text:
Marcum's status murky
TORONTO — There is still no news about the status of Jays starter Shaun Marcum, but the extent of the lack of update seemed almost cryptic. Basically, Marcum underwent an MRI on his right arm, but the Jays won't say what the results are just yet.
Instead, Toronto is getting a second opinion from arm specialist Dr. James Andrews and plans on announcing the extent of Marcum's injury on Friday. Marcum, meanwhile, said his forearm is still tender, though there's no more numbness in his hand.
"Right now, we're still looking at results and we'll probably know a little bit more tomorrow," Blue Jays manager Cito Gaston said. "They still want to look at it a little more before I can say anything to you guys. They want to make sure what they're seeing is what they're seeing."
If what they're seeing requires surgery, that would immediately put Marcum in doubt to break camp with the Jays at the start of 2009. So, behind Roy Halladay, you're talking about a mix of Jesse Litsch, Casey Janssen, David Purcey, Ricky Romero, Brett Cecil and maybe Scott Richmond for starting jobs.
"It just means one of the other kids has to step up and go in that role," Toronto general manager J.P. Ricciardi said. "Hopefully, it won't come to that, but I guess you've got to prepare for the worst-case scenario."
There's the chance that the Jays would consider Scott Downs or Brian Wolfe as starters. Dustin McGowan could be out until May. A.J. Burnett could opt out and become a free agent. In the latter department, Ricciardi did not that the Jays are willing to explore adding a year or two on Burnett's contract to maybe convince him to stick around.
"We'd love to have him stay," Ricciardi said. "But if someone wants to blow him out of the water, that won't be us. We would think about that, adding some years, but we're not going to get in a bidding war. There's got to be an interest on his part to stay, too."
As for catcher Rod Barajas, he has a Grade 2 tear of his left hamstring and could be done for the season. Downs is still day to day with a right ankle injury. Me? I'm injury free — over a nasty bout of tendinitis — and counting down the days to the Chicago Marathon on Oct. 12. Last thing I need is hamstring or ankle issues. Arm problems I can deal with…
Today's lineups:
BALTIMORE (67-83) at TORONTO (81-71)
at 7:07 p.m. ET at the Rogers Centre
Brian Roberts, 2B
Alex Cintron, SS
Nick Markakis, RF
Aubrey Huff, 3B
Kevin Millar, 1B
Luke Scott, LF
Oscar Salazar, DH
Jay Payton, CF
Omir Santos, C
PITCHING: LHP Garrett Olson (9-8, 6.84)
Marco Scutaro, SS
Jose Bautista, 2B
Alex Rios, RF
Vernon Wells, CF
Adam Lind, DH
Scott Rolen, 3B
Lyle Overbay, 1B
Curtis Thigpen, C
Travis Snider, LF
PITCHING: RHP Jesse Litsch (11-8, 3.75)
48 Comments
Bad news with Marcum, maybe not able to break camp with the Jays next year, and with the possible/likely loss of Burnett. We are really going to need someone to step up in the rotation.
In light of that, since gsumner hasn't been on in a while. Here is a little minors report, even though the season is over.
Brett Cecil finished the season semi-strong with Syracuse. Aug. 17 and Aug. 23 he threw 7.0 shutout innings against Buffalo and Rochester. Got hit up on the 28th against the Las Vegas Area 57's, at least I think thats what they were.
Ricky Romero, had two strong starts to finish the season against Rochester and the Scranton Yankees. He picked up two wins in 14 innings, only giving up two runs between both games. His record is 3-3 with a 3.38 ERA in 7 starts this season with the Skychiefs. Pretty average, but nice to see him succeeding at AAA, more so that he has at the lower levels where he has been awful.
Suddenly our rotation does not look like it once was. The depth of our pitching may really be tested in '09.
Dr. James Andrews is Dr. Tommy John surgery. Cross you fingers guys, Marcum could be gone till spring of 2010.
By the way Jordan, have the Jays ever given an update on Accardo's visit or consultation with Dr. Andrews.
wow. They haven't even started 2009 and their is already some injury concerns. The Jays need a break.
GSJ you asked me last night why I would want Ibanez
Games – 152 Ab-595 R-82 H-182 2B-43 HR-23 RBI-106 OBP-.370 SLG.-.504 AVG- .306
Tell me who those " If's " are who will hit for more homeruns and a better average making majore league minimum ? Ibanez will ask for more than 5.5 million but I would take a chance on him for sure. He'll cost less then the bigger fish and can produce pretty well. He's had atleast 4 straight seasons of 20 + homeruns or more and 3 straight with 100+ RBI's. Sounds like a guy the Jays could use as a DH to me. Also did I miss something ? because I don't understand how you initially made an arguement that the Jays wont have enough money to get a big bat but then you go and ask for Texiera. A guy who will likely ask for the most money and longest term (which you also made an issue about) out of all them. I'd love Texeira too but that is arguably the least likliest of happening. In the same paragraph you said that the Jays can't afford A.J. and then go on to say, use the 20 million to sign Texeira. PLease explain that because it doesn't make sense to me. If they can't grab Manny or Giambi i'd be happy with Ibanez. I think if they use the money to sign him and find a way to bring back A.J. with an almost full season of Hill, Wells and Lind that should produce enough offense on most nights with the pitching staff they have.
Amazing how Rios should now be traded for a number 2 starter, atleast according to someone last night. In December when Riccardi offered Rios for Lincicum (who's having a great year by the way) most people were criticizing J.P. for even thinking about it. I was one of the few who wanted it to happen. I think Garry was one too. J.P. would've looked like a genious had he pulled that off, it's a shame it didn't happen. Lincicum is having a great year on an even more offensively challenged team.
Our starters and potential starters for 2009, include Halliday, Litsch, Purcey and McGowan by mid May. We'll have to see what the fine Dr. says about Marcum-hopefully we get good news.
Potentials include Janssen, Cecil, Romero and in a stretch-Brad Mills-AA. OF course, the Jays will list Richmond and Parrish as well, but I wouldn't. They have also talked about stretching out Downs-which I think is a mistake, but the might be one or two candidates in the pen to be stetched.
What you haven't explained in you exuburance on Ibanez is why do we need 3 left fielders-particulary one that will turn 37 next year and demand 8 million?
Why sign a designated DH, when we can rotate an outfielder through the slot, two of which make about major league minimum and will both probably deliver the same results. Why do you want to keep adding these old guys-haven't you had enough of them with Thomas, Eckstein, Wilkerson, Stewart, Mench, Clayton, etc. etc. etc. None of them worked out (except Thomas for 3 months) and you want to sign another.
What I said is the Jays can't afford both Aj and a big bat. Tiexera is a bit different, since if we sign him for 20 and trade Overbay, it really is only a net cost of 13, because Overbay is scheduled to make 7.
As I said yesterday, we'ver had a full season of AJ at his best and the best pitching in baseball and we're struggling to win 3rd place. Bring back AJ at 20 mill. per year is a mistake because it will leave us no flexibility to add bats or at least significant bats. We need hitters.
What the hell are you babbling about in Rios. I have never been in favor of trading Rios. Get your facts straight Enigma and tone down a bit, there's no need to be so confrontational, unless of course you want others to be the same.
Garry mentioned trading Rios. I never lumped you into that and my apologies if it came across that way.
I never said sign A.J. for 20 million. That would be ludicris. I did say bring him back though and i'd offer a longer term take it or leave it. If not there is always guys like Dempster for example or the low risk, potentially high reward route with a Pedro Martinez. Texiera from what I hear is going to ask for atleast 25 million, even if it's not that much then what do you do about the term ? you mentioned that as a concern too (2 nights ago) which is a legitement one because he wont be coming here for just 2 or 3 yrs.
I don't think it's a good idea to rotate a couple of young players in and out of the DH role becuase they are so young and i'd like to see them develop defensively as well if it's possible, hence me wanting Ibanez to fill that role. Lind had a great September 2 yrs ago and still needed some time in triple A before he came up, it could be the same for Snider who is still just 20. Ibanez has proven that he's good for about 20+ homeruns and 100 RBI's. You can't expect those types of numbers from Snider, yet.
Eckstein could've actually been a good second baseman without Hill but Gaston didn't seem to see that. Once Gaston had no use for him it was only logical to trade for him. That had nothing to do with age though.
The Thomas experience taught me (if I were J.P.) not to sign older players to bad contracts with vesting options. I'll still take a chance on guys who are in their late 30's so long as they produce (i.e. Manny, Ibanez, Giambi, Thome or Delgado if available.) The rest of the guys you mentioned just suck and shouldn't have been brought in in the first place. With the exception of Stewart who if healthy could've been a decent leadoff man.
I'd like to add too that most of them cost very little in relative terms. It's a low risk, potentially high reward thing.
**i meant trade him.
JP said he doesen't see any reason to look for a big bat next year,also if Burnett opts out some of the young guys will just have to step up.Now does that look like there will be any money to spend.And Baustista will be back next year for sure.Our only hope is the new president will give JP his walking papers,7 years with no results is no good.
Enigma at the start of the season I thought Rios would be a force to rekon with so I was not in favor of trading him,But as an after thought I wish they would have made the trade.
The only problem is would they have kept Johnson or would they still have cut him loose and left us short in the outfield.If so then the trade would haven been bad for this year but good for next year.
What the Thomas experience should teach all of us, is to not sign 35-40 yr olds to 10-15 million dollar contracts-period; the steroid era is over. The problem with Manny, Giambi and Delgado is, they're all going to want 3-4 years at about 15-20 mill per year. I'd rather see us sign Tiexeira (who's 28) even if it's for more money and longer term, although the rumor is 18-20 mill and 7 years is what Scott Boras is looking for, which I doubt he'll get.
Rotating the outfielders worked for Cito before and it's the right thing to do this time. All it really means is each outfielder playing dh every 4th day. Frankly, it will keep them all fresh and more importantly eliminate the need for a designated dh, making the roster more flexible. Next year it could mean the difference between keeping or lossing one of Macdonald, Scutaro or Inglett. Besides, I have a lot more confidence in Cito bringing Snider and Lind along faster than anyone we have in AAA, although it does look like Snider is loving it up here.
Nice hit but dumb base running by Zaun.
Another nice outing from Jessie, hopefully we hold this one for a win.
Litsch looked like he was upset when Cito told him he was done for the night,but I think it was the right move and like gsj.said let's hope the Jays hold on to give him a win.
What the Thomas signing really shows is that the Jays, at least under JP's management, cannot attract quality free agents. Those they can attract are old and past their prime. Even these type of players we have to pay for dearly. About this time last year, i was talking about Tampa taking the division. This year they might. I also talked about the fact that the Jays would finish 4th. They still might. Let's not kid ourselves folks, next year this team is not finishing any higher in the standings than it is this year. AJ will leave. Like all teams we can expect to loose at least one starter to injury. We keep hearing that our hitters have had off years. I don't think so. I think they are what they are at this stage in their careers. I love the Jays, but they are not going to compete next year, just like the last 7 years.
Go Cubs!
Look out everyone here comes BJ I have my eyes closed.
Burt I'm with you on the Cubs.
Yes, I called for the Jays to finish 4th as well. I knew TB were going to be better than us this year, although I never thought they'd take the division.
We need a complete overall, both Godfrey and JP need to be replaced. The thing that really caught me off guard was the miniscule revenue per ticket of under $18.00 and still drawing under 3 million per year. Their attendence jumped in 2006 and has leveled off ever since and the average price per seat has actually dropped. That is not good news and I'm sure something Rogers are concerned about. If they're not, they really should be. We need to see that average ticket get closer to 30-40.00 and attendance pop to 3 million+ so the player budget can be increased. Of course we need a competent GM to spend it wisely, as well.
Catcher interference, what the hell was that about?
Now thats what I call exciting.My heart was in my mouth.
Well, the one thing Ryan does do is keep everyone interested until the 3rd out.
gsy.Zaun stuck his glove up and the bat hit it.
its a good thing Zaun hit the double to drive in two runs, because his glove error and running error are not very pretty.
There is absolutely no way we see Texiera playing for the Jays . 1) The Jays can't afford him …2)the Yanks want him to replace Giambi ..3) Boston is looking at him to play first and moving Youk over to third, especially now Lowell needs surgery …. 4) Boras is looking for atleast 20 mil per year and 7-10 years and 5) Let me repeat Jays don't have the money for him plus pick up Overbay's salary and Ryan's salary. Its easy to say trade a player but in reality far more difficult to do it . If Jays don't want these guys why would you think another team would be willing to pay out that money for them
As for the Thomas signing JP was bidding against himself . Thomas was way overpaid but I have to give JP kudos for letting Thomas go . They obviously saw something or didn't see something in Thomas this year and as it turns out Thomas has been on the DL most of the year . It was a good decision and a costly mistake
What Boras has stated in Pr's I've seen is 5-7 years and between 18-20 per year. I do think we can trade Overbay although we might have to pick up a mill or two of his salary for 09 and 10. Boras will sign wherever he gets the best deal for his client. I expect NY to pick up Giambi's option for 2009. Giambi's numbers aren't far off Tiexeiras and NY do tend to keep guys who performed for them in the grand zoo of NY.
Ryan isn't tradeable now, BUT, if he recovers more in the off season (and I expect he will) he will be tradeable next year and he's under valued compared to Riviera and what Rodriguez will get, so I doubt if we'd have to pick up any of his salary. Burnett will definately opt out, so we could lose 27 million in 2009 salary-assuming we pick up 2 mill per year for Overbay. That should be enough room to sign Tiexeria.
The real problem contracts as I see it hit us in 2010 with Rolen, Wells, Rios, Ryan, Overbay and Halliday costing us over 78 million. So, although there might be some room in 2009, 2010 becomes damn difficult. The issue over and above some bad contracts is the low level gate receipts and the low level average per seat. The Jays need to grow the revenue side, get 3 million seats sold per year at a much more respectable $30 average and raise gate revenue in order to be competitive. I have no idea why the average cost per seat is dropping; I don't think that's the case in other MLB venues-although I'm not sure.
If we cannot do that, then I don't see a lot of option but to blow the team up, trade for high level prospects and re-build like TB has and Oakland are-unless of course fans here are happy with 3rd and 4th place finishes each year.
Thomas had a vesting option which guaranteed him 10 million for 2009 if he had a particular number of at bats in 2007 and 2008. JP very rightly recognized Thomas would hit the number in 2008, and dumped him. It had nothing to do with "seeing something" other than the small writing on a dumb contract. I give JP full marks for dumping him, but then again why give him that option when no other team was seriously bidding for him.
I still don't believe Texiera is on the Jays radar nor will he be and everything I have read says they , Boras and Tex , are looking for atleast 20 mil and 7-10 years …its just not going to happen . According to the article link you posted last night , you agreed that Jays won't save any money but their payroll will actually go up , so how can we lose 27 mil in salary …you can't have it both ways .
I know about Thomas vesting interest and I agree it played a roll in his being let go but I also believe they saw a difference in him this year . The way he held himself and his swing were not the same as last year , there was an article on this very site about that . I believe both contributed to Thomas demise .
As for the ticket price , Jays have $2.00 tuesdays that drag prices down . Plus I have bought tickets last minute at reduced rates , along with company tickets that are offered at better rates and group tickets. Its nice to say raise ticket prices but then you run the possibility of losing patrons . Who knows maybe this is the venue Roger's chose to use as a tax write off , all large companies have them
The gate is not the only revenue for Rogers,TV rights food and drink and many more items.Don't for a minute think Rogers is loseing money.
Drop the e in losing.
Did you read my last post to you.
Ron Lancaster was an icon in Canadian football,It is a sad day for all sask.football fans,I for one will never forget him.
With regards to ticket prices. Remember, an average is a terrible statistic because it can be easily skewed (e.g., $2 Tuesdays). A more appropriate statistic would be the median (middle) price. That said, keep in mind that it is a shell game. You lower ticket prices only to raise the price of a hot dog, coke, and bag of popcorn, parking, and all of the other stuff they sell at the game. I don't know how bad the financial woes for the Jays are, keeping in mind that when they budgeted they would have used US currency, and we know that the Canadian dollar is much stronger now compared to the US buc. I am sure revenue is not where Rogers would like to see it, but all the money in the world cannot make up for bad decisions and a lack of young competitive talent – just ask the Yanks. The difference between the Yanks and the Jays is that the Yanks are honest enough to admit that there is a problem. Last night on the broadcast, JP was actually quite smug and proud of what the team had accompished. He played the injury card, yet again. The difference between Yankee fans and Jays' fans is that the Yankee fans would have run JP's butt out of here long ago. They would not have become aplogists for his dismal performance.
The point, I am trying to make with ticket prices and revenue is, I think the Jays are at a cross roads. I guess I owe an apology to Enigma and Indigo since I've really been trying to present both sides of the situation in order to expose both sides of the argument.
Documents filed for 2007 show the club lost money and the total gate revenue was only $42 million which is less than 1/4 of what it is in Boston and New York, our two major competitors in the AL east. Both NY and Boston control their own refreshment areas as well and have the further benefit of owning their TV networks, which in both cases are worth billions. Frankly, I understand 1/2 the gate revenue of either Boston or NY, but not 1/4.
Remember as well, 2007 was the year the Jays enjoyed a huge swing in dollar currency, 2008 and likely 2009 will represent a currency loss versus gain of 2007.
Yes, we will lose some contracts this year, and that might or might not give us some flexibility to add a big bat, but raises already in place eat up most of that salary loss. It's also,very likely the equalization payment received from MLB in 2009 will drop as a result of NY opening their own building and becoming (potentially) a reciepient of revenue sharing versus a giver-unless MLB change the current rules. In addition, we are not increasing the number of fans going to games-that seems to be stuck in the 2.3-2.4 million range, so it's likely revenue in 2009 will drop and costs will rise, unless something is done.
Looking beyond 2009 to 2010 isn't any prettier, since raises scheduled for 6 players will committ 78 million before we look at the other 19 players on the roster. By the way Indigo, no corporation goes looking for tax losses; non cash tax write-offs yes, but not operating losses.
So, in my view, the Jays either go with the gusto, sign guys like Tiexiera and Hudson and promote like hell to increase ticket sales to the 3 mill.+ range and change some of the give away ( $2.00 Tuesdays become $5.00 Tuesdays) promotions. Hopefully, this results in significantly higher revenue, or they crater the team and trade for prospects to rebuild, like Oakland have done.
The other issue for Rogers is, do you really trust the same two guys to "go with the gusto" or crater the team who put you into this situation or replace them. Of course, Rogers do have a 3rd altenative, they can just keep writting checks so both Godfrey and JP can stay in their playpen. Those checks appear to me to be looking rather substanial in 2010 though.
It will be interesting to see whether a real decision on future direction is taken or whether Rogers just put their head in the sand and throw more money at it and keep this team muddling in mediocrity for the foreseeable future.
It's all well and good to fantisize about landing a player like Teixeira. However, his agent is Boras. And Boras is famous for getting blood from a stone – Exibit A – A Rod, or if you don't believe me, just ask anyone in Texas. Teixeira is one of the top 5 players in all of baseball and will be paid as such. He will get a minimum of $20M / yr.
Also, I've noticed that there have been a lot of "trade Overbay" comments in the last couple of days. Easier said than done. Where do you plan on trading him? The only teams in the AL that have less productive 1B are the cash strapped A's and Seatle. Is the NL any different? No. Only San Fran and Washington. So, if the Jays want to trade Overbay they only have 2 choices: Seatle, Washington, or San Fransisco.
Speaking of San Fran, I called it in the off-season and hindsight is 20/20, Rios for Lincecum would have been a S-T-E-A-L. Rios is having a very average year and Lincecum is busy reeling in a Cy Young. Now there is no way that SF would even consider dealing him, well, at least not until his arbitration years are over.
Back to the Jays. The reason that they are where they are is not because they have made mistakes signing certain players. It is because their farm system has failed to produce. They have been FORCED into spending money in the free agent market because their minor leaguers are not ready yet. Their track record for home grown tallent is brutal. Who have the Jays brought up through their farm system in the last 5 years? Rios, Hill, McGowan, Marcum, Snider?. Compare that to anyone else:
Red Sox – Pedroia, Youk, Pappelbon, Lester, Ellsbury, Lowrie? – note they traded away Hanley Ramirez
Mets – Wright, Maine, Reyes – note they traded away Kazmir
Phillies – Howard, Utley, Hammels
Rockies – Holliday, Atkins, Tulo, Jimanez, Hawpe, Francis, Stewart?
Rays – Crawford, Longoria, Upton, Shields, Price? – note they traded away D Young
D-Backs – Webb, Jackson, Upton, Young, Drew, Reynolds, Scherzer
Dodgers – Martin, Billingsley, Kemp, Ethier, Loney, Broxton, Kershaw
Brewers – Fielder, Braun, Hardy, Weeks, Gallardo, Hart
Twins – Morneau, Mauer, Liriano, Slowey, Baker
I could keep going, but I've made my point. It's not even close. You can clearly see that there is a huge difference between the Jays and these other teams. Some teams can and do buy championships (Yankees), but most of the teams that are good now, or will be in the next 2-3 years are good because they grew their talent in-house and signed and/or traded for the last piece or two of the puzzle. The Jays farm system is clearly the problem. They need to access whether the issue is drafting the wrong players, or not having the coaching staff in place to develop the players properly. Note that I am not saying that the Jays have the worst farm system in the league. Simply that they are lagging behind enough teams that a change is necessary.
I'd like to throw this one out there for you guys.
Why the heck doesn't the Jays try to go for a peskier style of play? Wells/Rios/Hill are about the only tangible base stealing threats at the moment. And at that, only Rios seems to run (and lets be honest, he's a bit of a bonehead on the basepaths). Rather than try to constantly land the big fish – why aren't we looking at people who role-play a bit better. Why aren't we looking for speed. Why aren't we looking for execution?
Reed Johnson (Enjoy the playoffs buddy, you deserve it) was the player I'm talking about – Mighty Joe Inglett is his current incarnation. Instead of aging sluggers and overpaid arms, lets go after people that fill our needs.
Shortstop for example. Johnny Mac is the man on D but can't hit a lick. Is there a middle ground there?
I like the idea of an Overbay / Rolen style corner infielder, but the doubles are meaningless without speed in front of them to score.
It feels like JP has an idea, incorporates it, but forgets to think about the knock on effect around the other players…Case in point. Frank Thomas can drive in runs, but everyone hitting behind him suffers because he can only advance base to base.
So what I'm putting to you guys is – can you folks think of some solid team players around the rest of the league who would fit this mold. I'd love to bash that one about for a while.
Rogers bought the Jays for 120mil in 2000, its now valued at 325 mil . My point was not that Rogers sought out a company to write off but maybe he isn't so concerned about the ticket revenue because it does give him a tax break, something all companies look for . The 1.5 mil loss in ticket revenue is not that staggering when the Jays still go up in value .
swagman ,
I agree and said last year Jays need to play more small ball . I actually think they would do better in the NL league
Stealing a base in T.O. is almost a criminal offence.Remember when JP first came here he did not like the running game and I still don't think he does,All you have to do is look at the players he has signed over the years.
This is the line up I would like to see in Toronto.[It will never happen]
Hudson SECOND
Johnson LF-DH
Wells CF-DH
Teixeira FIRST
Rios RF-DH
Rolen THIRD
Hill SHORT
Snider DH-RF
Barajas CATCHER
On the bench-Inglet-John MacDonald-Scuttaro-One of the young guns as the back up catcher
garry ,
I just saw your questions. I need to head back to work but I will think about them and try to give you my answers tonight …. Take care all and have a great day
My bet is the Jays go after Manny,The reason,The gate draw.
The only drawback is they will trade Rios or keep Snider in the minors or they may trade Lind.
Rogers himself does not run the Jays,He has a board of directors that make all the decisions.
They would not have upped the payroll if the team was not making money,Also he owns rogers center outright so the team pays no rent.And he got it cheap just like the team.
I think we will see a lot of inhouse changes after Godfrey is gone,I don't think the board is happy with the way Godfrey is running things,I can't be sure of all of this but it is my guess.
Welcome to my parlor said the spider to the fly,BWA HA HA HA.
This should be a great serries and we owe you bigtime for the asskickin the DEVILSOX gave us the last time we met.lol.
Marcum's having Tommy John surgery. Source: Bob McCown.
crap-he's gone until spring of 2010. I wonder if they rushed him back too quickly.
To be fair to Godfrey attendance has risen (albeit slightly) for 3 straight seasons and TV ratings continue to rise as well. I don't know what more they can ask from him but I don't know much about that stuff either.
On another note many people believe that if the decision is based on baseball only, J.P. stays but if it's based on P.R. as well he's gone. I'm indifferent about the whole thing. On the one hand I feel that on paper he has put a good team, Which is why for the most part I defend him. On the other I do feel where most of you are coming from, it's been 7 years and they haven't been near the playoffs.
I was very optimistic about this teams chances next year with or without J.P. but now with the news that Marcum will be gone for all of next year I am seriously concerned. When I first heard the news my immediate reaction was "fcuk" (great clothing brand). I think signing A.J. becomes even more of a priority now, with McGowan out untill May. This will likely take some cash out of the big bat search unfortunately though. Things suddenly look discouraging to me. It's probably too much to ask but Casey Janssen will have to pitch well as early as he can especially if he is going to be a starter.
It looks like downs will be called upon to be a starter.If so I don't mind because of Carlton a pitcher that came out of nowhere and can take Downs place as the 8th INN guy. Also Janssen could be back by late May.Purcey will have to get it together.One thing I find about this team is the pitchers seem to put it all together and I credit Arnsberg for I think he is a very good pitchen coach.
No matter who is the GM and providing they bring Cito back I think he will have a big say in who the Jays go after in the offseason if they go after anybody,
Then there is Dustin McGowan,If he comes back and his control is on they will be fine.
As for Marcum I think we all knew he was in trouble, all of us have been baseball fans for a lot of years and we have seen it all before so I don't think we were too surprised about his condition,He was an asset and he will be missed next year but they have a lot of depth in the pitchen department.
Hey, maybe lightning will strike twice in a row and two of Romero, Cecil, Wolfe and Jannsen will come through. Remember we would never have known how good Marcum and McGowan could be if it hadn't been for injuries to others.
The Rogers center holds about 45 to 50 thousand people.when the Jays open the season at home they fill the house,But after that they draw about 19 thousand fans per game.One of Godfreys jobs is to fill the stands and he can't do it.With 97 mil. per year the Jays should have been able to bring in some big name free agents that would draw the fans in.Now one thing for sure is the fans are in Toronto but there not going to the games.Godfrey was not a baseball man and JP had no experience and never should have been hired in the first place,But they thought Billy Beane taught him moneyball,Now why would Billy do something like that.my gate figures may be out a little.
Also when I said bring in free agents I did not mean hasbeens.
Attendance jumped in 2006, but then grew about 100 fans per game in 2007 and 2008 meaning it really levelled off. In the golden years we put 4 mill.+ in the stands, so fans do come when the team is winning.
I do think there's a fair amount of dillusionment with fans on the team because of JP, but there's been huge marketing and PR mistakes made over the last couple of years as well. Remember, this spring, Boston and NY fans got first dibs on tickets for games played here. Never before has a professional sports franchise given first right to tickets to the opposing team versus their own fans. It was the stupidist PR move I've ever seen and had to piss off a lot of fans.
The other thing that I think turned a number of fans away was Godfrey's aggressive non-smoking policy. This has got to be the only stadium in MLB, were you cannot exit the stadium to have a smoke and re-enter. No smoking inside the arena is acceptable and the law, but to not allow smokers to exit, have a smoke and come back in is stupidity and represents Godfrey's bleeding heart liberal views of life. 25% of Toronto's population smoke, so Godfey just eliminated 25% of his potential market. Brilliant move-DUH. I know 15-20 guys who have never been to another game since and used to go to 10-15 games per year.
