SaaS...a Market? Or a Market Advantage?
“SaaS is not a market. It’s just software,” reads the title of a recent blog post by Mark Everett Hall of Computerworld. He’s riffing on a statement made by Trisha Gross of SaaS-based Hubspan, who argues that “there’s a market for CRM, ERP, supply chain management, integration software and other markets, but not SaaS.”
These are common misunderstandings by folks who have not walked a day in both the shoes of an on-premise provider and a SaaS provider. But SaaS is not “just a channel,” nor is it “just a way to consume software.”
Unfortunately, these perspectives don’t recognize so many of the true differences between SaaS and traditional enterprise software. It would be like saying the difference between using a horse-and-buggy versus air travel is merely the “delivery model.” Of course the method of delivery is different, but the benefits to the passenger (and the provider) are far greater.
Beyond the means of delivery, SaaS doesn’t require customers to buy and maintain expensive hardware. It’s about reducing the risk of “shelf-ware” so common in the on-premise world. It’s about letting customers dip a toe into their software investments, rather than paying millions of dollars up front. It’s about keeping vendors honest: if customers aren’t happy, they will walk. It’s about not stranding customers on old and obsolete versions, and forcing them to do costly upgrades. It’s about allowing vendors to focus on a single line of code, meaning more efficient engineering organizations that can spend more time innovating.
The conclusion Mark draws at the end of his post is that “instead of SaaS vendors being measured against themselves, they should be compared in the same market as their packaged app competitors, which would greatly diminish their relative size and importance. I’m not sure a lot of SaaS players and their backers would want to go down that road.”
Completely agree. No SaaS vendor worth its salt should be shy of inviting such a comparison. If SaaS vendors are doing a good job, their on-premise counterparts are likely squirming - telling anyone who will listen why SaaS isn’t relevant or, better yet, starting to apply “on-demand” and “SaaS” descriptors to their on-premise applications.
Fortunately for true multi-tenant SaaS vendors, the genie is out of the bottle and it’s just a matter of time. So, while SaaS might not be a market in the traditional sense, it’s clear that, all other things being equal, it is a huge market advantage.

4 Comments:
I completely agree with the post. SaaS is not just a delivery model for software.
The benefits reaped by SaaS to the customers are fully measurable and go a long way beyond traditional software offering.
Working for a SaaS company in the Project Management space, I see everyday the great benefits this specific market gets from running as SaaS.
Project Management is an area where the collaboration afforded by SaaS provides such exceptional benefits to the customers, their clients and their value chain that is not available to them in traditional on premise solutions. Being able to work in the same "place" with your partners and customers, providing clarity to everyone involved in a project goes way beyond delivering project management through a browser or subscription.
Sharon Vardi
VP Marketing
Clarizen
March 8, 2009 3:55 AM
Sharon or Chris can either of you point me to some hard case studies (Not ROI) that I can dig into to prove the SaaS return and value claims.
It seems to me that capitlization and depreciation are HUGE components that are obviously not being considered in SaaS ROI claims.
Kerek Taylor
cariboucrossing.blogspot.com
March 12, 2009 8:44 AM
These comments from ComputerWorld/IDG sound very similar to those of a Gartner analyst recently:
http://blog.saasrealist.com/2009/02/25/playing-both-sides-is-necessary-for-business-at-gartner.aspx
SaaS is a fully underway revolution in the software industry that will not be turned back or talked away. It places large and extremely profitable 'reporting' public software companies in the position of having to adjust to a future where organic growth is going to be somewhat less profitable and controllable than in the past.
The more acquisition concentration there is in major licensed software businesses over the next few years with associated cost reduction,the more vulnerable these acquired business customer bases will become to the responsive SaaS offerings. This is because most of the big publicly traded licensed software businesses will not have management teams that can lead/manage a needed push into hybrid business models, with all the complex market segmentation, organic SaaS development/launch, and management of boards and investors who do not want to hear about the details of the revolution, only how profits will go up each quarter. Much easier to continue to focus on buying/consolidating/cost reducing the remaining licensed product vendors in a segment.
http://blog.saasrealist.com/2009/01/29/debunking-ceo-debes-of-lawson-point-by-point.aspx
So it's a virtuous cycle for SaaS pure players and committed hybrids for the foreseeable future.
March 19, 2009 9:41 AM
I agree that SaaS is a huge market advantage. I've been in the software industry for many years and the complexity of on premise software is painful. Just yesterday, my IT staff was struggling to diagnose Outlook config issues. No need to worry in SaaS -- just log on.
March 21, 2009 2:50 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home