For SAP in Q3, no new news is good news unless you’re an investment analyst

by Dennis Byron on October 22, 2007

Except among invest­ment ana­lysts, no news is good news. For invest­ment ana­lysts, no news brings out the worry beads. So it seems with SAP (SAP). Invest­ment ana­lysts were all over on-target Q3 results and slightly improved full year guid­ance from SAP at an Octo­ber 18 quar­terly con­fer­ence call. They pep­pered SAP exec­u­tives with number-crunching ques­tions, pick­ing apart changes in expec­ta­tions by row and col­umn. For exam­ple, com­pare license rev­enue in the Amer­i­cas but back out last year’s $31M rever­sal? What about Busi­ness ByDe­sign (BBD) cap­i­tal expenses vs. mile­stones announced two years ago? Wasn’t Ger­many soft? (Yeah, it was sum­mer in the North­ern Hemi­sphere in Europe.) But if full year 2007 is going to be x-metric bet­ter than 2006, doesn’t that mean Q4 2007 is going to be softer than Q4 2006? One ana­lyst wanted SAP to release local costs in local currencies.

To be fair, the ana­lysts are ner­vous about the infor­ma­tion tech­nol­ogy (IT) mar­ket over­all, and SAP is more likely to give out more use­ful detail than other IT sup­pli­ers. So there is a ten­dency to ask SAP ques­tions that if answered help ana­lysts fill in cells in over­all IT mar­ket models.

But the net-net for SAP at the end of Q3 2007 is three­fold. SAP said it will grow faster in 2007 than in any of the last three years. Key rev­enue met­rics are grow­ing at the same rate as key com­peti­tors adjusted for cur­rency. (SAP gets a neg­a­tive effect from the Euro appre­ci­a­tion vs. the dol­lar whereas U.S. based com­peti­tors gets an extra bump.) User counts—the met­ric SAP wants to be mea­sured by—continues its upward trend.

Basi­cally, noth­ing has changed pos­i­tive or neg­a­tive since many of the same ques­tions were asked and not answered at last week’s TechED, the announce­ment about acquir­ing Busi­ness Objects (BOBJ) a cou­ple of weeks ago, last month’s BBD announce­ment, and last quarter’s con­fer­ence call. So nat­u­rally the non-answers haven’t changed either. SAP would not com­ment on Oracle’s (ORCL) bid to acquire BEA (BEAS). In fact, it wouldn’t even com­ment much about SAP’s bid to acquire Busi­ness Objects.

Investors do still have to cut through SAP’s pos­si­bly mis­lead­ing core enter­prise appli­ca­tions ven­dor share claim as well as the state­ment that “we would have made more money if we weren’t rolling out BBD but we’re invest­ing in the future.” The lat­ter state­ment isn’t very action­able for investors because pre­sum­ably every suc­cess­ful com­pany is invest­ing in the future. As for the for­mer, is NetWeaver growth some­how included in SAP’s “enter­prise appli­ca­tions” cal­cu­la­tion? Are Net­suite and Salesforce.com (CRM) con­sid­ered com­peti­tors? Still, the SAP mar­ket share claim is no more egre­gious than Oracle’s claim about its place in the mid­dle­ware mar­ket as Ora­cle defines it.

In both cases, the com­pa­nies do not release the num­bers needed to ver­ify the claims. So ignore them. Do not invest in SAP sim­ply because you think it is gain­ing ERP mar­ket share; it is not gain­ing share in ERP vs. Microsoft (MSFT) and Oracle.

But the rest of the news is that there was no new news.

–Den­nis Byron

Tags: , , , ,

{ 1 comment }

free investment research November 29, 2007 at 10:51 PM

How to defference between SAP & Oracle?

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: