• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
TSB Alfresco Cobrand White tagline

Technology Services Group

  • Home
  • Products
    • Alfresco Enterprise Viewer
    • OpenContent Search
    • OpenContent Case
    • OpenContent Forms
    • OpenMigrate
    • OpenContent Web Services
    • OpenCapture
    • OpenOverlay
  • Solutions
    • Alfresco Content Accelerator for Claims Management
      • Claims Demo Series
    • Alfresco Content Accelerator for Policy & Procedure Management
      • Compliance Demo Series
    • OpenContent Accounts Payable
    • OpenContent Contract Management
    • OpenContent Batch Records
    • OpenContent Government
    • OpenContent Corporate Forms
    • OpenContent Construction Management
    • OpenContent Digital Archive
    • OpenContent Human Resources
    • OpenContent Patient Records
  • Platforms
    • Alfresco Consulting
      • Alfresco Case Study – Canadian Museum of Human Rights
      • Alfresco Case Study – New York Philharmonic
      • Alfresco Case Study – New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association
      • Alfresco Case Study – American Society for Clinical Pathology
      • Alfresco Case Study – American Association of Insurance Services
      • Alfresco Case Study – United Cerebral Palsy
    • HBase
    • DynamoDB
    • OpenText & Documentum Consulting
      • Upgrades – A Well Documented Approach
      • Life Science Solutions
        • Life Sciences Project Sampling
    • Veeva Consulting
    • Ephesoft
    • Workshare
  • Case Studies
    • White Papers
    • 11 Billion Document Migration
    • Learning Zone
    • Digital Asset Collection – Canadian Museum of Human Rights
    • Digital Archive and Retrieval – ASCP
    • Digital Archives – New York Philharmonic
    • Insurance Claim Processing – New York Property Insurance
    • Policy Forms Management with Machine Learning – AAIS
    • Liferay and Alfresco Portal – United Cerebral Palsy of Greater Chicago
  • About
    • Contact Us
  • Blog

Documentum Migration to Alfresco – Buy or Subscribe and business value

You are here: Home / Alfresco / Documentum Migration to Alfresco – Buy or Subscribe and business value

February 11, 2013

I had a good conversation with a CIO friend of mine last week regarding his recent mobile framework purchasing decision.  In purchasing a mobile framework, the CIO and his team decided, given the immaturity of mobile frameworks, to only buy a 3 year subscription.  Their thinking was that after three years and more maturity within the mobile frameworks marketplace, they would determine if the current mobile framework was still the right choice (market leader, trending upwards) and might require them to make a change.  This subject got us talking about the Documentum Purchase versus Alfresco Subscription model.

Does anyone really “buy” software or is it all rented?

One thing I have always discussed with other IT professionals is are we really “buying” software as much as renting it.  Sure there is a purchase order, things get capitalized and they do download a “product” (where they used to ship CDs),  but, given the needs for support and the dynamic nature of software, one could make the argument that software is really “rented” due to:

  • Bug fixes and the need for updates/upgrades
  • Maintenance releases
  • Licensing Changes (see related post)
  • Implied future capabilities that will be added to the software

At 20% and up for maintenance (See related post on Documentum Maintenance Rising), most clients don’t realize they are re-buying most commercial software every five years.  Add in all the other costs for software (internal support, hardware, training), and the incremental costs year-in and year-out can often outweigh the purchase price in an even quicker timeframe.

In my discussion with the CIO, we both agreed that attempting to predict the future in regards to what the best platform would be 3 years from now in mobile was at best a guess.  We thought it was better to build a strategy around picking a vendor that could deliver value now, sign a three year subscription and re-evaluate in three years than to risk lock-in with an expensive purchase and maintenance agreement for something that might not be the right choice or add business value in the future.

Determining the “Value” of Software – a slippery slope

Pricing for software is difficult.  Unlike manufactured goods that have raw materials, the incremental cost for the vendor for one more copies of the software is pretty much nothing (just a download).  Software vendors (and customers) have to determine the value of the software for their business.  Value is determined by a number of factors, including market, competitors, as well as client’s ability to pay.  As we discussed before, part of the value is in what happens with the software in the future, something difficult to attach a to current purchase decision.

The discussion of value makes it difficult for customers to recognize the true value of software and when they are getting a deal and when they might be paying too much.  Another factor in regards to software value is the discussion of sunk costs.  Once an amount is paid, it is “sunk” and should have no effect on future business decisions.  I have routinely heard clients justify the value of software by the amount they paid for it years ago, not the business value it brings now or the ongoing costs.

