax: +886 (2) 2708 9914 (M): +886 (0) 9330 12759 Singapore Transaction Media Nitin Joshi nitin@transactionmedia.com Tel: +65 6866 3254 Fax: +65 6866 3636 South Korea Young Media Young Baek ymedia@chol.com Tel: +82 2227 34819 Fax: +82 2227 34866
EMEA Huson International Media, Gerry Rhoades Brown, gerryrb@husonmedia.com Tel: +44 19325 64999 Fax: + 44 19325 64998 Important Every effort has been taken to avoid errors or omissions in this magazine. In spite of this, errors may creep in. Any mistake, error or discrepancy noted may be brought to our notice immediately. It is notified that neither the publisher, the editor or the seller will be responsible in respect of anything and the consequence of anything done or omitted to be done by any person in reliance upon the content herein. This disclaimer applies to all, whether subscriber to the magazine or not. For binding mistakes, misprints, missing pages, etc, the publisher’s liability is limited to replacement within one month of purchase. © All rights are reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the publisher. All disputes are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of competent courts and forums in Mumbai only. While care is taken prior to acceptance of advertising copy, it is not possible to verify its contents. UBM India Pvt Ltd. cannot be held responsible for such contents, nor for any loss or damages incurred as a result of transactions with companies, associations or individuals advertising in its newspapers or publications. We therefore recommend that readers make necessary inquiries before sending any monies or entering into any agreements with advertisers or otherwise acting on an advertisement in any manner whatsoever.
nel Ver
Commercial PC
HP maintains thin lead WORKGROUP PRINTER
HP back on top SERVER
IBM retains the crown NETWORK STORAGE
Three in a row for EMC enterprise networking
Cisco uninterrupted SMB NETWORKING
D-Link connects with channels STRUCTURED CABLING
Digilink maintains slender edge 6
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
ct
Ch
an
i d
12
client security
16
NETWORK SECURITY
20
COMMERCIAL UPS
24
Software Application
28
VIRTUALIZATION
30
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT software
32
THIN CLIENT
Symantec by a nose
No getting past Check Point
APC retains title
Tally stands tall
No match for VMware
Kaseya leads
HP wins in thin
34 36 38 40 42 44 46
Methodology
How we chose the champs
I
n this edition of CRN we present the annual Channel Champions survey rankings for the commercial product categories sold largely to SMBs and enterprises. In the next issue (March 15) we shall present the rankings for consumer products and components. Now in its ninth year, the annual CRN Channel Champions survey aims to provide a definitive index of plotting channel satisfaction in the country. The US edition of CRN has been conducting the survey for over 19 years now. While the basic methodology comes from CRN US, we have customized it to factor in local market dynamics and ground realities. The main objective of the exercise is to lend a voice to channel perception and experience in dealing with vendors who drive their business. At the same time, the survey aims to provide vendors a neutral view on channel expectations and how well they are managing channels and helping them to grow. In the 2010 survey we have added four new categories— Software Application, Virtualization, Infrastructure Management Software and Thin Clients. We have also
Nearly 687 unique channel partners from 85 cities voted for the 14 commercial product categories totalling 3,522 vendor evaluations
8
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
split the Networking Infrastructure category in two—SMB Networking and Enterprise Networking. The Scanner category was dropped.
Survey methodology
In the commercial category we polled 687 unique respondents (compared to 555 unique respondents in the 2009 survey) across 85 cities through an online poll which ran from November 25, 2010 to January 10, 2011. With each unique reseller voting for an average of five commercial product categories, we received a total of 3,522 vendor evaluations across 14 categories (compared to 2,887 evaluations in 2009 across 10 categories). For each product category unique respondents voted their vendor preference and satisfaction on eight key parameters and 24 sub-criteria. Product availability: Included parameters such as the regular availability of products, and whether a product was over- or underdistributed. In several commercial product categories, products are delivered back-to-back, hence we also captured the delivery lead-time for such products. Price-performance: Included sub-criteria such as product features, quality and reliability, and price. For commercial
products, special prices are decided by the size of the deal and the importance of the customer, hence we also factored the special pricing offered by vendors which often makes or breaks a deal. Channel profitability: The overall profitability that partners could achieve while dealing with a particular vendor. This included the front-end margins offered and the back-end incentives which partners could earn. Brand-pull & customer marketing: This criterion included the brand-pull enjoyed by vendors among end-customers, and the various local customer marketing promotions conducted by the companies to generate demand. Channel marketing & pre-sales support: This comprised parameters such as market development funds provided to partners for business development and generating demand, as well as channel schemes and incentives. Pre-sales support, which includes technical and sales enablement of partners, was also incorporated. Training & certification: This criterion included regular sales and technology training provided, online training Continued on page 10 ä
Methodology
ä Continued from page 8
Channel Champions
resources, product-specific training, and the value and effectiveness of vendor certification. Post-sales support: Included aspects such as warranty policy, RMA turnaround and escalation mechanism, toll-free phone support, and Web and e-mail support. Channel policy & management: Respondents voted on parameters such as fairness, transparency and swiftness of various channel processes, and the accessibility and responsiveness of managers.
Product Categories
2010 Winners
Commercial PC
Hewlett-Packard Hewlett-Packard
Workgroup Printer
For each product category, respondents were asked to vote for one of their top three vendors in terms of business dealings and rate it on the eight key criteria and 24 sub-criteria. It must be mentioned here that the CRN Channel Champions survey questionnaire is open-ended, which means resellers are allowed to rate any vendor of their choice; we don’t compel respondents to choose vendors from a list of names. Vendors that received less than 10 percent of the total votes polled in a particular category were not
Hewlett-Packard Canon
Server
EMC EMC
Enterprise Networking
Cisco Cisco
SMB Networking
D-Link NA
Structured Cabling
Network Security
Check Point
Commercial UPS
APC APC
East 9% West 45%
VMware
Software Application
Tally NA
Region
10
Computer Reseller News
Kaseya NA
Thin Client
Hewlett-Packard NA
considered eligible and were hence not included in the final ranking. For instance, in the server category, we received 339 unique votes (from 339 unique channel
Class A 24% Class C 52%
Type of City
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
NA
Infrastructure Management Software
Total vendor evaluations: 3,522
Class B 24%
Check Point
Virtualization
Total unique votes polled: 687
South 25%
Digilink Digilink Symantec Symantec
Survey Demographics
North 21%
IBM IBM
Network Storage
Client Security
Scoring
2009 Winners
Partner 63%
Non-Partner 37%
type of reseller
organizations), and hence any vendor who got less than 33 votes did not make it to the final rankings table. As a result, brands such as Oracle-Sun and Acer failed to make the cut in the final ranking because they did not receive the minimum 33 votes. Within the finalists, we arrived at the average scores for each vendor for each criterion. Under each main criterion, the scores of the subcriteria were added and averaged to arrive at overall criterion ranking. Individual criterion scores were added to arrive at the final score, and the final rankings were based on this overall score. In slicing and dicing the survey data, and providing deeper insights to arrive at the final rankings, we were ably helped by our knowledge partner, Aranca, India’s leading B2B research agency. n
Smart printers that keep your costs in check.
Introducing Dell Laser Printers in India. Dell Printers are designed the same way our computers are: as integral parts of your business IT infrastructure. You’ll find choice, reliability, and flexibility built into the entire line.
Also your business can enjoy a low total cost of ownership.
For enquiries, please contact Copyright 2010 Dell Inc. All rights reserved.
Supertron Electronics Ltd., Mr. Bankim on 09891672350 or write to bankim.dlh@supertronindia.com
Commercial PC
HP maintains thin lead
H
P surprised us all by retaining the channel champion crown in 2010 despite the fact that it made drastic changes to its GTM during the year, many of which drew flak from partners initially but were appreciated by the channel eventually. Lenovo, which was confronted with serious MOP issues in 2009—due to abuse of the SPC mechanism—did well to climb from the number four position to number two in 2010, right behind HP with a narrow margin separating the two. While Dell had a great year in terms of market performance—it emerged as the number one brand in the overall India PC market in Q2 and Q3 2010—it still suffers from channel skepticism with regard to its direct business. Acer, despite its price aggressiveness, continues to be ranked last in channel preference because it has failed to create a compelling reason for channels
to engage with it in the commercial space.
Hewlett-Packard
HP offers the widest range of commercial desktops and notebooks, and is also the most widely distributed brand. Interestingly, the company received better scores from nonpartners than its partners though it received an equal number of votes from partners and non-partners. In July 2010 the company revamped its distribution model for commercial PCs. This, both partners and non-partners admit, has helped in curbing MOP fluctuations in the MOQ business which was a big issue in 2009. It also led to higher profit margins for non-partners and partners. In addition, HP rationalized its prices. (In 2009 the channels had questioned HP’s strategy to price its products by up to 20 percent higher than those of Dell.)
Score Card Criteria
HP Lenovo Dell
Acer
Product availability
98.0
96.6
Price-performance
85.0 84.2 87.0 80.0
Channel profitability
78.0
79.0
75.0
72.3
Brand-pull and customer marketing
87.0
80.6
85.0
72.2
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
77.0
74.0
71.0
66.3
Training and certification
69.9
65.0
54.7
45.6
Post-sales support
79.0
78.2
83.2
70.2
Channel policy and management
77.0
81.2
74.0
71.0
Final Score
97.8
94.9
81.4 80.0 78.1 71.8 *Scores out of 100
12
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Respondents said that HP was vigorous in its marketing in 2010, and also that there was increased motivation among the regional and local sales people. Partners pointed out that HP has improved its lead generation activity, and felt that they received more leads than in 2009. HP had revamped its authorized service network during 2009, which was criticized by the channels. However, service-related issues were resolved by the beginning of 2010. Respondents complained of excess paperwork on acquiring spares due to HP’s new service policy. The biggest complaint of longtime partners was the lack of engagement from the company’s representatives. Due to the realignment of teams at the local and national level, many of the managers they shared a good rapport with were either moved to other regions or left the organization, and as a result the engagement suffered. Toward the end of 2010 HP made changes to its internal organization and created two different teams— mid-market and large enterprise— which many of its partners said is a good move. Nevertheless, they are waiting for a strong vision and strategy to emerge.
Lenovo
In 2009 Lenovo faced some serious issues. It was alleged by leading partners that many key business partners, with the help of some Lenovo employees, misused the SPC mechanism and sold PCs in the open market thus creating serious MOP issues. Lenovo did address the matter by making the SPC process stricter and even delisting a few partners and firing some of its staff. The company also realigned its relationship Continued on page 14 ä
Commercial PC
ä Continued from page 12
business which contributes nearly three-fourths of its commercial PC business. On the SMB front, it clubbed its SMB business with the consumer business to achieve market coverage. This seems to have succeeded as Lenovo received a larger number of votes from Class B and C cities compared to the 2009 survey. To complement this the company introduced a stock-and-sell program called Think Large. It also ran roadshows in the top 25 cities during the year. Respondents said that with a realigned SMB strategy Lenovo showed strong focus on small deals, and extended the necessary support to partners in order to close the deals quickly. Respondents from smaller cities appreciated the various channel schemes it has run over the years. Many large partners of Lenovo continue to complain about its growing direct business and lack of aggression in taking on Dell and HP.
Dell
Dell, which took the second spot in 2009, was pushed to the third spot in 2010. The company moved in the right direction by setting up a commercial channel sales team, announcing the rules of partner engagement, and setting up an incentive program. Dell continues to be rated high on price-performance. Its warranty and support are also considered better than the rest. Though Dell became the PC market leader in Q2 and Q32010, respondents said that quite a lot of the numbers were achieved through its direct business. The other issue that Dell faced was the delay in shipments during Q2 and Q32010. While the supply issue was resolved, many
14
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Commercial PC category: 546 North 22%
South 24%
Class A 46%
East 10%
Class C 30%
West 44%
Class B 24%
Region
Type of City
respondents said they lost business due to it. Dell’s lack of a stable price-list and partner transfer price-list is another issue that partners want the company to address. Partners were divided on Dell’s policy of deal registration based on opportunity and not on accounts. While some of the partners felt that this was a better way to do business, others were unhappy about the business model. Dell was the preferred vendor for many partners in government deals as it was reluctant to do direct deals with government organizations and
Lack of a stable price-list and partner transfer price-list is an issue Dell needs to address
Partner 61%
Non-Partner 39%
type of reseller
preferred to go the channel route.
Acer
Acer was acknowledged as the most price-aggressive PC vendor during 2010, and although the company tried its best to engage with partners through its Select program, it failed to create a strong channel preference. Respondents said the key issue with Acer is its lack of brand preference among customers. However, many HP and Lenovo partners admitted that they aligned with Acer on price-led deals in the education and government segments. Complaints regarding product quality and post-sales support from many respondents brought down Acer’s overall channel preference. Acer’s strategy to realign and consolidate different business territories didn’t go down too well with the channel. For instance, its move to club Coimbatore with the Kerala territory displeased partners in Tamil Nadu who till then were catering to that market. Though Acer launched servers during the year, and tried wooing enterprise VARs, it did not create much of an impact. n
WORKGROUP PRINTER
HP back on top
A
fter a bad 2009, HP bounced back as the most preferred channel brand in the workgroup printer category consisting of inkjets and lasers. Having resolved the product shortage issue, aggressive pricing strategies, high-decibel marketing and a renewed focus on partner profitability were the key reasons behind HP’s turnaround. Canon, the winner last year, had to be content with the number two position. Epson, which failed to make it to the final list last year, made noticeable gains in channel preference and ranked third. Samsung continues to have a steady channel play with focused partners.
Hewlett-Packard Although the shortage of certain products extended to Q22010, HP approached the market vigorously once supplies normalized. The company upped its channel engagement in Q2 and Q3 by
conducting multi-city training programs, launching channel incentive schemes and customer promotions, and making its channel managers more responsive to partner issues. An important step HP took was to revisit its premium pricing strategy. Through a mix of promotions and the price rationalization of both printers and consumables, HP became price competitive. In the 2009 survey, respondents had said that HP’s 20 percent to 30 percent premium pricing didn’t make sense. HP also rationalized its distribution model by cutting the number of sub-distributors. To tackle over-distribution among subdistributors, it put in place a system to create a level-playing field among volume partners of different sizes. Respondents said that the new initiatives led to better front-end margins for all types of partners, and that MOP issues have come under control. HP still offers the lowest
Score Card Criteria
HP Canon Epson Samsung
Product availability
94.2
Price-performance
89.0 83.7 82.0 84.7
Channel profitability
76.0
78.5
81.0
84.0
Brand-pull and customer marketing
91.0
83.0
75.3
71.1
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
79.2
74.0
81.2
71.1
Training and certification
74.6
73.8
71.7
55.6
Post-sales support
77.0
81.5
82.0
78.0
Channel policy and management
84.0
82.4
81.0
78.0
Final Score
97.3
91.0
93.0
83.1 81.8 80.6 76.9 *Scores out of 100
16
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
profit margin among all four vendors though respondents said that the large volume of HP business makes up for the lower margin. One issue that HP needs to work on is improving its post-sales support. Owing to its large installed base and higher sales volume, the company has a higher turnaround time for repairs and replacements. Also, the post-warranty support isn’t well streamlined, and the ASPs are often unresponsive. Many respondents from Class B and C cities reported unavailability of spare parts for some high-end models and plotters. Further, in laser printers, while both Samsung and Canon offer a 2-year warranty, HP offers only one year. About channel policy and management, respondents said that the IPG team has become more responsive over the past year. In addition, the motivation among the internal HP team improved; this led to better engagement with partners. HP also put in place an automated transaction system which fast-tracked incentive payouts from 45 days to 21 days. In November 2010 the company launched a new incentive model which de-links the IPG business from the overall HP portfolio. Partners said this increased back-end incentives and thus the profitability of their IPG business. One aspect HP needs to work on is the time taken to clear special pricing deals which respondents said ranges from 5 to 7 working days for rate contracts and DGS&D orders.
Canon Canon has become the second choice after HP for partners. In fact, Canon polled more votes than the previous year, suggesting that its distribution reach and partner acceptance have improved. The company strengthened its A4 Continued on page 18 ä
WORKGROUP PRINTER
ä Continued from page 16
laser portfolio last year and as a result found a bigger addressable market. In A3 flatbed MFDs, Canon continues to enjoy strong preference among partners and customers. Even many HP partners position Canon in such deals because HP still lacks a strong portfolio in this segment. Canon’s post-sales support ranks higher than that of its competitors with a shorter TAT and more responsive ASPs, particularly in smaller cities. One thing Canon needs to work on is the pricing of its cartridges. While HP and Samsung ran schemes giving free cartridges with certain models, Canon had no such scheme. Compared to 2009, respondents said that Canon did less channel marketing and customer marketing. Many Canon partners in Class A cities said that when HP and even Epson are running regular advertising campaigns, Canon was less visible, which impacted demand. Respondents said that decisionmaking at Canon at the local level is not as effective as it used to be, and that for large deals there’s a lack of urgency in decision-making on special pricing. A few Canon Enterprise Partners also said that the company resorts to direct selling in large deals.
Epson did well to attain the third spot. The company has been positioning inkjet printers as a viable option for office workgroup printing. Epson has also been working on an applicationled vertical strategy targeting photo labs, education institutes and SMBs having different printing needs. Respondents who voted for Epson said that it has better priceperformance and cost-per-page benefits in the inkjet category than HP and Canon. They believe the lack of a credible laser portfolio makes Epson’s case weaker among larger customers in the
Computer Reseller News
Unique votes polled for Workgroup Printer category: 274 North 21%
South 22%
East 11%
Class A 40%
West 46% Region
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Partner 52%
Type of City
non-impact category. Epson also needs better marketing to communicate the cost benefits of its inkjet technology in the office segment. The company’s NPower partner program has been well appreciated. Respondents said it helped them sell more products and earn higher margins. Epson also provides a 2-year warranty on most of its models. The company’s partners are now awaiting its new Ink Tank technology which brings down the cost of color printing to `1 per page.
Samsung
Canon had to be content with the number two position. Samsung continued to have a steady channel play. Epson made gains in channel preference
Class C 31%
Non-Partner 48%
Class B 29%
The vendor continued with its steady
Epson
18
Survey Demographics
type of reseller
channel engagement and polled the same ratio of votes as in 2009. Most resellers who voted for Samsung cater to the government and education segments. The biggest issue with Samsung continues to be its limited portfolio. The company’s product line consists primarily of lasers and spans entrylevel to mid-range with very few models and no credible option in the high-end network printer and A3 printer categories. Nevertheless, Samsung scores higher in price-performance. In the range it operates in, it’s considered the best price-performance option. Respondents shared the perception that Samsung’s hardware cost is lower, and that its cartridges offer better value for money than those of its competitors. The other positive factor about Samsung is that it offers better margins than HP and Canon. A few partners selling to the government complained about the lack of timely availability of backto-back supplies. The availability of cartridges is also an issue. While the company is strong in channel marketing, it requires more mainstream customer marketing to create stronger demand. n
Freedom
Global No.1 Antivirus Software* by AVcomparatives
from Virus Attacks
NEW
o
lo gy
n Na
NST Se no c u r e Te c h
Recommend K7 Security Products and Protect PC with
“NST – Nano Secure Technology”
* For overall speed & performance
Faster
Safer
Reliable
Leading International Security Software Certifications
www.k7computing.com
To order SMS <VIRUS UB> to 56767 K7 Computing Pvt Ltd. 144/7, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Kottivakkam Chennai – 600 041 Phone - +91 6611 7777
SERVER
IBM retains the crown
B
ig Blue kept sitting on the Channel Champion throne in this year’s survey while HP came second. Dell came in third, and narrowed the gap between itself and the two market leaders. Oracle, which acquired Sun Microsystems, polled less than 5 percent of the votes and therefore did not qualify. The availability of refurbished servers at much lower prices and the parallel import of server spares and components were common concerns for partners of all brands. According to the partners polled, solutions around virtualization ranked as the biggest technology driver which boosted sales.
IBM IBM continued to enjoy channel preference mainly due to its invigorated GTM during 2010. It launched several new products, primary among them being the Power 7 system. IBM also came out with several promotions to help generate
fresh demand and even migration opportunities. The company added new elements to its partner incentive program; this was appreciated by respondents as they led to an increase in profitability. Besides, IBM’s focus on enabling server partners in software resulted in increased business and, more importantly, profitability. The company’s launch of a new mid-market program led to an increase in market coverage. This was evident from the fact that IBM polled higher votes from Class B cities than last year. Notably, for the first time, IBM polled 30 percent more votes than HP in 2010 as compared to previous years when IBM always polled fewer votes than HP in the server category. In line with its mid-market focus, IBM introduced more server models in the MOQ list. The company was also energetic in marketing thanks to a series of launches on the
Score Card Criteria
IBM
HP
Dell
Product availability
92.0
91.0
89.0
Price-performance
85.0 80.2 76.8
Channel profitability
81.0
73.6
70.5
Brand-pull and customer marketing
83.5
78.4
76.3
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
84.2
79.0
77.9
Training and certification
81.0
78.3
63.7
Post-sales support
81.3
77.5
75.9
Channel policy and management
88.0
73.1
71.3
Final Score
84.5 78.9 75.2 *Scores out of 100
20
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
server, storage and software front. In channel marketing, it ran several programs to engage with channels. Respondents said that IBM’s lead generation system has become more effective, and conversion rates have gone up. On the channel policy and management front, respondents praised the improvements in the process of deal registration, special price clearance, and incentive and rebate payouts. However, some IBM partners in the north complained of conflict in deal registration for some large projects. IBM partners said that the channel sales team is showing more intent in garnering bigger business in 2010, and was far more assertive in its follow-ups with partners with a focus on closing deals. The quality of the IBM channel team was considered better than that of HP and Dell.
Hewlett-Packard While HP continued to lead the x86 server market in 2010, it failed to win channel preference. Interestingly, HP received better scores from non-partners than partners. This suggests that HP needs to review its partner engagement to manage their expectations. Most respondents said the lack of clarity about the GTM and the absence of motivation in the channel sales team were their biggest issues. Changes in the local channel engagement team added to the sentiment. There were major delays in decision-making on aspects such as deal registration and special price clearance. Many respondents said they lost some large projects to IBM as HP delayed price clearance. Despite assurances from HP that matters would improve, partners said Continued on page 22 ä
SERVER
ä Continued from page 20
there were no noticeable changes till October. However, since November 2010 there has been improvement in certain aspects but HP still needs to do more. Another issue raised was the lack of a uniform MOP on MOQ models, and there was a reported price variance of as much as 15 percent on entry-level x86 servers. Nevertheless, there were some positives for HP. While in 2009 there were complaints about a delivery time of 4-6 weeks for back-to-back supplies, in 2010 the company reduced the average lead time to 2-4 weeks. HP introduced the 2U rack system DL 380 through stockand-sell channels, which many respondents appreciated. It also introduced attractive schemes around the DL series in the second half. The company cut prices of its G6 series in H22010, and positioned it aggressively in the market; this helped partners to win deals against price-aggressive Dell. HP’s server training programs were appreciated by partners. Respondents noted that HP failed to market its new launches forcefully, namely the G7 series and the new category Microserver. After an initial month-long buzz around Microserver there were no marketing activities. Indeed, many leading partners didn’t even get to see the product.
Dell While Dell made progress in increasing its partner base by expanding its distribution and investing in building a channel sales team, the company still lacks partner confidence because it also sells directly. Respondents said that Dell has been aggressive in its channel engagement over the past 12 months, and that it has put in place a strong
22
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Server category: 339 North 20%
Class C 21%
South 25%
East 7%
Class A 55% West 48%
Region
Type of City
partner relationship management team which is responsive and supportive. Also, Dell is very aggressive on pricing, and partners say they have never lost a server deal on pricing. However, they point out that such aggressive pricing leads to discounting of the brand, and that every time the customer buys it he expects a similar price. Dell doesn’t sell any model through stock-and-sell, doesn’t have a fixed price list, and prices are available only after a partner inputs specs in the configurator. While its just-in-time delivery is
The availability of refurbished servers at much lower prices and parallel import of server spares and components were common concerns
Class B 24%
Partner 64%
Non-Partner 36%
type of reseller
quick, respondents believe that the company needs to introduce some fast-moving products through stockand-sell. In addition, respondents said Dell doesn’t enjoy a credible perception on high-performance servers, and as a result, for any ERP-led deal, customers tend to prefer IBM or HP. Despite raising this issue with Dell, the company hasn’t undertaken any marketing activity to educate customers about the quality of its servers. There’s a lack of clarity about the named accounts which Dell sells to directly, as well as the white list which is open to the channel at large. This creates confusion and conflict. A couple of partners pointed out that even if Dell has sold only a PC to a certain customer he may figure in the named account list, and this disallows partners from selling even a high-value server to him. Respondents said that while account managers share the named account list when requested, they believe that for the sake of transparency and to win partner confidence Dell should make it available to every partner. n
NETWORK STORAGE
Three in a row for EMC
F
or the third consecutive year, EMC emerged as the most preferred storage vendor, although by a slender margin. IBM made significant gains in channel preference and was ranked very closely behind EMC. NetApp, which was No 2 in the 2009 Channel Champions ranking, was pushed to the No 3 spot because of its lack of aggression in the marketplace to win deals. While HP did well to address several of the complaints raised by partners in 2009, it remained in the last position owing to the overall lack of effective partner engagement and motivation among its partner sales team. Dell failed to poll more than 10 percent of the category votes and hence doesn’t figure in the final list. However, respondents who voted for it said that the company is doing well on pricing and channel training.
EMC EMC upped the competition bar in the network storage space by adding several new tools and services— backup and recovery, encryption, intelligent storage management—to its range of mid-market and large enterprise products, thus creating an unbeatable price-performance vis-àvis the competition. With a strong focus on the Iomega brand in 2010, EMC improved its connect with the SMB channel. (It needs to be mentioned here that several SMB partners had voted for Iomega, but we merged Iomega votes with those of EMC.) EMC’s flagship mid-market products, Clarion, Symmetrix and Celerra, were updated in Q12010 with many advanced features and tools. Although EMC increased the prices of the updated models by as much as 15 percent—which included a 3-year free upgrade option on all firmware and software—partners said
Score Card Criteria
EMC
Product availability
95.0 94.0 85.0 83.2
Price-performance
83.4 81.0 78.1 74.2
Channel profitability
81.4 76.4 84.8 71.1
Brand-pull and customer marketing
89.1
85.8
83.8
77.6
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
88.9
88.6
84.2
81.0
Training and certification
88.0
91.5
86.9
83.0
Post-sales support
89.0 86.4 84.1 79.0
Channel policy and management
94.3
Final Score
IBM
91.2
NetApp
88.0
HP
78.2
88.6 86.8 84.4 78.4 *Scores out of 100
24
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
that customers are willing to pay a premium for advanced tools such as intelligent storage management. The company also introduced the Express Configurator feature to its partner portal. Throughout the year, EMC ran attractive schemes on its entrylevel EMC boxes as well as Iomega products. However, there’s a perception building among small tier-2 VARs that EMC is focusing on large VARs and neglecting them.
IBM Improvements in its product positioning, channel marketing and training ensured IBM the second position. During 2010 the company focused on the mid-market and expanded to Class B and C cities. As a result, it polled much higher votes from these locations compared to 2009. IBM was very proactive with its entry-level DS-3000 series which partners said is the most aggressively priced in its segment. IBM also widened its stock-and-sell portfolio as part of improving the availability of products and engaging with a wider channel. The company launched the Storewize 7000 series in October, and while none of the respondents we spoke to reported any big business in the new product, they said that it is high on features and well priced. What many respondents liked is that unlike in the past, instead of bundling storage with servers, IBM created discount schemes for customers buying the x-series and p-series. The company filled the gap in the NAS range by launching new products in the N-series (through an OEM relationship with NetApp). Respondents noted that the Continued on page 26 ä
NETWORK STORAGE
ä Continued from page 24
overall partner engagement in storage has improved with better leads, good financing schemes, and enhanced pre-sales and marketing support. On the back of its mid-market strategy, IBM did a series of road shows in smaller cities. It also ran several training programs for large and small partners. Some IBM partners we spoke to said they won large storage deals for IBM’s enterprise storage offering, XiV, after they were rigorously trained and enabled to sell this range. The minimum deal size for XiV was reported to be `80 lakh. Still, some partners complained that in its zeal to win market share IBM was involving itself too much even in partner-led projects, which should be avoided.
NetApp NetApp continues to be ranked as a vendor with strong technology, a good partner program, and a definite focus on partner profitability. According to respondents, what pushed it down to the No 3 position was its lack of market aggression. In fact, respondents said that NetApp’s special pricing is often 10 percent to 15 percent higher than EMC’s, which in large purchases could amount to as much as `4 lakh to 5 lakh, and this in some cases has led to losing the project. In Q22010 NetApp lost many of its good managers which resulted in delays in approvals and clearances, as well as a let-up in the market thrust, the company had shown in 2009. Partners however said that NetApp has one of the most transparent and streamlined partner programs and management systems. It has a very good POC as well as demo programs for partners which
26
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Network Storage category: 254 North 17% East 7%
Class C 14%
South 29%
West 47% Region
Class A 65%
Hewlett-Packard To HP’s credit, many issues highlighted in 2009 were addressed. For example, it launched a unified storage offering under LeftHand in Q22010, introduced a demo program, and positioned LeftHand more aggressively on pricing. It may be recalled that in 2009 many HP partners had complained of HP’s lack of a credible unified offering when this product segment was growing the fastest and competitors were selling high
While the competition is bundling tools for backup and recovery, data protection and de-duplication, HP is still selling only boxes
Class B 21%
Partner 80%
Type of City
are well supported by a strong pre-sales.
Non-Partner 20%
type of reseller
numbers. They had criticized the lack of a demo program for LeftHand (which was a new brand then), and had raised the issue about the higher pricing of LeftHand vis-à-vis the competition. Many large HP partners stated that the storage market has moved a couple of notches above what HP offers today. While the competition is bundling tools for backup and recovery, data protection, thin provisioning, virtualization and de-duplication, HP is still selling only boxes. The company didn’t have a big technology tale in storage while its competitors had some big launches. Many partners said that after showing some marketing aggression in Q2 there was little or no major marketing carried out by the storage team. The channel policy and management was also criticized. Delays in deal registration, price clearance and the lack of a strong and focused GTM dented partner sentiments further. On the positive side, many respondents said that HP has been very aggressive on the EVA and MSA range, which moved in good numbers. n
enterprise networking
Cisco uninterrupted
C
isco again emerged as the most preferred enterprise networking vendor in the Channel Champions survey, followed by HP and Juniper. While Cisco’s revamp of channel programs has been much appreciated because the new programs have helped the company to closely align with partners, issues regarding availability continued to be a negative point. HP, after integrating its networking business with its enterprise server and storage business, had a closer alignment with partners. However, most of 2010 was lost in introducing a new consolidated portfolio following its 3Com acquisition and in fine-tuning its partner focus and programs. It was only in November 2010 that the company launched a revised PFR that lays significant focus on the networking business. Juniper, which failed to make it to the final list in 2009, has become aggressive in the market.
Nevertheless, its lack of a focused partner engagement and an effective distribution network continues to be a big dampener. To the company’s credit, more partners are today aware of the Juniper brand than last year, and have rated Juniper as strong emerging competition to both Cisco and HP. Avaya, despite revamping its partner program and appointing industry veterans to drive its channel initiatives, failed to make it to the final list. It polled only 2 percent of the total votes. Respondents believe that Avaya would have fared much better if it had integrated the Nortel products faster into its portfolio and incorporated the good elements of Nortel’s channel program. Several Nortel partners shifted to Juniper after senior Nortel team members joined Juniper.
Cisco
The non-availability of Cisco products, which began in October
Score Card Criteria
Cisco HP Juniper
Product availability
89.2
Price-performance
87.0 78.7 82.2
Channel profitability
84.5
82.3
81.0
Brand-pull and customer marketing
91.5
84.5
85.6
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
87.3
83.4
77.4
Training and certification
85.2
85.8
79.3
Post-sales support
86.6
82.0
82.0
Channel policy and management
88.9
84.0
75.0
Final Score
92.5
90.3
87.5 84.2 81.6 *Scores out of 100
28
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
2009, continued to be the biggest issue for partners in 2010. While post-July 2010 the company did address most of the issues, certain products continued to be in short supply. Partners said that for most backto-back supplies Cisco brought down the lead-time from 8-12 weeks to 4-6 weeks, but that this was still higher than what it used to be before the global shortage began. As a result, counterfeits and refurbished products continued to trouble channels though measures taken by Cisco did manage to control matters to a certain extent. Most respondents believe that Cisco needs to have a stronger policy to control the situation more. They opined that the company should communicate to partners regularly on this issue so that partners are aware of the steps being taken. To Cisco’s credit, the new distribution strategy has led to increased coverage, and as a result, Cisco polled more votes than last year from Class C cities. However, in cities such as Jammu and Guwahati, respondents said that even the distribution-led products take a week to reach resellers. The frequency of partner training has improved, and this has benefited resellers in smaller cities. Cisco has also been pushing its services through partners, and this, respondents said, has led to improved profitability. Yet many remarked that Cisco needs to provide more in-depth training, and have a more engaging partner program to sell services. While Cisco’s pre-sales support got high marks in Class A cities, respondents from smaller cities said they want more demo units and an active engagement from Cisco representatives for pitching jointly to large prospects. One of Cisco’s
assets is its post-sales support which most respondents rated as the best in the industry with the vendor meeting its SLAs in most cases. Government resellers who took the survey believe that Cisco isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t doing enough in the segment which has emerged as the largest IT spender over the past two years. They opined that the company needs to be more aggressive in getting its products approved for state-level projects such as SWAN and state data centers. On the channel policy and engagement front, respondents said that the new channel strategy and the reinforced team have led to considerable improvement in Ciscoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s alignment with channels.
Hewlett-Packard
Post-November 2010, respondents saw ample focus on networking from HP. Prior to that the company failed to make a notable impression as it was consolidating its product portfolio and lacked an aggressive focus on networking. According to HP partners, the company launched its consolidated portfolio in India only in September, and hence failed to capitalize on enterprise buying in the JAS quarter of 2010. In November 2010, which is the beginning of its global financial year, HP came up with a revised incentive program with the highest back-end incentive allocated for the networking business. The company also launched some exchange schemes for Cisco customers, and this created a lot of buzz among the channel and customers. In the last two months of 2010 HP covered much ground in terms of getting its products rolled out, aggressive pricing, strong partner engagement and customer
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Enterprise Networking category: 140 North 21%
Class C 15%
South 27%
East 10%
Class A 58%
Class B 27%
West 42%
Region
Type of City
marketing. Still, respondents believe that HP needs to move up several notches to compete with Cisco in terms of breadth of products, training and certification, pre-sales support and creating customer demand. Respondents said that if HP continues to do the good work it has done since November 2010 it can emerge as a strong alternative to Cisco among the partner community.
Juniper
Juniper did well to make it to the top three most preferred channel
HP needs to move up several notches to compete with Cisco in terms of breadth of products, training & certification, and pre-sales support
Partner 66%
Non-Partner 34%
type of reseller
vendors in 2010. Many Nortel partners moved to Juniper after several senior Nortel staffers joined Juniper. However, Juniper polled most of its votes from Class A cities; this suggested that the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market penetration is still limited to large cities. Many Cisco partners in Class A cities said that on a case-to-case basis they recommended Juniper to customers because it offers good value for money and also because Juniper is aggressive with its pricing. In some key verticals like BFSI and IT-ITeS, Juniper emerged as the second-most preferred brand after Cisco, and with its aggressive special pricing for large projects it is managing to win large deals in these verticals through partners. Many respondents who voted for Juniper were all praise for its pre-sales support. Even so, the company needs to systemize its channel engagement with consistent programs and processes. The new channel management team has been doing good work, but to compete with Cisco and HP it needs to do much more. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
29
SMB NETWORKING
D-Link connects with channels
T
his year we have divided the Networking category into SMB Networking and Enterprise Networking, hence this is the first time we are reviewing the SMB networking category in the Channel Champions Survey. D-Link emerged as the most preferred brand for SMBs with strong brand pull, wide availability and better price-performance. The company has also improved its channel engagement and post-sales support, which were major issues highlighted in 2009. Digisol, the active networking brand of Smartlink (Digilink), which entered the market in Q22010, won good scores due to its attractive schemes, regular training programs and higher profit margins. However, respondents opined that the new brand is yet to register with many resellers and most customers, and that it is still sold in the market as a sub-brand of D-Link. Netgear came behind Digisol.
It has improved upon a few issues such as warranty support and channel marketing as compared to 2009. Cisco gained ground in the SMB segment with its S series portfolio. It polled most of its votes from Class A cities from Cisco Premier and Select partners who sell the product as a branch office solution for a large enterprise. In Class B and C cities, resellers said they havenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t heard much about the S series.
D-Link
In 2009 D-Link was criticized for moving from a regional to a national distribution model. However, in the 2010 survey, many respondents admitted that, contrary to their initial perceptions, the new distribution strategy had actually been beneficial. Several respondents said that in the earlier regional distribution structure RDs sometimes behaved autocratically, but with the national distribution
Score Card Criteria
D-Link Digisol Netgear Cisco
Product availability
94.8
Price-performance
91.2 86.5 86.5 86.1
Channel profitability
85.3
87.7
82.3
80.7
Brand-pull and customer marketing
91.4
81.5
85.7
64.7
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
84.5
86.6
72.0
56.5
Training and certification
88.6
91.0
59.3
41.0
Post-sales support
91.0
89.0
69.9
76.9
Channel policy and management
93.0
91.0
67.0
63.0
Final Score
93.2
80.5
64.6
90.0 88.3 75.4 66.7 *Scores out of 100
30
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
model not only has there been improvement in product availability but also credit availability. In the SMB space, D-Link enjoys a customer pull that no other brand does. The company conducted round-the-year training programs. The engagement at the local level improved, and respondents said that regional managers have been visiting them frequently. Many partners suggested that D-Link became more channel-friendly after Digisol announced its plans to launch active networking products. D-Link and Digisol continue to sell largely through a common channel due to historic reasons, and this could be a risky proposition. D-Link partners pointed out that Digisol partners are selling to SMBs by calling Digisol a sub-brand of D-Link. Post-sales support, which emerged as a key issue in the 2009 survey, has been addressed to a large extent. However, for some products, the TAT is still 3-4 weeks, respondents said. They said that D-Link will have to be cautious about Digisol because the company is doing a lot of aggressive channel and customer marketing, pricing its products at 10 percent lower than D-Link, plus offering better margins. Many respondents said they have been informed that D-Link will launch its structured cabling portfolio in the new financial year. This, they believe, would give the brand an impetus.
Digisol
Most respondents said that Digisol has made a sound start to its active networking business. Although the portfolio is limited thus far, the brand has been following the right strategy to engage with channels. It
polled minimal votes from the east suggesting that the company is yet to engage with the channels there in the way it has in other regions of the country. The distribution and availability of products isn’t an issue because Digisol continues to ride on the regional distributors of Digilink. The company has priced its products at 10 percent below D-Link, which, respondents say, is a smart strategy. In H2, following the launch of its networking range, the company carried out a 150+ city channel marketing campaign. It also conducted training for the staff of its regional distributors to bring them up-to-date on pre-sales and technical support for its new range. The company, through a combination of channel schemes and back-end rebates, has ensured very healthy margins for its partners, and respondents said that as a result they are putting extra effort behind Digisol. Respondents opined that the challenge for Digisol is that D-Link is such a strong brand that to replace it in the customer’s mind isn’t going to be easy. The fact that many Digisol partners are selling to SMBs by calling Digisol a sub-brand of D-Link may initially help resellers to get the numbers, but respondents said this would harm Digisol in the longer term.
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for SMB Networking category: 220
North 23%
South 27%
East 9%
Class A 37%
Type of City
Netgear said the company has improved considerably on its postsales support compared to 2009, and they specially appreciated its tollfree support. The company improved its channel marketing during 2010, and conducted quarterly training programs for new products. Respondents said that Netgear has become regular in providing pricelists, as well as information related to schemes and incentives. Most respondents however said that Netgear doesn’t enjoy the brand recall and pull it did 2-3 years back in the SMB segment, and that the
D-Link partners pointed out that Digisol partners are selling to SMBs by calling Digisol a sub-brand of D-Link
Netgear
Nearly 90 percent of the votes Netgear polled came from the south and north, and only 10 percent from the west. It received no votes from the east. This probably indicates that the company is following a conscious strategy to focus on regions where it has good partners. Respondents who voted for
Partner 49%
Non-Partner 51%
Class B 35%
West 41% Region
Class C 28%
type of reseller
company isn’t doing any customer marketing.
Cisco
Cisco has gained ground in the SMB segment with its S series portfolio, primarily in Class A cities. However, it failed to emerge as a contender to D-Link as an SMB brand, and is mostly sold as a branch office solution for a large enterprise. The availability of S series products remains limited to Class A cities and some large Class B cities. Respondents said the availability of products was patchy, and that it was difficult to find even run-rate products over the counter. While Cisco has priced many of its S series products almost at par with similar products from D-Link, it’s not doing anything to promote them to customers. SMBs are not even aware that Cisco now has a good price-performance brand suited to their budget. Respondents believe that if Cisco is serious about doing SMB business it needs to first streamline its distribution and conduct customer campaigns to build demand. Only then will the channels show interest in selling its products. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
31
STRUCTURED CABLING
Digilink maintains slender edge
F
or the fourth consecutive year Digilink topped the category for structured cabling. Tyco came a close second. Although the company is a market leader, its lack of engagement with the larger VARs selling to SMBs acted as a dampener. Commscope improved its channel engagement over 2009. However, it still needs to work on streamlining its channel strategy for India and engaging with partners consistently and transparently. Molex, which failed to make it to the final list in 2009, managed to enter the league on the back of its aggressive pricing and improved channel focus. The main issue with the company is the lack of any consistent and systematic partner engagement program.
Digilink
The company continues to enjoy the widest channel connect and a broadbased channel engagement. It’s the most widely distributed brand thanks to the company’s well-tuned regional
distribution model. Last year Digilink was seen as more aggressive with its channel engagement due to its demerger and also the launch of its active networking brand. Respondents said that Digilink increased the frequency of training. The company was also active in channel marketing, rolling out several exciting schemes during the year. Digilink’s pre-sales was appreciated by respondents as the company provides support even in smaller cities. On the negative side, respondents complained that Digilink didn’t manage the copper price volatility as well as it should have. The lack of a priceprotection policy is also a big issue. In fact, many respondents said that Digilink prices after the revision in October 2010 were more than even Tyco’s. The other major issue many partners highlighted was the lack of an automated and transparent deal registration system. Many partners selling Digilink in large projects said
Score Card Criteria
Digilink Tyco Commscope Molex
Product availability
94.7
Price-performance
86.0 89.0 91.0 79.2
Channel profitability
76.6
76.0
73.6
81.0
Brand-pull and customer marketing
79.3
81.3
75.3
52.9
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
79.3
76.0
75.3
52.1
Training and certification
82.8
79.4
68.4
54.5
Post-sales support
82.0
81.0
79.0
72.5
Channel policy and management
83.7
82.0
76.0
71.7
Final Score
94.0
92.0
85.8
83.0 82.3 78.8 68.7 *Scores out of 100
32
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
that the deal registration process is people-driven and hence lacks objectivity. Digilink’s biggest strength—of being the most preferred SMB brand— is also its weakness. Respondents said that large enterprise customers still don’t consider Digilink a worthy competitor to MNC brands although from the technology and performance point of view it is almost on par. Many Digilink partners, who have now evolved into large network integrators, believe that the company needs to improve upon its SMB image and create a separate team to engage with large enterprises and the partners catering to them.
Tyco
Tyco is a market leader in structured cabling. However, when it comes to channel preference, it ranks second. The reason for this is that the company lacks broad-based engagement with smaller VARs. Except for a close alignment with 150 select partners, the rest of the tier-2 channel is managed by the company’s distributors and subdistributors. While among the partners Tyco got good scores, non-partner respondents gave it low scores on parameters such as channel marketing, training and overall engagement. Many non-partners said that Tyco distributors and sub-distributors are slow in passing on information about price changes, schemes and new product launches, and that the company, instead of relying on distributors for this, should do it on its own. Non-partners said that they sell Tyco only if customers ask for it, otherwise they sell Digilink. Most Tyco partners said that the company did a better job of managing price fluctuations emanating from the copper price volatility. Many partners said that the company gave
price protection on a case basis. While there were MOP issues around price hike announcements, these were manageable, respondents said. (In 2009 the company was severely criticized for its inability to manage price fluctuations which had created serious MOP issues.) The company also improved its availability across the country by streamlining its distribution during the year. While Tyco has a strong brand pull, respondents, including Tyco partners, said that the company should have more customer- and channel-centric schemes to create excitement in the sales process. Partners rated Tycoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s training as good, and also praised its pre-sales support. However, its deal registration system got low scores, as it did last year. Respondents alleged that the deal registration system is not transparent.
Commscope Systimax
Commscope increased its channel preference scores as respondents saw an improvement in channel engagement, delivery lead-times, presales support and decision-making in deal registration and special price approvals. The company polled more votes than last year; however, its channel coverage continues to be limited to Class A cities. Also, it received 70 percent of its votes from the west, suggesting that the company lacks a credible partner network in other regions. Commscope strengthened its channel management team during the year and revamped its partner programs. This led to an enhancement in channel communication and training. According to respondents, the availability of Systimax has improved since the company started a bonded warehouse in Chennai and its distributors started stocking
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Structured Cabling category: 226
North 23%
Class C 23%
South 27%
East 8%
Class A 51% West 42% Region
Type of City
fast-moving cabling products and components. Systimax has always been regarded as the best performance brand, and has a significant pull among large enterprises. While it continues to be priced at a premium over Tyco, in large deals, Commscope offers competitive pricing. Respondents however said that the company doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t come up with regular and timely schemes. Many tier-2 partners feel that the company is more oriented toward large partners and SIs. They complained that Commscope passes leads only to large partners. While overall there has been
Tyco is a market leader in structured cabling. However, when it comes to channel preference, it ranks second
Class B 26%
Partner 63%
Non-Partner 37%
type of reseller
much improvement in Commscopeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s channel engagement, many respondents believe that the company needs to further streamline its channel strategy for India and engage with partners consistently and transparently.
Molex
In the first nine months of 2010 channels saw a more assertive Molex. In Q4 the company appointed a new distributor after its existing distributor SES Technologies began winding down its India operations. This according to respondents led to availability issues. On the pricing front the company was very aggressive and priced its products at 10 percent to 15 percent lower than Digilink. Many Digilink partners said that they lost projects to Molex due to its aggressive pricing. Molex received most of its votes from the south and west, which indicates that the company lacks a partner connect in the other two regions. Molex is usually pitched against Digilink, and a few Digilink partners even said they sold Molex in some deals due to its very aggressive pricing. Nevertheless, the company lacks any concrete and systematic partner engagement program. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
33
client security
Symantec by a nose
W
hile Symantec retained its title, it suffered on the overall channel preference and finished ahead of Quick Heal by only a nose. Trend Micro which failed to make it to the final list last year came third followed by Kaspersky. eScan did well to make it to the final list, but McAfee disappointed again and was pushed to the last spot.
Symantec
While Symantec stayed on top, its channel preference suffered in 2010 due to high attrition which affected decision-making and continuity in partner relationships. The company has the strongest pull in the end-point market among SMBs and large enterprises. It moved to a regional model empowering regional managers to drive business and become profit centers. This model, respondents said, hasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t worked well as there has been frequent attrition in the regional teams thus affecting overall channel engagement. Another negative for the company
came from Class B and C city partners who said that in 2010 the company had little focus on smaller cities. In terms of channel processes and systems such as deal registration, lead generation and incentives, Symantec got higher scores than its competitors. Respondents in Class A cities appreciated Symantecâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s focus on training partners in emerging technologies like DLP and managed services.
brand in the SMB segment due to its aggressive marketing, effective partner enablement and strong ground support in more than 25 cities. Partners of Quick Heal said that over the past 8-10 months the company has made it its mission to make it big in the mid-market and enterprise segments, and that if this focus continues it can give MNC brands a run for their money in the end-point market.
Quick Heal
Trend Micro
While the company continued with its second spot, there has been a significant improvement in its channel preference among enterprise VARs. Quick Heal, which till last year was regarded as an antivirus brand for small businesses having less than 250 nodes, is steadily breaking into big accounts. Even large tier-2 partners of Symantec, Trend Micro and McAfee in Class A cities are seeing that Quick Heal is finding acceptance in 250+ node accounts more regularly. In Class B and C cities the company is regarded as the best end-point
Score Card Criteria
Symantec Quick Heal Trend Micro Kaspersky eScan McAfee
Product availability
94.0 95.0 94.0 93.0 91.0 92.0
Price-performance
89.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 77.0 85.0
Channel profitability
87.0 84.7 84.7 79.8 81.6 75.7
Brand-pull and customer marketing
92.5
84.0
84.0
81.0
76.0
85.0
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
85.0
89.2
83.7
74.5
77.2
74.1
Training and certification
84.5
89.9
85.8
68.5
73.1
64.6
Post-sales support
89.0 88.9 76.5 82.0 82.4 72.5
Channel policy and management 88.0 91.0 85.6 79.5 81.0 73.4
Final Score 88.6 87.8 84.6 80.3 79.9 77.8 *Scores out of 100
34
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
The company did well in 2010 to make it to the final list and straight to the number three position. During the year Trend Micro expanded its channel connect, which was evident from the fact that it polled much more votes than in the 2009 survey. However, it still lacks coverage in Class B and C cities, and secured nearly 95 percent of its votes from Class A cities. Respondents said that Trend Micro improved its partner engagement, and was aggressive in the market during 2010. On the product front, its Worry Free portfolio for SMBs and its new OfficeScan 10.5 release have been appreciated for their performance and features. The company rolled out incentives for sales reps of partner organizations. In terms of technology and brand perception among large enterprises, Trend Micro is ranked just behind Symantec and McAfee. However, respondents opined that in the fastgrowing and vast SMB market it lacks brand awareness and needs to undertake customer marketing. One complaint that came from a few long-time Trend Micro partners is that the company is ignoring them in its drive to expand its partner base. They said that while there is nothing wrong with the company wanting to expand, this shouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be done at the expense of partners who have done good business for the company over the years.
Survey Demographics
Kaspersky Seems like Kaspersky is making headway in channel preference in the client security arena. In 2009, the company was ranked last due to lack of brand ownership and the absence of a channel management framework. In 2010, following the company’s decision to set up an Indian subsidiary and hire a local team, it has managed to address many of the issues raised in the previous year. The company revamped its distribution and introduced its partner program. It also formulated a standard MOP strategy to bring stability in the pricing and stop heavy brand discounting. Kaspersky also added sales resources to ensure better engagement with channels. Respondents said that the company has also become more aggressive in its marketing, and that all the above measures would help it to improve its image from a discounted brand to a brand with an international lineage. Many Symantec and McAfee partners see Kaspersky as a competitor because they believe that the company, being a global player, must have a good end-point product, and that at the price it comes it can be tough to beat especially in the SMB segment. Many large security solutions providers have aligned with Kaspersky in the last three months of 2010. It will be interesting to see how this is received in the end-point category.
Unique votes polled for Client Security category: 305
North 24% East 10%
South 22%
Class C 23% Class A 53%
West 44% Region
Type of City
ny failed to make it to the final list. The company has introduced the concept of a monthly training program which is held for partners’ staff every third Saturday of the month. Though many partners appreciated this, it is available only in select cities. Respondents said that eScan has improved its admin console and added several new reporting parameters which are required by mature SMB customers. The company’s mail scan solution is good in terms of features and performance. Where the company needs to improve is local decisionmaking. Even a small decision related to a minor price discount on a deal has to be escalated to the head office,
Trend Micro moved to the third spot followed by Kaspersky. eScan did well to make it to the final list, and McAfee disappointed again
eScan
On the back of an aggressive strategy to increase its SMB business—which included strengthening its regional distribution network, hiring ground staff in major cities to take care of pre-sales and post-sales support, and channel marketing through road shows—eScan moved up the channel preference rankings and came just behind Kaspersky by a very slender margin. Last year the compa-
Class B 24%
Non-Partner 29% Partner 71%
type of reseller
and this is time consuming.
McAfee
Nothing seems to have changed with McAfee during 2010. In the previous year’s survey respondents had raised serious issues with regard to lack of aggressiveness, weak pre-sales support, and the absence of automated partner management systems. The same issues persisted almost throughout 2010, and it was only in December that the company finally paid heed to partner feedback and began changing its ways. As a result of its inaction, McAfee ranked very low on partner preference which is unbecoming of a company which in technology terms and customer brand pull is ranked on par with Symantec. Some large partners complained that the company was aligning mostly with tier-1 vendors and not involving tier-2 partners in large deals. Toward the end of 2010 the company added several field resources to improve pre-sales and partner engagement, and also put in place an internal sales team to generate leads for partners and help them with renewals. Partners are hoping that these changes will be sustained and will finally give them a reason to cheer. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
35
NETWORK SECURITY
No getting past Check Point
C
arrying on from 2009, Check Point continued to be the most preferred brand in network security in 2010. Cyberoam, ranked third in the 2009 Channel Champions Survey, climbed to the second spot. Fortinet was pushed to the third position. SonicWall performed well with improved channel engagement. Cisco fared better than in 2009 although it ranked last. Juniper again failed to make it to the final list as it polled less than 10 percent of the votes.
Check Point
The company retained its number one position on the back of good scores on price-performance, brand recall, presales support, and channel policies and management. Respondents said that in deals of 500 nodes and above, Check Point (CP) has the best network security portfolio in terms of features and manageability. Although it’s premiumpriced, customers don’t mind paying
the premium. Its software appliance-based approach gives it an edge in point solutions as well as unified appliances. CP upgraded its security platform from R65 to R70 and eventually R75, which is the most advanced network security platform available. CP has an automated system for managing its partner programs; this makes the process of deal registration, special pricing and incentive payouts hassle-free. However, the same process-driven approach for post-sales support is sometimes a hindrance in urgent cases. Its pre-sales team got high scores as it’s technically well-equipped, proactive and responsive. Last year the company introduced MDF for partners. This was wellappreciated because it helped them to do customer-focused events which helped gain business. One issue is the lack of direct partner engagement. Although respondents said CP distributors are providing the support required by partners,
Score Card Criteria
Check Point Cyberoam Fortinet SonicWall Cisco
Product availability
100.0
91.9
Price-performance
92.1
80.5 81.8 80.0 81.9
Channel profitability
93.1
83.6
85.0
81.4
77.4
Brand-pull and customer marketing
95.1
81.0
83.2
78.0
78.0
Channel marketing and pre-sales support 89.0
83.4
80.2
67.7
73.6
Training and certification
92.4
69.5
74.0
60.9
68.1
Post-sales support
91.2
89.0
78.6
81.5
78.0
Channel policy and management
89.0
84.0
76.0
83.0
76.0
Final Score
73.2
91.0
79.9
92.7 82.9 79.0 77.9 76.6 *Scores out of 100
36
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
they want the company to engage with them directly. On post-sales support there were issues related to upgrades because CP upgraded its platform twice during the past six months. Respondents feel CP needs to spend more on customer marketing. Many partners said it is not doing enough to promote its small business UTM portfolio (5-250 nodes) under the Safe@Office brand.
Cyberoam
The Indian brand carved its niche in the UTM appliance space which has been dominated by multinational brands. It has been steadily moving up in channel preference. In the 2010 survey Cyberoam polled the maximum number of votes, which suggested that it is the most widely distributed brand. In the sub250 node UTM segment, it emerged as the most preferred channel brand due to its strong price-performance. Respondents said its energetic marketing led to improvement in brand awareness and pull in the SMB segment. The company is also strong in pre-sales support, and provides demo units and POC support to partners. However, respondents complained that there were no good customer schemes in 2010. Last year Cyberoam became aggressive in the enterprise segment and signed up some leading regional SIs which helped it gain business from customers requiring 500-1,000 node appliances. One issue highlighted is that the company lacked any serious training program in 2010, which was rated as its strong point in 2009. Cyberoam’s key strength is its postsales support. In terms of channel policy and management, although the company doesn’t have a well-defined partner program it has a good partner engagement framework. The local and
Survey Demographics
national sales and support team is responsive and quick. However, partners believe that Cyberoam needs to automate its channel management systems in order to create a consistent and transparent engagement with partners. Also, many respondents believe it’s time Cyberoam had a well-defined program which focused on better engagement with long-term partners.
Unique votes polled for Network Security category: 202 North 21% East 6% West 49%
Fortinet
The company is regarded as a technology leader in the UTM space, and has a wide-ranging portfolio. It’s also the UTM brand with the best customer awareness and pull. Where Fortinet disappointed partners is in channel engagement and management. This was also a big negative for the company in the 2009 survey, so it seems it hasn’t done much to address channel complaints. Fortinet’s strategy of working with a single distributor displeased partners. Ingram Micro manages all the processes, including back-end rebates, deal registration and customer mapping, hence partners are dependent on the distributor for all their needs which aren’t being met adequately. Despite assurances from Fortinet that it would appoint a second distributor in early 2010, it has not signed one. Partners highlighted issues with deal registration and customer mapping, and complained that the processes are individualdriven rather than automated and transparent. Many said that they spend more time following up with regional managers and the Ingram point-person than creating business opportunities. The lack of channel marketing activities is an issue with Fortinet. Respondents said the company needs to address channel management and distribution issues.
Class C 13%
South 24%
Region
Class A 66%
Type of City
SonicWall With a streamlined distribution strategy, improved channel engagement and competitive pricing, SonicWall moved up the ranks. In the 2009 survey respondents had complained about its distribution policy and MOP issues. In 2010, SonicWall strengthened its on-ground teams and reduced prices by up to 15 percent. Respondents said that SonicWall is currently priced 10 percent lower than Cyberoam. SonicWall also strengthened its post-sales support and improved the TAT for decisions on special pricing. Moving beyond its SMB focus, the
Having a single distributor has displeased Fortinet partners. Despite assurances that it would appoint a second distributor it has not
Class B 21%
Non-Partner 24% Partner 76%
type of reseller
company strengthened its enterprise portfolio. As a result, it managed to align with many large security solutions providers.
Cisco
Cisco, which fared poorly on the 2009 channel satisfaction score, made amends in 2010. While the company began making changes to its GTM for its ASA range of network security products from July 2010, all the elements of its new strategy came together only by November 2010. Respondents said that from December they have seen a significant improvement in Cisco’s GTM. The company addressed its renewal policy which was criticized in 2009. It became very proactive in pushing the channel agenda by adding channel sales resources focused on driving the network security business. Respondents said that Cisco needs to improve its availability because even the run-rate ASA products have a delivery time of 2-3 weeks. Some said it needs to do a better job of integrating its Ironport range with the overall security portfolio. While pricing isn’t an issue in deals where ASA appliances are sold with routers and switches, in standalone deals Cisco needs to review its pricing. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
37
COMMERCIAL UPS
APC retains title
T
he Channel Champions 2010 results for the commercial UPS category read the same as the 2009 results. APC held on to the title of the most preferred channel brand followed by Emerson and Numeric.
APC
The brand continues to enjoy the largest market coverage and has a strong brand pull. The company has a much wider portfolio in the volume segment (2 kVA to 20 kVA), most of which is sold through the stock-andsell channel. It also ranks higher on price-performance in this range. During 2010, APC was aggressive with its channel marketing and customer schemes in the volume segment. The company has a well-oiled marketing program, and communicates regularly with resellers. APC’s channel policies and management are better than its competitors’. The company has a good deal registration program,
an automated back-end incentive program, and a large sales team which meets partners regularly. The big complaint from many of its partners is that, over the past year or so, APC has been engaging more with non-IT partners, mainly from the power solutions space. This is hurting the IT partners’ business. The second issue, highlighted by respondents in Class B and C cities in the north and east, is about post-sales support, which they said has suffered in recent months with delays in getting spares and replacements. Class B cities in the east also complained about the non-availability of some products, and advised APC to review its distribution structure for Jharkhand, Bihar and UP. In addition, a few large partners complained that APC has begun to address some large data center deals directly.
Emerson
The company continues to be the
Score Card Criteria
APC
Emerson
Numeric
Product availability
95.7
94.0
95.0
Price-performance
85.0 82.3 80.0
Channel profitability
76.5
78.0
80.0
Brand-pull and customer marketing
84.0
79.9
69.4
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
82.0
77.1
61.1
Training and certification
64.0
61.4
43.8
Post-sales support
84.5
82.4
86.5
Channel policy and management
84.0
78.5
74.5
Final Score
82.0 79.2 73.8 *Scores out of 100
38
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
strongest player in the high-end UPS range of 60 kVA and above, where it is ranked higher than APC in price-performance. In the 20 kVA to 60 kVA range, Emerson is considered on par with APC, while in the volume range it doesn’t have as strong a thrust as APC. Emerson has improved its market coverage, which is evident from the fact that it secured 30 percent more votes than in 2009. It also received more votes from Class B cities in the east and north like Ranchi, Allahabad and Patna. Respondents said that one thing Emerson needs to improve is its channel management systems, especially its back-end incentive mechanism which is complex. Some respondents said they had to hire a person specifically to manage and follow-up on back-end incentive claims and payouts. The company also needs to make its deal registration system more transparent because some respondents said it is individualdriven and lacks objectivity and transparency. Though Emerson had promised to change the deal registration process, partners are yet to see any change. Even so, Emerson leaves more profits on the table for partners than APC. While respondents rated Emerson’s pre-sales support as very good, they gave a thumbs-down to the company’s customer and channel marketing activities. They said Emerson needs to focus more on customer marketing, and needs to improve its channel communication. Respondents were also unhappy that Emerson does all of its data center business directly with zero partner play.
Numeric
The home-grown Numeric is considered the most price-
competitive in the under-20 kVA range where it gives both APC and Emerson a run for their money in price-performance. Beyond that, it is perceived to be lower in performance compared to Emerson and APC, and lacks customer preference. The company doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have a data center solutions portfolio. A major complaint is that Numeric does a large proportion of its business directly. Many respondents complained that the company has poached their customers. Respondents said that Numeric has good products but lacks marketing. The most important issue is that there is no partner appreciation from Numeric. No top management team member comes to meet even those partners who have been doing business with the
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Commercial UPS category: 227
North 24% East 11%
South 24% Class A 42%
West 41% Region
Class C 32%
Class B 26% Type of City
Partner 55%
Non-Partner 45%
type of reseller
company for a long time. There is no one to address their pain-points, respondents say. Where Numeric scores high is post-sales support and channel
profitability. It has a strong network of its own field engineers even in remote locations; this ensures faster installation and resolution of warranty complaints. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
39
Software Application
Tally stands tall
T
he software application category has been introduced in the Channel Champions Survey for the first time. Tally emerged as the most preferred channel vendor due to its channel coverage and connect. Microsoft ranked number two on the back of its push in the market for its ERP and CRM offerings. Though SAP was seen as aggressive in the market it has limited market coverage.
Tally
With its enviable position in the accounting software space and the increased focus on its small business ERP offering, Tally emerged as the vendor with the largest channel connect. Despite its large partner ecosystem, Tally was ranked high on channel policies and management. It offers the best margins in the business, conducts regular training programs for channels, and shares a strong relationship with the channel at the local level. Another impressive
aspect is that despite such a large partner ecosystem there are no MOP issues with Tally. In 2010, the company became aggressive in pushing its ERP offerings. It launched an upgraded version of its ERP with several innovative features. Respondents said that although Tally ERP 9 has been around for the last 3-4 years, it has now matured as a stable and feature-rich product for companies under 100 employees. The company has a very efficient channel training program. It conducts sales training every Saturday in all major cities, and on the 9th of every month organizes a Tally Day where all product-related features are discussed and sales and technical doubts clarified through an online and webinar interface. The company is very vigorous in its channel and customer marketing, and runs schemes for both channels and customers every month. The incentive payouts for such schemes are also quick.
Score Card Criteria
Tally
Microsoft
SAP
Product availability
91.2
91.0
89.0
Price-performance
82.3 84.0 84.0
Channel profitability
82.3
78.5
78.0
Brand-pull and customer marketing
91.0
88.0
90.1
Channel marketing and pre-sales support
84.3
75.0
75.4
Training and certification
81.0
75.0
73.9
Post-sales support
85.0
82.9
82.5
Channel policy and management
91.0
87.0
81.2
Final Score
86.0 82.6 81.7 *Scores out of 100
40
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
2010 saw SAP get more aggressive in the tier-2 VAR segment although it works through very select partners
Microsoft
Over the past couple of years the company has positioned itself as a strong contender in the ERP market with its AX offering for large enterprises and Navision for SMBs. Respondents said some of its ERP modules like inventory and procurement are even better than SAPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and Oracleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. The advantage Microsoft has is its strong connect with customers through its infrastructure and productivity software. Microsoft has activated many of its leading infrastructure software partners to sell ERP to their existing customer base, and this strategy has worked well. The company has a verticalspecific strategy and has been strong in customer marketing. Many partners who voted for Microsoft offer Navision in a hosted model to SMB customers, and they said that Microsoft has a very strong hosted program. In 2010 Microsoft became aggressive on the CRM front as well. Its new version, which is in the beta phase, has some excellent features, and the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new cloud-based offering will also help it gain traction in the market where
Survey Demographics
Salesforce.com has a strong hold. Microsoft has became aggressive in BI with the release of SQL 2008 which comes bundled with its BI tool free. The company was rated good in pre-sales, lead generation and partner engagement. Partners want Microsoft to have more handson onsite training.
Unique votes polled for Software Application category: 97
North 28%
SAP
2010 saw SAP get more aggressive in the tier-2 VAR segment although it works through very select partners. SAP enjoys a brand pull that no other ERP brand does among both SMBs and large enterprises. In terms of offerings, it is the best among all ERP vendors. Respondents said that the company has worked on its pricing to make it cost-effective for Indian SMBs to deploy it. They said the upgraded version of B1 incorporates more India-relevant
East 10%
South 24%
Class A 49% West 38% Region
Non-Partner 26%
Class C 33% Class B 18%
Type of City
Partner 74%
type of reseller
features. However, there still persists a perception among certain sections of SMB customers that SAP is unaffordable and that the deployment time is very long. Respondents said that SAP needs
to address this perception gap immediately. SAP is good at handholding customers and training them. Its pre-sales support and channel training program is also rated good. n
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011
www.crn.in
41
VIRTUALIZATION
No match for VMware
V
irtualization as a separate category was introduced in the Channel Champions Survey for the first time. Market leader VMware easily won the contest. Citrix has the most compelling story when it comes to desktop and application virtualization, and ranked second. Microsoft still lacks a virtualization offering which can match VMware’s.
Unique votes polled for Virtualization category: 104
East 6%
North 14%
South 31%
West 49% Region
VMware
In 2010 VMware expanded its India sales team and also appointed a dedicated channel team. It revamped its partner program to incorporate several new elements to create a strong partner engagement in the tier-2 VAR segment. Proof of this is that it polled 60 percent of the overall category votes. Respondents are clear that neither Microsoft nor Citrix can match the breadth and depth of VMware’s server virtualization portfolio—and it upgraded its entire portfolio during 2010. The company spent significant resources in partner training. Under the new partner program it waived off fees for Professional partners, while for Enterprise and Premier partners the fees were halved. It also embarked on a multi-city training program to enroll more tier-2 VARs. Respondents said that VMware was proactive in forging alliances with server and storage vendors to come up with specific solutions for high availability, business continuity and disaster recovery; it also helped upgrade VAR skill sets in these domains. In addition, VMware introduced solutions for popular platforms such as SAP, Oracle and Microsoft Exchange. This helped the company to engage with the larger partner ecosystem of HP, IBM and EMC. The company introduced a deal registration program
Score Card Criteria VMware Citrix Microsoft Product availability 92.0 91.0 90.0 Price-performance 92.3 85.0 61.1 Channel profitability 88.5 86.0 56.4 Brand-pull and customer marketing 89.0 81.0 62.8 Channel marketing and pre-sales support 85.3 80.1 47.2 Training and certification 86.3 85.7 83.0 Post-sales support 89.0 85.0 79.0 Channel policy and management 90.5 85.4 63.5
Final Score
89.1 84.9 67.9 *Scores out of 100
42
Survey Demographics
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Class C 8% Class B 10%
Class A 82% Type of City
Non-Partner 15%
Partner 85% type of reseller
and a lead referral incentive; however, partners said the deal registration system needs to be optimized. On the pre-sales front, while respondents said that VMware has a good POC program, they complained about a lack of adequate pre-sales resources on the ground.