With the Yanks opening their new stadium next year, they will spare no expense in putting a winner on the field. Sabathia and Burnett should both be in pin-stripes, unless the Bosox or Dogers out bid for one of the two. This leaves the Bosox, Rays, and Jays fighting for one play-off position. The Jays have no hope. We should not deulude oursevles to think otherwise. With regards to our rotation: Halliday, Purcey, Litsch, and two others. Next year will be the year that we will really start to feel the effect of a weak farm system. I would love to see the Jays move some current players, if possible, and load up on young talent. The time to do this was at the trade deadline, but JP must be excused for trying to save his job for yet another year.
I think the Jays will be fine with pitching next year – one of the better staffs in the AL again. Between Downs, Cecil, Janssen, Romero, Mills, Tallett, and others, they can find find two fine starters. I'm sure JP will try to sign a few low risk/high reward pitchers. They probably won't work out, but you never know when you're gonna catch lightning in a bottle.
My main concern is whether or not the hitters will return to where there supposed to be statiscally. If so, they'll be tough to beat. If not, it'll be 07 and 08 all over again. I say it's a 50% chance either way.


text:
Thank you for visiting Bret Kuhn Music!
We are very excited to launch our new Web site, and hope you will continue to check in with us as we grow, develop, and add more interactive features to the site.
Here, you'll learn how to purchase pre-arranged shows, or to hire Bret Kuhn to arrange a piece you have selected or write an original show for your group. You'll also find information on hiring Bret for clinics or consulting, and information on how you can own Brets' signature snare sticks.
Congratulations to Aimachi for their 3rd place win at the 2008 WGI Percussion Championship! Their show was entitled Drumroll, arranged by Bret Kuhn and Erik Johnson. Visual arranged by Michael Gaines and Tim Fairbanks.
Congratulations to LD Bell High School who was named the 2007 Bands of America Grand Nationals Champion for their performance of TRANSCENDents! They also won awards for Outstanding Music Performance and Outstanding Musical Effect.
Click here to view pictures from Brets' recent clinics.
Drumline from Truman State University in Kirksville, Missouri.
© 2007 Bret Kuhn Music

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You probably realize there are tax breaks related to your home, your charitable giving and your work—but you may be eligible for more than you know.
And then there are some deductions that could raise red flags for the IRS and get your return kicked back to you—or worse, trigger an audit.
Two simple rules that can save a lot of hassle are (1) Don't be sloppy; take your time to avoid careless mistakes; and (2) Think like the IRS, which likes matching numbers. If your mortgage deduction claim is different than what the bank reported, for example, red flags will rise.
(Read More: How to Avoid Identity Theft at Tax Time)
Most of the guidance below about maximizing deductions while avoiding the pitfalls is for those who itemize, so here's one tip from Jim Smith, a Dallas CPA, for those who take the standard deduction: The state tax refund you got last year, if you did not itemize, is not taxable income, so don't report it as such—never mind the Form 1099-G. The federal tax refund is what you overpaid last year and not taxable either.
Home: Mortgages and Refinancing
If you're like most Americans, mortgage interest is the most significant deduction on your tax return. For many, it's the break that makes it worthwhile to itemize rather than take the standard deduction, and it's very popular.


text:
Big data, Karl Rove and DrunkNateSilver prove a data quality point
If you follow the same bloggers, tweeters and publications that I do, after last week you could be forgiven for looking forward to the next four years of the Nate Silver administration No one has probably done more for nerd-dom since Lewis Skolnick and Gilbert Lowell. Although the Harvard Business Review's decision to nominate the data scientist as the sexiest job of the 21st century certainly did its part.
Still, is there a clearer sign of instant celebrity in the modern era than inspiring your own parody Twitter handle? @DrunkNate Silver is pretty funny (though a warning, it's a bit bawdy if that bothers some folks).
It's a good story, and a good headline, tied to one of the world's biggest events, but I have to say I find much of it over the top. I saw one story claiming Nate Silver's victory over punditry. I guess that makes sense if you think people watch pundits for actual election predictions. Karl Rove's meltdown on election night over Ohio would indicate anyone looking for accurate predictions from these folks aren't getting the measured analysis they hoped.
I'd argue that people watch pundits for entertainment, not measured analysis. Look, statistical analysis has penetrated the sports world pretty pervasively — far quicker than in a lot of business segments. After all, Billy Beane, the General Manager of the Oakland A's, with no other business background is a member of the NetSuite board of directors. Silver himself started out by developing the PECOTA system, to predict baseball players' hitting and pitching performance. But people are still listening to sports talk radio and they're not discussing statistics. I live in Boston, believe me I know.
Another story in Slate threw a little cold water on the idea of Silver as a towering genius, and it makes a good point. Silver didn't win the election, he just predicted it with incredible accuracy. And he did that using polling numbers that have been around for years. Obama won the election. With a great deal of help from his own number crunchers as this Time piece points out.
Political campaigns have long been at the forefront of data mining and predictive analysis. By most accounts, the Obama campaign has been particularly good at it. Stories about couples who voted early only to later get a phone call asking if their son had voted yet are a pretty good indication Obama's campaign was well organized. That is something for business to strive for. I wish I could get through an IVR system without having to enter my account information three times.That makes headlines indicating that Silver provided some 'big data' lessons none too surprising. The fact that Silver got the election right and a bunch of right-leaning pundits got it wrong may be a vindication of big data for the enterprise, but I think it points to another lesson and that's one of data quality.Silver's trick wasn't collecting election data and running it through a supercomputer. It was finding the right polls and weighting them according to accuracy, which seems to me much more about the quality of his data than a dive into big data analytics. Data quality has traditionally been given short shrift when popular technology trends like CRM and BI emerge only to rear its ugly head after the project has been rolled out. That is a lesson businesses would be wise to take from this election.
Dreamforce reignites the CMO vs. CIO debateBusiness applications
Last week, Salesforce.com released its plans for the Marketing Cloud, a new identity management offering and a Dropbox-like feature for the enterprise.
Yet, one item that garnered much of the attention at the annual Dreamforce user conference was IT analyst firm Gartner's report that by 2017 the CMO will spend more on IT than the CIO. Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff mentioned it several times during the conference. In fact, Benioff thinks Gartner may be too conservative.
"Personally I think it's going to happen faster than that," Benioff said in a question and answer session with the press. "I think Gartner is maybe underestimating."
That sentiment is not surprising given how much Salesforce.com spends on marketing itself, not to mention its recent acquisitions of BuddyMedia and Radian6. Still, it's clear Benioff believes in the trend.
"In many ways the CMOs are becoming the number two officers in the company right behind the CEO," he said. "They're flying these expensive jet fighters and they need a cockpit and they don't have that. We bought a billion dollars worth of companies to give it a go."
But do others agree? Clearly there are doubts. Frank Scavo, of Constellation Research, voiced his skepticism on Twitter and found some fellow doubters. Barb Darrow at Gigaom ponders whether putting the CMO in charge of IT is really a good thing.
There certainly are some factors putting pressure on marketing departments to modernize and automate, trends Benioff was happy to note during his keynote address. For example, according to research firm IDC's worldwide collaborative applications forecast for 2011 to 2015, there will be a 47% annual growth in spending on social networking. According to an IBM survey of CEOs, social networking was cited as the most important way to connect with customers, and companies are having 150 million conversations a day with customers on social networks.
GE, which has invested heavily in Salesforce.com and its Chatter collaboration tool, would seem to agree with Benioff and Gartner.
"It's already happened," Ian Forrest, vice president of marketing for GE Capital, said during the conference. "The way I look at it is the CIO and CTO had everything because they owned the systems, the platform, the business rules, the logic, everything. And if you look at it today, today all the business rules and logic sit with the marketing teams. I just think it's a trend that's going to continue because the business owner now doesn't have the gate of IT to develop the customer."
Forrest, a marketer with a budget of his own, doesn't want to wait for IT anymore.
"Logically as a marketer, you're going to be thinking: How do I go faster? How do we go deeper? And you're going to be a lot more reactive because you don't have to deal with IT," he said.
It's not like Salesforce.com is alone in chasing this trend, of course. IBM is hoping to appeal to marketing departments after buying Unica, Coremetrics and Cognos. Oracle, for its part, spent a reported $300 million on Vitrue and more on Collective Intellect. You now can count Adobe among that crew as well.
Whether CMOs ultimately outspend CIOs or not, it's clear IT needs to take notice. As Michael Hickins points out about Salesforce.com in the Wall Street Journal:
The company's customers may end up paying a price for its success. Salesforce.com may be reducing the overall effectiveness of its services, as its emphatic outreach to executives outside the IT department threatens to cause a fracturing of IT services within organizations, reducing the potential effectiveness of each of those individual applications.
Salesforce, with its emphasis on social software, is also increasingly emerging as a potential threat to the influence of CIOs. The vendor is brazenly circumventing IT and speaking directly to CEOs and CMOs. Burberry CEO Angela Ahrendts, GE CEO Jeff Immelt and GE CMO Beth Comstock, all actively endorsed Salesforce during this week's conference.
Benioff acknowledged the challenge his customers may face with the rapid releases during his Q&A session.
"This is probably more technology than customers can assimilate," he said.
If they can, it's going to take both the CIO and the CMO to make it happen.
M2M: A tactical take on managing 'big data'? Oracle, SAP and Salesforce take note
It took Isilon, EMC's big data storage division, three months of development and a price tag in the "high five figures" to integrate its own internal Salesforce.com customer service application with Axeda's machine-to-machine (M2M) application.
But it's been worth it, according to Jason DePardo, director of technical support at Isilon.
DePardo outlined the project at a session during the Axeda Connexion conference being held in Cambridge, Mass. this week. (Axeda's decision to misspell connection in its signature event remains one of those corporate branding moves I will never quite understand). The event lured me, as well as a number of local industry analysts — some of whom elected to skip to the SuccessFactors conference on the other coast — to Cambridge to see what's happening in the world of M2M. We weren't the only ones intrigued, so were SAP, Oracle and Salesforce.com, who are among the sponsors and presenters at the event.
The promise of enterprise applications and big data is an intriguing one and M2M certainly has a place in that conversation. According to Axeda CEO Jack Sweeney, M2M is on track to make 3.5 billion connections by 2015 and 15 billion by 2020. There was however, refreshingly little use of the overhyped "big data" term at the event.
Instead there was some concrete discussion of bringing M2M data into business applications. EMC's Isilon, for example, is using Axeda to send product information directly from their customer's storage arrays into support cases in Salesforce.com.
In the midst of rapid growth before it was acquired by EMC in 2010 for $2.5 billion, Isilon saw its business expand even faster once the deal went through. Its caseload jumped from 3,000 support cases per month in January of 2011 to 6,000 cases per month a year later.
To cope with the onslaught, Isilon launched SupportIQ, a free product for its customers using Axeda's M2M technology.
Prior to the initiative, support cases could take up to days to even get started. Isilon ships out a proprietary hardware and operating system in its storage arrays. Yet once it's shipped, the company didn't know how the customer had configured the array, how many nodes they had and other details relevant to solving a customer's issue. When an issue arose, customers would have to discuss their configuration and run diagnostic scripts for Isilon's support engineers.
Sometimes those requests would come in after the customer contact had left for the day. Then the diagnostic upload might fail the next day. It could sometimes be two days before support techs even began looking at the problem. Plus, when customers called back a few months later with a new support ticket, they'd have to repeat all their information again.
With the Axeda-Salesforce integration, support engineers can run those diagnostic scripts right from a button within Salesforce.
"The M2M technology has taken the process of starting the support case from hours, possibly days to literally how long it takes to run the script," DePardo said. "We're not constantly asking them, 'hey can you run this command for us.'"
While the Salesforce-Axeda integration was a customer service initiative, it's had an impact on sales as well. For example, one of the alerts M2M forwards to Isilon is when a customer reaches 80% of their storage capacity. Right now there's no formal process for taking action on that information, support just forwards it onto sales, but that's something Isilon is investigating.
"When we sell to a new customer almost undoubtedly their data needs grow and they are a follow on customer for us," DePardo said. "If they had a good support experience it makes the sales easy."
To date, Isilon has about 30% of its install base running SupportIQ, though 50% have the ability to enable SupportIQ.
"Some choose not to for security purposes or more than likely it's an education process," DePardo said, adding that one summer project for the interns at the company is to call Isilon's customer base to educate them about SupportIQ.
In the meantime, Isilon has been able to handle the influx of support cases without adding significant headcount and hopes to further decrease the time it takes to close out a ticket by adding features like the ability to gather data on the node configuration from within Salesforce.com.
Of course, not all projects go that easily. I spoke with one Axeda customer at lunch who asked not to be named. They've put their M2M project on hold for an issue familiar to anyone running enterprise applications – they're data was so dirty that the insights they got couldn't be acted upon. Multiple names on one customer account or outdated information meant the machine data coming into their ERP system couldn't be addressed.
There was a fair amount of excitement around M2M, particularly from Emily Nagle Green, chairman emeritus of The Yankee Group and the keynote speaker at the show, who sees M2M as more than just machines but connecting to things – everyday things. She discusses that in the video below.
Yet, as exciting as things like big data and M2M may be you still need to do the dirty work, as in cleaning your dirty data.
Is SAP leaving ERP behind?
In-memory! Cloud! Mobile!
There's no question what the dominant themes were at last week's Sapphire conference. They were writ large across the Orange County Convention Center and repeated mantra-like from the keynote stage.
Far less time was spent addressing SAP's core ERP business. In fact, when key executives did discuss "the core" it was to explain how they were not going to change it or disrupt their customer base.
That stands to reason, of course. Most industry observers will tell you that cloud, mobile and — maybe not in-memory, but certainly analytics and faster analytics, the core value proposition for HANA — are the key trends moving forward. A show like SapphireNow, is typically for roadmaps and grand vision.
Besides, co-CEO Jim Hagemann Snabbe did offer a few promises for enhancements to SAP's core ERP suite.
"We'll pay special attention to a new user experience for the business suite," he said during his keynote address. "It's time we get modern with interaction for our users, creating intuitive and consumer-like experiences."
Yet, a few statements from SAP's senior leadership should certainly have SAP customers questioning what happens to the core ERP product while SAP is focused on in-memory, cloud and mobile.
Take co-CEO Jim McDermott's statement from the post keynote QandA with press and analysts:
"On the implementation and ready-to-run Rapid Deployment Solutions, we view the partners consuming much more of the standard ERP business of SAP," he said. "Much more of that business will go to the partners. Their networks are more suited for that. We want to focus on mobile, in-memory, analytics and the cloud. We want to move our best people to these high value solutions and then teach the ecosystem what we do and how we do it."
Those looking for help from SAP with the Business Suite had better get friendly with their partner instead.
In fact, Snabbe and McDermott both made the case for cloud applications being fundamentally different from on-premise. While that's partly a shot at Oracle and it's either/or Fusion Application strategy, it also paves the way for a new wave of applications, led by SuccessFactors CEO Lars Dalgaard.
"I think it's a fundamental mistake to take an application designed for on premise consumption and just move it to the cloud," Snabbe said. "It will not give you the opportunity to scale and be profitable in the cloud. It's the easiest way to be fast to the cloud, but it's not going to bring you a successful business."
Indeed, Snabbe essentially dismissed a question from Foote Partners' David Foote, who said his research showed that pay for those with SAP skills tanked in the last quarter.
"The number of people deploying ERP is not going to increase rapidly," Snabbe replied. "Analytics is still growing rapidly, so is the cloud. Maybe it's more about defining SAP in its new categories when you look at the total need for skills, not just ERP. Those skills are rare and we are doing everything we can to expand the skills in those roles."
SAP's co-founder, Hasso Plattner, who has been laser-focussed on HANA for years, also gave a clue about the future of application development at SAP.
"We can write applications that are fundamentally different than the ones we have," he said. "SAP is not continuing to grind away on what we did 15 years ago."
In a highly technical address, Plattner explained that SAP's HANA in-memory technology can bring massive enhancements to OLAP that do not carry over to the same extent for OLTP.
"The difference is OLTP systems do single selects, mostly single selects, and OLAP systems do group selects," he said. "Single selects you cannot make much faster. Any database with a decent cache is doing this today. We cannot make it much faster. That is why OLTP can only be made faster to a certain degree."
Clearly, new analytical applications running on HANA, mobile and in the cloud — likely all at once — are the direction SAP is headed.
Of course, this does not mean the company is abandoning its core customers and all the revenue they provide. In fact, Plattner made that very case. He promised SAP would not build separate Business Suite functionality for HANA.
It does, however, provide some guidance on where SAP is headed and who's handling and innovating on the Business Suite moving forward.
SAP's cloud chief slams Business ByDesign approach, poses cloud alternative
Lars Dalgaard, CEO of SuccessFactors, said this of SAP's flagship SaaS offering during a question and answer session with press and analysts:
"Business ByDesign is a powerhouse, it just is," he said. "But it hasn't been marketed right, it hasn't been positioned right or explained right and people haven't been trained right. There isn't much I can say that's been done right."
Dalgaard intends to change that. Pundits at the SapphireNow show here in Orlando are wondering how he's going to change the culture as well. He's taken up the customer mantra of co-CEOs Jim Hagemann Snabe and Bill McDermott.
"At SAP we've had too much PhD and too little customer," Dalgaard said.
Business ByDesign will still be a sold as a suite to SMBs and divisions of larger enterprises, but the future of cloud applications at SAP is a modular one.
In his keynote address at Sapphire, Dalgaard identified a four-prong approach to selling cloud apps: customers, people, money, suppliers.
The customer-focused cloud applications are already out with an upgrade to Sales OnDemand and the availability of a new social media tool (or the SAP Social Customer Engagement OnDemand solution if you're, you know, not into the whole brevity thing). The people applications will be based mostly on SuccessFactors' human capital management portfolio and was highlighted by the release today of a version of SAP's cloud-based payroll system that integrates with SuccesFactor's Employee Central. Supplier applications will be built off of SAP's Sourcing OnDemand.
And the money applications?
Those will be based on existing work done by the Business ByDesign team, as well as new work being done by the developers at SAP who brought you R/3 and by developers at SuccessFactors, according to Dalgaard.
"It's SAP's God-given right to build financials in the cloud," Dalgaard said. "It's a very serious, very deep product. It's a tiger in a cage. Today we let it out."
The core difference is that unlike Business ByDesign, SAP's cloud applications will be sold individually. That, Dalgaard said, is the way people buy clouds.
"They wanted to boil the ocean," Dalgaard said. "The market wasn't ready for a boiled ocean."
If that sounds familiar, that's because SAP had already started down that path with Career OnDemand, Sales OnDemand and Travel OnDemand. It's also the approach Oracle has taken with its Fusion Applications.
The link there is John Wookey, who in the merry-go-round of Silicon Valley, was head of development for Fusion Apps before moving to SAP to help build the OnDemand apps there, and is now at Salesforce.com, heading up application development. It will be interesting to see what comes from Salesforce.com two years from now when Wookey has moved on again.
Dalgaard vowed to continue to invest in Business ByDesign, but made it very clear that if it, or any other platform doesn't perform, he's ready to throw it out.
"If it's not working, it's gone," he said. "I'm the first one to call out where the problems I find are."
Given SAP's checkered history with ByDesign, or its first OnDemand CRM applications for that matter, the market awaits the outcome.
Can SAP keep its promises of database dominance?
You can say this for SAP: It doesn't lack confidence.
Its track record of living up to lofty promises, however, is a bit spotty.
The company basically laid it all out on the table this week when it proclaimed its intention to take over the database market. During the press conference detailing its many initiatives — of which database dominance was only a part — CTO Vishal SIkka promised that SAP would become the fastest growing database vendor in the industry. Of course, that's not much of a claim considering where SAP's database business was two years ago. Are they factoring in the Sybase business in that growth model?
SAP has been a little more boastful about its database ambitions recently. At an analyst event in Boston last winter, it promised to be "the number two database vendor by 2015."
The question remains whether SAP can pull that off.
SAP's press conference put me in mind of a recent post from Tom Wailgum over at ASUGnews who did some nice reporting by digging through SAP's year-end Form 20-F document.
Among the interesting nuggets:
"We want to become a profitable market leader in cloud computing, generating $2.6 billion in revenue in this segment by 2015." (No. 7)
So, by 2015 SAP aims to be the No. 2 database vendor and a market leader in cloud computing with $2.6 billion in revenue. Those are lofty goals and lofty goals are good, but what is SAP's track record in keeping its promises?
Well, in 2006 SAP's then-CEO Henning Kagermann said that by 2010, two-thirds of the installed base would be using enterprise SOA. "Using enterprise SOA" is a tough one to define so we'll pass there.
How about in 2007, when SAP vowed to have 100,000 customers by 2010? That claim was made largely in hopes that Business ByDesign would pump up the SMB user base. In fact, SAP also pledged that Business ByDesign would bring in $1 billion by 2010. SAP ultimately fell short, scaling back on Business ByDesign as it ran into bugs and issues making it profitable enough. And the customer numbers?
