From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | "adrian(dot) klaver" <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ned Lilly <ned(at)xtuple(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SMH on Salesforce-Oracle |
Date: | 2013-06-27 15:06:32 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEw8cDXeChmZViHZLO56ewOv1o2w-tQ65dp++WzmwyNrnA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Jun 27, 2013 4:50 PM, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:40:57AM -0400, Ned Lilly wrote:
> > >Now, if that 9 years is somehow _optional_ on Salesforce's part, then
> > >there might be something to the "maintain a relationship", but I have
> > >not seen anything suggesting that.
> > I would be really surprised if Salesforce went for that deal. Got
> > to believe that they have the option to do other stuff. The more I
> > think about it, the weaker Oracle looks in this exchange.
>
> I think the big question is what would motivate SalesForce to go for
> that deal? SalesForce certainly has been hostile to Oracle in the
> past, so why the big "hug" now? Mentioning Postgres in an Oracle
> negotiation has been known to reduce prices, so was this just a huge
> example of that?
Money, yes. Perhaps a guarantee against price increments during that time.
Which when you're an oracle customer that big is a *huge* pile of money.
There was also the whole integration of their app with oracles offerings,
where oracle is supposed to help drive sales of sales force I'm sure.
There are a lot of angles to a deal like that, and we're never going to
learn what all of them were anyway...
/Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-06-27 15:12:46 | Re: SMH on Salesforce-Oracle |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2013-06-27 15:00:10 | Re: SMH on Salesforce-Oracle |