Citrix
Respondents said that Citrix is much better positioned in the desktop and application virtualization space than any competition, and many also suggested that though the company has a good solution for server virtualization it isn’t doing enough to sell it in the market. The company polled 12 percent of the category votes, mostly from Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru and Chennai. This suggested that Citrix is focused on these cities and has a limited partner focus. One common complaint is the lack of market aggression. Respondents want Citrix to strengthen its local pre-sales and partner engagement team which they said is small and lacks initiative. While Citrix enjoys strong branding among large enterprises, in the SMB segment it has no mind share and the company is doing nothing to create awareness. The company has a good training and certification program, and also a lead generation program. Respondents believe that Citrix needs to forge OEM alliances and become more vigorous in its customer marketing. It has a strong portfolio of complete solutions and also point solutions which are priced more competitively than VMware’s.
Microsoft
Respondents said that the problem lies with Hyper V itself which is designed for only Microsoft platforms and fails to deliver in heterogeneous environments. Microsoft partners said that they ran POCs for Hyper V; however, customers failed to sign up as they weren’t convinced about its features and performance. Respondents believe that Microsoft can’t take on VMware or Citrix head-on, and will require a completely fresh approach to sell its virtualization offering. n
20 – 21 April, 2011, Renaissance Hotel, Mumbai
Forum For the ChAnnel ChieFs From indiA’s top it CompAnies to deliberAte And shAre insights on the Future oF teChnology Adoption & its impACt on the ChAnnel eCosystem Topics Covered • Decoding the SMB opportunity • Getting market ready for Cloud • Reshaping of channel & changing market dynamics
Who Will Attend ? CEO, Channel Heads, CMOs, National Product and Sales Heads from ICT Companies with a strong partner focus
Brought to you by
To register for the summit, visit http://microsite.crn.in/images/all/crnleadersforum/ For further details contact Sejal Acharya on +91 98194 75566 or sejal.acharya@ubm.com
INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT software
Kaseya leads
Survey Demographics
T
he Infrastructure Management Software (IMS) category has been introduced for the first time in the Channel Champions Survey. The reason for including it is that over the past couple of years many leading tier-2 VARs have been making significant investments in creating a strong managed services portfolio. Kaseya was voted the most preferred brand in IMS due to its sustained marketing and partner focus. Microsoft was the surprise No 2. The company has a large number of tools which are bundled with its infrastructure software and which are used by many leading Microsoft partners to offer value-added managed services to customers. IBM was the third notable company but failed to make it to the final list. The company has been promoting Tivoli modules for storage management, and has also introduced different types of infrastructure management services to be co-delivered with partners.
Kaseya
Kaseya is the most visible brand in the IT infrastructure management space. Over the past couple of years the company has enabled many VARs to offer managed services using its platform. During 2010 too the company was aggressive in its efforts to move VARs to become MSPs. Kaseya strengthened its pre-sales support during the year to help many of its MSPs create new managed services, package them better, and sell them effectively. It offered flexible pricing to partners, and invested in a dedicated sales team to help partners sign up new customers. During H22010 the company ran a high-decibel campaign, branded Operation 1111,
Score Card Criteria Product availability Price-performance Channel profitability Brand-pull and customer marketing Channel marketing and pre-sales support Training and certification Post-sales support Channel policy and management
Final Score
Kaseya Microsoft 100.0 100.0 78.2 77.0 77.4 75.8 89.0 76.0 91.0 75.1 87.0 63.2 88.0 83.0 91.0 85.0
87.7 79.4 *Scores out of 100
44
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Unique votes polled for Infrastructure Management Software category: 88
East 5%
North 17%
South 28%
West 50% Region
Class C 8% Class B 15% Class A 77% Type of City
Non-Partner 23% Partner 77%
type of reseller
which entailed signing up 1,111 SMB and enterprise customers for partner-led managed services. While respondents reported that the company was successful in achieving the target of 1,111, many also complained that the campaign was designed only for 20-25 large partners, and that they felt sidelined. During 2010 Kaseya moved from charging MSPs a perpetual licensing fee to a revenue-sharing model. While respondents who bought licenses in 2010 welcomed the new model, earlier partners under perpetual licensing expressed unhappiness. According to respondents, the biggest contribution of Kaseya is the way it has created awareness about AMS in the country. At the same time, a few respondents said that Kaseya is trying to grow very fast, and that this would make it difficult for partners to build a services model which can be differentiated from the others.
Microsoft
Microsoft followed Kaseya on the strength of its ever-growing portfolio of infrastructure products that are based on its platforms such as Windows Server 2008, MS SQL Server 2008, Windows 7 and Microsoft Office. The company offers a number of free tools (under the Server and Desktop Solutions Accelerators) which are being used by partners to sell and support service offerings. Microsoft also started an end-to-end security product line for managing and optimizing infrastructure, policies, processes and best practices. In 2010 the company ran a number of pilot programs for these product lines to help partners build competencies and service offerings. Microsoft also offered an online free training program called Microsoft Core Infrastructure Practice Builder. A handicap for Microsoftâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure solutions is that they can manage only Microsoft platforms and not heterogeneous environments. The company is expected to launch a SaaS-based MSP offering for partners, and is currently beta testing it. n
MUMBAI September 28 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 30 // Bombay Exhibition Center
See the Future of IT
The Leading Business Technology Event The call for papers is now OPEN. Calling IT professionals, business leaders and technology
Gold
Platinum
providers to share their best practices and customer stories, as well as address key industry topics at INTEROP Mumbai 2011 under any of the following categories: n Application Delivery
n Mobility
n Business Intelligence, Data
n Networking
Warehousing & Analytics n Cloud Computing
Bronze
n Open Source n Security
n Compliance and Governance n Servers n Data Center
n Services
n Enterprise 2.0/Collaboration
n Storage
n Green IT
n Unified Communications
n IT Management
n Virtualization
Supporting Associations
Submit speaker proposal at http://mumbaicfp.interop.com Submissions are due by April 30, 2011. Secure your influence and take an active role in the technology market in India. To partner or reserve a booth, contact: Pankaj Jain, Project Director, O: +91 11 2376 5553, M: +91 98 1017 2077 E: pankaj.jain@ubm.com
Media Partners THE BUSINESS VALUE OF TECHNOLOGY
Online Media Partners
Organised by
www.interop.in
THIN CLIENT
HP wins in thin
H
P emerged as the top thin client brand in the country. NComputing, the thin client specialist, was ranked second, followed by Wyse. Many respondents voted for a diverse range of local and Chinese thin client makers. This suggested that the penetration of thin clients is happening in a big way, and also that MNC PC vendors haven’t really paid much attention to this market as yet. Desktop virtualization, easy manageability and low power consumption are the biggest drivers for thin clients in verticals like education, utilities, ITeS and government.
Hewlett-Packard
HP scored the highest in criteria such as brand awareness, product availability, pre-sales support, training, marketing support and channel management. What helped HP clinch the pole position was a well-defined solutions-led market strategy and channel enablement for targeting the opportunities emerging in verticals such as education, health care, retail, hospitality and e-governance. HP’s thin clients, which form part of HP’s Personal Systems Group, are also the most widely distributed as HP enjoys the largest market coverage. HP’s MultiSeat computing solutions targeted at computer labs and school classrooms were reported as the most popular solutions by respondents. They said that in the education segment HP has created a network of independent software vendors who have education ERP and learning management systems, and that this has been a great driver for business. In partnership with Microsoft, HP ran a campaign at the beginning of the school buying season targeting education institutions; it bundled its offerings with Microsoft’s multipoint server OS. This, respondents said, helped garner good thin client business from the segment.
Score Card Criteria Product availability Price-performance Channel profitability Brand-pull and customer marketing Channel marketing and pre-sales support Training and certification Post-sales support Channel policy and management
HP NComputing Wyse 96.4 85.3 83.0 91.0 76.8 88.0 82.0 78.0 85.0 75.7 56.7 63.3 82.0 71.0 73.0 71.0 63.0 32.0 82.5 75.0 75.0 85.3 79.0 73.5
Final Score
83.2 73.1 71.6 *Scores out of 100
46
Computer Reseller News
01/03/2011 www.crn.in
Survey Demographics Unique votes polled for Thin Client category: 105
North 22%
South 25%
Class C 21% Class A 51%
East 10% West 43%
Region
Class B 28%
Type of City
Partner 60%
Non-Partner 40%
type of reseller
The company has been running focused partner-led marketing programs for specific verticals. This has helped to spread awareness about the benefits of thin clients and increase adoption.
NComputing
Thin client specialist NComputing became vigorous in the Indian market in 2010 and enrolled several partners. Its portfolio is optimized for desktop virtualization and its VDI platform VSpace is highly rated. However, the company had product availability issues in H12010 which led to parallel imports and dented channel preference. NComputing eventually sorted out the supply issues by making Redington an exclusive distributor, and respondents said that since then availability has become normal. While respondents opined that NComputing has a good set of offerings for SMBs and education, they said that the company needs to improve its pre-sales and postsales technical support. It also needs to do more impactful campaigning among customers to raise its brand profile. In addition, respondents said that NComputing needs to have an application-led vertical-specific GTM like HP.
Wyse
Wyse enjoys strong brand awareness because it’s been in the thin client space for more than 20 years. Its products are also considered high on technology, and it has several large enterprise VARs selling its products. Where the company lacks is marketing, a well-defined partner engagement program, and manpower resources in presales and partner engagement. In large VDI deals respondents said HP and Wyse are the only serious players providing thin clients, but while HP is aggressive in special pricing and decision-making, the Wyse India manager has to get price approvals from the US, which delays the process. The company is also rigid about its pricing even in large projects. In fact three respondents said that they lost some very large deals only because of Wyse’s rigid pricing, and while the customer was willing to pay a 10 percent premium over HP the company didn’t even match that price. There’s a complete lack of marketing and partner engagement. n
50
COMPUTER RESELLER NEWS MNLMPLOMNN www.crn.in
RNI NO. MAH ENG/1999/635 Postal Reg. No. MH/MR/NORTH EAST/193/2010-2012 License to post without prepayment MR/TECH/WPP-23/NE/2010-12 Posted at Patrika Channel Sorting Office, Mumbai Due Date 2nd, 3rd & 16th, 17th Of Every Fortnight