Documentum Value – user based pricing and add-on selling

One aggressive selling tactic we often saw with Documentum that took advantage of customer’s perception of value was the “add on sale ” where additional software is sold with “discount” pricing.  For example, say client had a system for 100 users.  After negotiating (Documentum never sells for list, particularly at the end of a quarter or year), the price per user would be X.  We would traditionally see another 100 or 200 users added onto the sale for one-half of X or something lower.  The amounts would really be skewed when Documentum would sell an enterprise license for some amount that would really bring down the cost per user.

We would routinely talk with Documentum clients that were excited by the great deal (typically end of quarter) that “saved them” X% of the typical purchase price, given the software’s value as set by Documentum.  Some difficult math related issues customers realized in the following years included:

  • Shelfware – If the client is only deploying 100 seats, Documentum had effectively doubled the cost of the software without really adding any business value.  A realistic analogy would be a vacation time share that never gets used – is it worth the money?
  • Time Value of Money – Even if the additional seats were deployed in the future, the client would have sacrificed the purchase price before they needed the seats (routing money from other needs) and still paid for maintenance on seats that were waiting to be deployed.
  • Maintenance  (see related post) – Given maintenance is often charged at list price, they are paying more than double for their annual maintenance costs.

Documentum customers typically struggle with justifying the ongoing value in regards to paying maintenance on obsolete versions and non-deployed seats.  Most customers tend to fall-back to the sunk cost of the purchase price and how great of a deal they got with the purchase.  Saving money on a product that isn’t used and can’t be resold is not really saving anything.

Alfresco Value and the Subscription Model

Alfresco, as we pointed out in a previous post (Documentum Alfresco pricing differences), only supports a subscription model with CPU pricing (no user pricing) and no purchase price.  The key differences regarding software value:

  • There is no purchase price, so the add-on user license discussions never happen.
  • Subscription needs to be renewed every year.  As pointed out earlier, in predicting the future, this approach lets clients determine every year if they would like to renew the subscription.
  • Subscription costs are typically lower than Documentum maintenance costs.

Summary

The point I took away from my CIO friend was that they were planning on reviewing their decision in three years.  This is something I have rarely seen in the ECM community that tends to lock-in to a decision and buy rather than revisit the decision later on.  As two specific points related to we pointed out in our initial post on “Document to Alfresco Migration – Why Now?

  • Pricing Model  – Often times the subscription cost of Alfresco is less than the maintenance cost of Documentum.  Customers should make sure that the purchase price is treated as a sunk cost and not factor it into the ongoing costs.  See pricing related pricing post.
  • Migration and Training – Often times we hear that sticking with Documentum would result in less costs for migration of documents and training on a new interface.  Look for upcoming posts but, with Webtop fading, any future direction with Documentum (D2 or xCP) will require migration and retraining.

Documentum customers, facing increased maintenance costs as well as the need to upgrade/migrate to new products from Documentum (and repurchase in the case of D2), should evaluate Alfresco and related solutions with a fresh perspective rather than be trapped by past decisions.

Let us know your thoughts below:

Filed Under: Alfresco, D2, Documentum, ECM Landscape, xCP

Reader Interactions

Trackbacks

  1. Documentum to Alfresco Migration – Why Now? « TSG Blog says:
    February 11, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    […] Cost Differences including (Buy or Subscribe) […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

Search

Related Posts

  • Documentum and Alfresco – What are some of the bigger differences?
  • Documentum to Alfresco Migration – Comparing Company Visions
  • Documentum to Alfresco Migration – Maturity of the platforms
  • Documentum or Alfresco Interface – Ready for an Upgrade?
  • EMC World 2016 – Day 2 – ECD Roadmap and Vision
  • Documentum – Top Tips for 2016
  • Enterprise Content Management Predictions – 2015
  • Alfresco or Documentum Collaborative Document Reviews with OpenAnnotate
  • Documentum or Alfresco – Redacting Sensitive Information with OpenRedact
  • Documentum – Momentum EMC World 2014 Recap – Some bunts, hits as well as some swings

Recent Posts

  • Alfresco Content Accelerator and Alfresco Enterprise Viewer – Improving User Collaboration Efficiency
  • Alfresco Content Accelerator – Document Notification Distribution Lists
  • Alfresco Webinar – Productivity Anywhere: How modern claim and policy document processing can help the new work-from-home normal succeed
  • Alfresco – Viewing Annotations on Versions
  • Alfresco Content Accelerator – Collaboration Enhancements
stacks-of-paper

11 BILLION DOCUMENT
BENCHMARK
OVERVIEW

Learn how TSG was able to leverage DynamoDB, S3, ElasticSearch & AWS to successfully migrate 11 Billion documents.

Download White Paper

Footer

Search

Contact

22 West Washington St
5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60602

inquiry@tsgrp.com

312.372.7777

Copyright © 2023 · Technology Services Group, Inc. · Log in

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. Please accept this site's cookies, but you can opt-out if you wish. Privacy Policy ACCEPT | Cookie settings
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT