Microsoft, Certified Gold Partners, and SharePoint Search

January 15, 2009

ChannelInsider.com posted a bombshell of a commentary in my opinion here. Pedro Pereira’s “Is Microsoft the Managed Services market’s Biggest Enemy?” makes some interesting assertions. The essay certainly caused this addled goose’s tiny brain to cycle two or three times. The premise of the article is that Microsoft has worked hard to round up “channel partners”. These are the companies who pay to take tests, send engineers to Microsoft classes, and agree to various terms and conditions to achieve the coveted “certified” endorsement. Mr. Pereira wrote:

But as the managed services market matures, you have to wonder how long the world’s largest software company plans to sit on the sidelines. And while you’re at it, you might chew on this: When Microsoft finally gets serious about managed services, will it do so as a partner to the channel, as a competitor or both?

Mr. Pereira identifies a number of high profile channel partners who may generate revenues that Microsoft covets. In effect, will Microsoft take the big, juicy engagements and keep the lion’s share of the revenue. IBM has morphed into a services business with an interesting history. Perhaps Microsoft will follow in IBM’s footsteps in order to keep the company’s revenue growth stable or growing.

image

Disrupting Microsoft channel partner structure could prove costly. If Microsoft changes the game for “certified” partners, the reconstruction may open the door to plug compatible alternatives that are no longer “certified”. Even more interesting is Google’s opportunity to pick up the pieces in the aftermath of the scenario Channel Insider describes. Image source: http://gees.usc.edu/GEES/RecentEQ/India_Gujarat/photos/photobyrediff/mdf10294.jpg

Mr. Pereira cites survey data new to me. He wrote:

A Channel Insider survey conducted over the summer found that 25 percent of MSPs have switched platforms three times, 21 percent once and 18 percent twice. Seven percent of participants reported that they have switched platforms a staggering 10 times. Yes, there are enough platforms out there to switch that many times.

As I thought about this interesting write up, several ideas occurred to me. I don’t want to lose them; to wit:

  1. Assume Microsoft does push out partners who have juicy deals. For example, instead of allowing an integrator to sell a third party search system, Microsoft asserts that the partner must sell Fast Search & Transfer technology. Then Microsoft steps in and uses its “search engineers” to handle the customization, optimization, etc. Microsoft gets a sale from a channel partner and then steps in to skim the high value work. If this happens, channel partners will jump ship. So does this create an opportunity for Google to expand its channel partner program. Google’s recent announcement to allow resellers to create, sell, and support Google Apps and Apps extensions might get a turbo boost.
  2. Assume that Microsoft excludes snap in, third party search systems for SharePoint search. In my opinion, the Fast Search system may open even more cans of worms than the baked in SharePoint search yields. Microsoft is now faced with a more costly problem; that is, getting the Fast Search systems to work on large document collections with acceptable performance.
  3. Assume third party vendors circumvent their “certification” and go direct to SharePoint customers with search woes. Suddenly the tension escalates between Microsoft and third party vendors. Customers may not like being caught in the middle. Those customers might look for another path. Waiting in the wings, of course, is Googzilla.

I want to gather some information about each of these ideas sparked in my mind by Mr. Pereira. If the channel receives a seismic shock from Microsoft, the chunks may fall only to be picked up by third party vendors and Google. Microsoft will find itself trying to reconstruct the frameworks that its own channel actions knocked down. In short, Microsoft bleeds cash at a time when cash is king.

Stephen Arnold, January 15, 2009

Comments

Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta