U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft 275
AliasF97 writes "Thought you all might be interested in this story about the U.S. government attempting to block Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft via a civil anti-trust lawsuit. Seems to me that the courts are going to have their work cut out for them on this one. Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."
M$ (Score:4, Insightful)
mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)
Oracle isn't anywhere near monopoly, although they are a very strong database vendor, with probably one of the best supported database systems written, but they are competed against by everyone from Microsoft (which, btw is integrating their database engine into the OS), to us open source developers... The US Courts really need to pick their priorities better..
Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)
SAP, BEA (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't realize BEA was a player in the applications market. I thought they sold tools and infrastructure, not ERP applications. (Newegg might use BEA to run their web server, but wouldn't go to BEA for, say, warehouse and order management software.)
Regarding why the DoJ didn't have a problem with PeopleSoft buying JD Edwards, perhaps its because that merger was arguably beneficial to the customers. PeopleSoft is weakest in areas like hard core distribution and direct sales (like what newegg does), and that's where JD Edwards really shines. JD Edwards, on the other hand, is weaker in some areas where PeopleSoft is stronger, such as with their technology infrastructure (PeopleSoft is all web based) and their HR package.
Another aspect of this is that maybe the DoJ could see this was perhaps Justice was legitimately conviced that this deal was bad for competition. More information available here [eweek.com], and here (Is Oracle the New Neighborhood Bully) [newsfactor.com].
Re:SAP, BEA (Score:4, Informative)
Historically it goes like this;
PeopleSoft is the leader in Human Resources ERP software.
SAP leads manufacturing / distribution software
Oracle is best at Finance
All of theses top tier ERP systems offer enterprise wide applications. SAP has good HR solution, PS now owns JDE which gives it a look into manufacturing and dist, and Oracle is increasing its HR.
Basically Oracle has a load of cash from its Database income base, and by absorbing PS, it would greatly increase its HR market share, and more easily dominate the market.
Re:mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)
You are WAY off (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:mod parent up (Score:3, Interesting)
Entire linux client OS mareketshare 3%
Microsoft used and still uses it's 90%+ marketshare to prevent any competiton. They did this in an illeagal way.
What makes this funny, yet sad is that the government can't have it both ways. It can't say Microsoft is ok, and call of the justice department, then say "Stop!! Oracle buying PeopleSoft would be bad for the customer!" The customers would still have WAY WAY WAY more real choices for CRM/HR software than they have for a l
Re:mod parent up (Score:2)
Holes in there argument (Score:5, Interesting)
So they would hurt large businesses... right and I am buying that microsoft not offering patches [slashdot.org] helps businesses.
larry looks like. (Score:5, Funny)
Homer's old boss (Score:2, Funny)
Re:larry looks like. (Score:5, Funny)
i must be really bored tonight...
http://www.geocities.com/hjklyuio7890/C_ra_ptas
(fyi, work safe, it's pretty stupid actually...)
Ellison is pure evil (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ellison is pure evil (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ellison is pure evil (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ellison is pure evil (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ellison is pure evil (Score:3, Insightful)
Joe-public all the way through mom+pop through to mini-corporates can survive quite nicely without Oracle by using more commonly available commercial or Open Source databases.
MySQL, Postgresql, Firebird (1.5 now out), ...
Because Oracle's products don't suck. (Score:5, Interesting)
The bigger issue though, is that what Oracle does doesn't really affect us personally in any way. I mean, how many of us are running $10,000+ ERP software on are home desktops. If we use that stuff at all, it's only for work and if it is somewhat annoying, who cares?
Microsoft's largess actually affects our lives, some of us run Windows, or have seen OSs, software and companies we like crushed by them and their mediocrity.
How many of us have a personal love of peoplesoft?
Ellison (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ellison (Score:2)
Here's a bigger version: here [oracle.com]
Proof (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Proof (Score:5, Informative)
http://solohq.com/Articles/Rowlands/Antitrust_Law
Re:Proof (Score:2, Insightful)
A post that was quickly modded down had similar arguments, albeit more agressive:
Well yeah, it's a soft-headed Objectivist rant. It starts by misrepresenting what a monopoly is, what anticompetitive behavior is, and totally ignores the requirement of misdeeds for prosecution to occur. I feel dumber for having read it.
Re:Proof (Score:2, Interesting)
Or else you're going to do what?
Nothing to do with proof. (Score:5, Interesting)
Guess who those two contributed most money to?
Oracle still gets the benefits (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oracle still gets the benefits (Score:5, Interesting)
Peoplesoft has a golden clause in their company constitution that states along the lines of:
"If a hostile takeover is done, support must be granted for all customers within the last X years or a full refund of the receipt price will be granted"
Got that tidbit from my advisor who worked with Peoplesoft at NAU university with a beta development team.
-- Page
Re:Oracle still gets the benefits (Score:5, Interesting)
Since Oracle has already stated that their only purpose in buying PeopleSoft is to kill the product (along with the JD Edwards software that PeopleSoft has just acquired), this is what's known as a "poison pill." Oracle would either have to do full support and updates (negating the whole point of the acquisition), or face massive lawsuits/fines by contract.
this also has the effect of de-FUDing the issue for customers who may be leery of buying new PeopleSoft/JDE product if there's a death sentence on it. pretty much a brilliant move.
Given that the ERP software market would go from around 4 players down to two (oracle vs sap) if this goes down, the deal has drawn antitrust flak.
Re:Oracle still gets the benefits (Score:5, Insightful)
Simply put - there's a lot more riding on an implementation of something like this than just the original purchase price. Any big company looking into an ERP solution right now is going to seriously think twice (or forty times) before going with PeopleSoft just because there's a possibility that all their effort could be for naught.
That 'golden clause' is pretty much worthless - and Oracle is indeed benefiting from this dark cloud over PeopleSoft's future.
Re:Oracle still gets the benefits (Score:3, Interesting)
Comical or not... (Score:5, Funny)
A circus magician...with a net worth of about $15 billion.
One strange-lookin' dude (Score:5, Funny)
money != success (Score:5, Insightful)
...who is also widely considered to be a complete nutcase and space-shot, with little credibility. He may be worth $15B, but who gets more press? He's widely ignored, because many concepts he's tried to champion have not just failed, they've imploded before they even left the launch pad. The whole thin-client netpc is a great example.
He's just too goddamned impressed with himself, and the picture is a perfect example of that attitude, and I'm sure it was selected(or provided) for that reason. The comparison to The Rock was perfect. Like Trump, Gates, Jobs, Fiorina- any time the focus shifts from someone's talents and qualifications to their personality, you've got yourselves a genuine cult figure and some serious problems. Things are all happy-shiny while the money's pouring in...but when the -water- starts leaking in, everyone's too busy looking at how great Master is to bail, and often even when the water's up to their necks they don't realize it's really time to mutiny, or jump ship altogether. One man or woman does not make an organization, and many a corporation has discovered the dangers of simply rubber-stamping and worshipping a central figure. Boards, VP's, etc all exist exactly to prevent this sort of thing.
Frankly, what amazes me the most is that there isn't a massive explosion when he and Steve Jobs are in the same room at Apple board meetings- Steve's Reality Distortion Field meets the Ellison Ego Field.
Lastly, never confuse wealth with success. Some of the world's richest people are miserable failures as human beings. I could name a dozen people I respect far more than Ellison, or any executive officer of any corporation.
Re:money != success (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't bash him though, in my opinion the guys a great lot of fun - apparently he has been known to fly his Russian built fighter over Gate's house to piss him off.
So he has a big ego too.
As for his credentials and people slagging Ellison for the thinPC/thinClient/netPC idea, it really wasn't a bad idea, but was put out of the water by the dramatically falling price of normal PC's. On other matters he's been right on the ball - convergence in enterprise apps for example in the 11i suite - it's going to make increasing inroads into systems integrators territory such as IBM if it continues along its current path of success.
Plus he's best mates with Steve, between them you can bet this dynamic duo get up to a lot of fun (Google for the trick they played on a technician at Pixar - offering him the CEO job at Apple).
Re:money != success (Score:3, Funny)
Er, no. He said something about that once, but as far as I know he isn't even legaly allowed to fly it in US Airspace. Even if he is, I'm very certan that he's never buzzed Gate's house.
He does seem like a fun guy to party, with though.
Odd. (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe Larry doesn't contribute enough towards ... uh .. certain funding. Then again, maybe PeopleSoft has connections.
After the spying on the UN scandals in the news this morning my head is swimming.
Re:Odd. (Score:2, Insightful)
Clearly, Ellison is considered too much of a loose canon to get his deal approved by the DOJ, or he aint greasin' the right wheels.
Re:Odd. (Score:5, Insightful)
But also think of the sweetheart pricing on Oracle the feds can "negotiate" as part of the "settlement."
Other than that, I really have a hard time figuring out why they wouldn't so much as whimper through the entire HP/Compaq merger, and decide to speak up now. There is either more to the story, or someone in the department finally has a pair.
Oh, right, this is an election year...
Re:Odd. (Score:3, Interesting)
The Justice Dept is too literal in their readings sometimes. They nixed the DirecTV/Dish
Oracle's Evil ERP Empire (Score:5, Insightful)
Stock Price (Score:5, Insightful)
PSFt - 21.78 down
I'm going to make a prediction that because of this the news, Psft's prices are going to go up and Orcl will go down.
PeopleSoft has been fighting this tooth and nail. They actually seem like they want the keep the company. As opposed to just wanting to cash out and saying screw the people.
From this prespective, it seems like a Corporation is stucking UP to the Big Guy, instead of sticking it TO the little guy.
Shoot my dog will you... (Score:5, Informative)
Ellison and his company bungled this one big time. They badmouthed the company, and on Larry King Live, Oracle openly stated that they would kill off the PS product line after the take over (besides the kill clause in their constitution which they didnt research, it was just a bad PR move). With Sparky being the job runner in earlier PeopleSoft releases, Conway made an interesting analogy that they were going to shoot his dog, and I can remember at the 2003 Peoplesoft Conference in the fall that Conway walked out on stage with his dog (both wearing a bullet proof vest), and proclaimed that he would not let his dog be shot and the crowd went wild.
This deal was just destined not to happen after Oracle's management bungled it. Read over at itmanagersjournal for an interesting history lesson at why they bungled it.
-- Page
Re:Shoot my dog will you... (Score:5, Interesting)
If Oracle intended this whole deal as FUD to encourage people not to buy PeopleSoft, they couldn't have done a better job.
One of the main things people look for when they buy ERP software is longevity in the software package, and knowledge that the software will flourish in the future. This deal casts a tremendous doubt on PeopleSoft in that regard. So just the talk of this alone helps Oracle tremendously in their competition with PeopleSoft.
Re:Shoot my dog will you... (Score:2, Interesting)
I hadn't considered that they still might have something to gain by scaring ERP customers way until your post, though.
Re:Shoot my dog will you... (Score:2, Informative)
This impacts taxpayers too as some govermental districs and departments are also Peoplesoft clients.
If Oracle wants to do this, they need to consider the cost of conversion or they will continue to meet with resistance from the users as well as the shareholders.
I've said it once... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I've said it once... (Score:2, Funny)
Circus Magician? (Score:5, Funny)
I'll be honest. I did.
Re:Circus Magician? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Circus Magician? (Score:5, Funny)
Playboy: "I just read it for the articles..."
Slashdot: "I just read it for the pictures..."
you mean (Score:3, Funny)
Practical reason for stopping Oracle (Score:5, Insightful)
Circus magician vs VEGAS magician (Score:5, Funny)
No no no. If he was a circus magician, then Oracle's products would be affordable.
He's clearly a Vegas Magician. Same act, but the ticket costs $120 instead of $6.
Re:Circus magician vs VEGAS magician (Score:2)
Peoplesoft? (Score:4, Funny)
WTF does peoplesoft do? Software vendor? What software?
Re:Peoplesoft? (Score:5, Informative)
"PeopleSoft and one other firm--SAP--are the only companies that compete with each other to develop and sell enterprise human resource management and financial services software for large businesses and government and nonprofit organizations"
Re:Peoplesoft? (Score:2)
or can you imagine... (Score:3, Funny)
Can you SMELL what Larry Ellison is COOKIN*' ?!!
*single eyebrow shoots up
Thank God (Score:5, Funny)
Reasonable application of antitrust law (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Reasonable application of antitrust law (Score:2, Informative)
Not really. Yahoo Finance [yahoo.com] shows that PSFT jumped almost 20% last June when Oracle's takeover bid was announced.
There's no reason to expect the stock to jump on an announcement that the takeover won't happen. And investors won't have much patience for a long legal battle if Oracle fights it [yahoo.com].
Re:Reasonable application of antitrust law (Score:2, Informative)
Oracle, oracle (Score:3, Funny)
Merging Certifications (Score:2, Informative)
Who cares who owns PeopleSoft (Score:4, Interesting)
whats the govt's problem? (Score:2, Insightful)
If a company can afford to buy out another company there seems to be no logical reasoning for the govt to step into the matter.This means that with anti trust laws the govt can curb the growth of any company be it MS or Oracle or any power hungry firm which beats the whole idea of freedom of uhmm..whatever.
Besides Oracle does hav
Separated at Birth! (Score:2)
That, or some James Bond villain, named "Zodiac" or something (credit to Jack at As the Apple Turns [appleturns.com] for that one).
As a PeopleSoft employee.... (Score:5, Informative)
Oracle started this bid and has continued it as a way of disrupting business, creating FUD, and trying to change PeopleSoft's market perception. I've worked with both products and I can tell you that there are very few who would claim Oracle's product, support or business tactics are better than PeopleSoft's. That's not saying that any ERP product doesn't have it's pitfalls, but our customers are some of the most loyal and it's not without good reason.
I'm all for the free market, but the proposed takeover would undoubtedly crush innovation and increase prices. It faces many regulatory hurdles, from a DOJ lawsuit, to a potential EU lawsuit on the same grounds and a States Attorneys General lawsuit should it go forward. These people are the same ones
I'm of the belief that anyone who wants this to go through is either paid by Oracle, has strong ties to Oracle, or is a short term investor. Larry has a magical way of using the "system" to his advantage and he has only done this to cause market confusion, disrupt PeopleSoft's business and drive up his sagging market share.
I'm of the belief he NEVER wanted to buy PeopleSoft. If Oracle truly wanted us, why not do it 2+ years prior when we were against the ropes? He would have gotten us on the cheap and had a nice chunk of customers. No, if he really wanted to buy PSoft, he would have never badmouthed the product, claim he was dropping support or any of the other shenanigans he's pulled. He's scared of the combined force of JDEdwards and PeopleSoft and the customer's he's been losing to us for years.
By the way, many PeopleSoft employees are ex-Oracle ones and every single one of them I know has said they will never work for Oracle again. Even current Oracle employees apologize for their boss... what does that tell you?
In the end, I have a feeling this will bite him on the ass.
Peoplesoft @ Northwestern U (Score:3, Interesting)
My university [northwestern.edu] uses Peoplesoft as a vendor; we use them for class scheduling and managing class documents and communication. But they output some of the shoddiest HTML I've seen in a long time. It's a strange mix of HTML and CSS, and obviously hasn't been tested except on one browser. It's been published [dailynorthwestern.com] in our school's most-distributed newspaper: Use IE to avoid problems.
Our school's course management system is one of the more infuriating sites around. For instance, hitting enter in a form doesn't submit the form. Rather, it reloads the page. And blanks all of your entries. And you can't stop the reload.
I have a serious problem with Peoplesoft's products.
</rant>
I don't know or understand all of the stakes involved in the acquisition or lawsuit, but I have this to say: I can only hope that Peoplesoft cleans up its act (read: HTML output). I don't like having to use other people's computers when Firefox doesn't know how to deal the poor output.
Re:Peoplesoft @ Northwestern U (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand, the underdog corporation is always the our favorite poster child for "The American Way/Dream/etc". Unless said corporation actually manages to follow through on their business plan and make it to the top. Then suddenly they become our new evil overlords and everything they do (even though they've been doing
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup! The same government that created one of the most famous of all monopolies and enforces it by preventing competition. Not a very useful law.
That makes no sense. The postal service is a government function. That's why congress was given the sole authority to create a postal service in the Constitution. Don't see people raising their own for-profit armies in the US, do you?
You're not laughing.
Yes I am. You amuse me.
If it weren't so common for government schemes to backfire completely, you'd probably think this was funny too.
That's why no government program ever works, and why we live in a squalid, impoverished anarchy.
It gets better. The antitrust laws are used against companies that practice "anticompetitive practices." What counts as "anticompetitive?" Anything aimed at doing better than your competition.
No, by that twisted logic every industry leader in every field would be the target of a federal suit.
Well, here's my last and favorite part. Even assuming that the government is right about everything (I know it's hard...just pretend), the laws are still worthless. The government assumes that if a single company becomes the sole producer in a market, they might jack up the price of their product, hurting the little guy
The laws weren't created in a vacuum--they were enacted BECAUSE of how monopolies were treating consumers.
Now, the main reason Objectivists dislike these laws is because they're a blatant initiation of force.
Objectivists don't like these laws because they're humorless, incredibly naive little people.
If a single producer jacking up his price is really the problem they're trying to solve, and given that they don't care about property rights in the slightest, why not wait until a single producer actually does do that? That's right. If they're going to trample rights, why not just wait until the "bad" thing has actually happened? By their own standards, the antitrust laws are useless.
Because prevention is better than a cure. Corporations aren't people. They shouldn't get the same rights.
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2, Interesting)
One thing I have to argue, here. Most government programs really are failures. Social Security, for example, is a total disaster (I don't even include it in my retirement plans). The patent office is a joke. John Ashcroft is a joke. Many defense projects are simply to funnel money to favored districts. The war on drugs is the worst thing since Prohibition. So-called free trade is not equitable. The IRS
I love your logic (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously though, the makers of a documentary called "The Corporation" make a pretty good arguement that corporations are psychopathic. Not amoral (like a rock). Psychopathic (like Ted Bundy). I feel the need of som
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:5, Insightful)
Satisfying your customers better than your competitors in the past does not mean you will do it in the future. Only competition does that. They need a choice.
Companies has the right to compete on the product or service they sell. This makes for better products and services, with more value for the customers. When they stop competing on the value of the product then there is a problem. That problem is what antitrust laws are meant to address.
A big enough company can elumiate opposition that produces a product with a better value. They do this by making sure that product cannot be sold, through one means or another.
This has happened in the past. That is why the antitrust laws were written, to prevent what had happened from happening again.
As for the Post Office (bad example: it is not a monopoly,) If there is a product or service best served by a monopoly (and there are some) then it is the government's job to fill that role. Because then and only then is the monopoly producer accountable to the people.
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:3, Insightful)
And how do companies 'elumiate' the opposition? Usually it's by providing a cheaper good (Wal-mart) or a better good. If they do it through legislation then that is wrong and the law should be revoked.
The Post office IS a monopoly. No one is allowed to send mail under $0.50 to post boxes. Not because they won't be able to compete, but because the government says so. Just because i
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:3, Insightful)
Only since the advent of antitrust laws, which make them illegal.
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
By buying the competitor?.. If a company which grew to have 40% market share by honestly offering better product/service/value wants to buy a competitor with 30% market share, it threatens to become the monopoly, which will no longer need to put as much effort on honestly better product/service/value.
The law does not give the government an authority to break an existing monopoly, that grew by itself, but it seems sensible for the government to try to block
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
I'm not a fan of unions either. However I see no issues with the OEM deals, in which I could write a book about and will leave out of this discussion.
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:3, Interesting)
If none of the remaining 30% has above 5% (or even if they do), they can also be aquired by the monopoly. Or, the monopoly may choose to price the product/service below the cost and wait for the competition to go under. Or whatever.
Think about it as, say, a rocking chair. As long as it is rocked within a certain range, it is safe and will come back to the right position. But tilting it too far will flip it over. L
USPS (Score:2)
The USPS owns those mailboxes. Other companies are more than welcome to convince people to install separate boxes for the competitive service if they want to. Newspapers do this in some places, and Mailboxes Etc. (now "The UPS Store") has its own
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
it makes for a bad example anyways, better examples would be copper/oil/coal whatever trusts there were, THAT WERE BAD, THAT MANIPULATED THE MARKET, THAT SAID A BIG 'FUCK YOU' TO THE CUSTOMER.
when you get enough market share then you can prevent smaller players from entering the market by being sleazy, by making it impossible for people to use that competing producers product. like in case of a pc manufacturer that in practice HAS to sell yo
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
F-----g idiots can't even deliver to the correct address half the time.
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
Sure they can. The problem is the nature of the logistics. Two companies purchasing large airplane and truck fleets will always find it cheaper to just buy the other company. Then you have one company, charging whatever it feels like. And you don't want that, because then there is no choice in the market. The government-run monopoly is to ensure that this position doesn't occur, by legislating th
Well, lets not forget (Score:3, Informative)
Rabid Linux Dogs (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! (Score:2)
I'm still waiting for a reply.
Re:Not a Circus Magician... (Score:5, Funny)
Sign for Larry's Parking Space (Score:4, Funny)
Larry owns my new company too, but whatever . .
Ellison's parking space was right outside of the 500 building entrance. I saw him wandering around the parking lot, cell phone clamped to his ear, a few times. The space wasn't specially marked, just one of a bunch of reserved spaces.
Once, during a staff meeting, the boss mentioned that the division managers were trying to come up with text for a sign for Larry's spot, because people who didn't know better would park there.
The favorite suggestion:
EXIT INTERVIEW PARKING
Re:all thats left (Score:2)
DONT CLICK LINK! (Score:2)
I am at work in a public computer lab ASSHOLE!
Lucky I do not know where you live. If I get fired
MOD DOWN - ADULT LINK (Score:2)
Re:Link responding has Over18 content only... (Score:2)
If I get written up because I was at work or fired I am totally screwed. I have bills to pay.
Who modded this clown up?
Moderators please mod down before anyone else makes the same mistake.
Re:Link responding has Over18 content only... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Link responding has Over18 content only... (Score:2)