Based on the Form 20-F, SAP now has 183,000 customers.
SAP actually put forth a lot of goals for 2010. In 2008, then CEO Leo Apotheker said "all customers will have upgraded to ERP 6.0 or the latest Business Suite releases."
That one didn't work out so well. According to the SearchSAP.com 2010 Reader Survey, 48% of respondents were still on R/3. By the 2012 survey, two years after Apotheker's target date, the number has improved. Sixty-six percent of respondents had moved to ERP 6.0, 18% were still on R/3 4.7 or earlier and 12% were on ERP 5.0.
For most customers, whether SAP winds up the No. 1, No.2 or No. 6 database vendor probably doesn't matter a whole lot, as long as they get the kind of response times and value that SAP is promising with HANA. Similarly, whether SAP becomes the "fastest growing" database vendor probably doesn't matter a whole lot to SAP customers either, outside of the dollars many of them will be contributing to make that happen.
Still, it's always good to bring some perspective to boastful software executives.
Microsoft preps cloud ERP, adds to its own SAP deployment, ponders HR
Microsoft applications executives are out on the road this month, getting word out ahead of the company's Convergence business applications show in Houston in March.
The word, apparently, is cloud.
Microsoft is scheduled to release its first ERP product for the cloud this year with Dynamics NAV. It will be followed by the company's other ERP products in the Dynamics line — AX and GP.
Mike Ehrenberg, a Microsoft technical fellow, explained the company's approach to cloud ERP in a visit to TechTarget's offices last week. As with CRM, Microsoft will offer one code base, but with the ability to deploy it on-premises, partner-hosted and Microsoft-hosted.
According to Ehrenberg, when it comes to ERP, choice is even more important than it is with CRM.
"SMBs prefer to deal with partners, enterprises want to deal directly with Microsoft," he said.
Additionally, any company moving to ERP in the cloud will have to do so carefully. Microsoft for its own part is developing AX in key areas for its own business operations. The company runs SAP, but is "extending AX around the edges," Ehrenberg said, building an expense management system.
"Horizontal workloads need that sort of approach," he said. "You're in a better position to deal with change. We'll go after one functional area at a time."
Moreover, re-architecting Microsoft's suite of ERP applications from premises-based software, to software that can run in multiple environments is one the company is ready for thanks to its experience with Dynamics CRM, which was initially developed as an on-premises-only application.
"We've been down this road before," Ehrenberg said. "Now, CRM was before Azure. On ERP it's more important to go on Azure first."
Of course, Microsoft has not ported its CRM product over to the Azure platform yet either.
Ultimately, Microsoft's Azure ID module will allow users to access Office 365 and CRM, as well as federate the cloud with on-premises deployments.
"We live in a cross-platform world," Ehrenberg said.
Microsoft's cloud initiatives will also be multitenant. However, it's not a customer concern so much as an analyst and reporter concern, according to Ehrenberg.
"The only time someone asks us if we're multitenant is if someone tells them to," he said, calling multitenancy "a grossly misunderstood topic."
That may be changing. In a recent story on cloud-integration, SearchDataManagement Senior News Editor Mark Brunelli spoke with the American Automobile Association of Northern California, Nevada and Utah's (AAA NCNU) application integration head, who insisted on multitenancy in his cloud integration platform. From Brunelli's story:
AAA NCNU wanted a "truly multi-tenant" cloud-based integration tool-a single version of the application that serves multiple clients-but IBM Cast Iron and Jitterbit didn't fit the bill, according to Kirk Heughens, the auto club's application integration leader.
"We were looking for a true cloud offering," Heughens said. "A lot of vendors nowadays say they are cloud [but actually] have multiple installations of their software out there in the cloud, so it's really not truly multi-tenant."
Most customers may not be concerned with multitenancy but they're definitely interested in what it may mean for them — lower costs through economies of scale and quick and easy deployments.
Microsoft can provide those things and in fact is already pushing heavily on price in the CRM market, under pricing Salesforce.com with Dynamics CRM Online.
In fact, Azure will change the game by redifining tenancy, for example multiple tenants at the operating system level, Ehrenberg said.
"We're going to do things differently," he said.
Microsoft sits out the cloud HR buying spree
Meanwhile, Microsoft's competitors in the enterprise marketplace are making big investments in the cloud and human resources with SAP's $3.9 billion acquisition of SuccessFactors and Oracle's $1.9 billion acquisition of Taleo.
"The prices are stunning. We certainly looked at those things," Ehrenberg said, noting that the two companies will have a lot of integration work ahead of them. "Over time you have to have a common architecture. It's important [the applications] talk to one another."
Cross platform, cross device
Microsoft is also promoting the fact that its applications will run across devices and operating systems. It's already previewed the Dynamics CRM release which will run on iPhone, iPad, Android, Windows and BlackBerry devices and on Windows, iOS, OSX, Android as well as Firefox, Safari and Chrome in addition to Internet Explorer.
"The best experience will be on Windows," Ehrenberg said. "We'll be good on the others."
SaaS dominates the cloud
Despite the hype around private clouds, Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) and Platform as a Service (PaaS), most organizations are focused squarely on Software as a Service (SaaS) — if they're in the cloud at all.
Results from the TechTarget 2012 IT Priorities survey indicate that SaaS is the predominant use for cloud computing – by a long shot.
Of the respondents using cloud computing in 2012, 55% are using Software as a Service, far outdistancing Storage as a Service, the next highest response at 35%. For comparison, 31% had plans for IaaS, 28% plans for disaster recovery/business continuity in the cloud, 27% for PaaS, and 21% had plans for hybrid cloud integration.
The online survey polled 2,642 global respondents, 1,308 in North America, at the end of 2011.
Rick Hassman, director of applications with Pella Corp., the Pella, Iowa window manufacturer, is among those who have stepped into the cloud with SaaS. Running some applications in the cloud via the SaaS model made perfect sense, but moving other core IT functions there — well that he's not so sure about.
Pella, an Oracle applications shop, runs the E-Business Suite as its core ERP with the SaaS-based CRM OnDemand product in some sales groups and Oracle CRM in another.
"Based on the investment we've put into the infrastructure, the network, the redundancy, the disaster recovery, I would say our core strategy moving forward would still be to host this stuff [ourselves]," Hassman said. But CRM made sense because, in Pella's case, it's not heavily transactional and most of its users are remote. "We felt we could integrate it and we didn't have the inherent skill set in house."
Pella is far from alone in this thinking.
The TechTarget 2012 IT priorities survey showed SaaS is becoming more pervasive throughout the enterprise. On-premises software/hardware and on-premises appliances remain the primary deployment models at 58% and 23% respectively, but 35% of respondents said they would use a SaaS deplyoment model in 2012. Only 16% planned to run their software on a public cloud infrastructure and 26% had plans to run their software on a private cloud. Just 17% had plans for mobile deployments in 2012.
Of those SaaS adopters, 57% said that the end user population will be using one or more cloud apps next year. Additionally, roughly a third said that as much as 40% of their end user population or more will use cloud apps this year.
Other research has shown that the spending is following SaaS. According to Gartner, vendors with SaaS models for enterprise applications brought in $9.2 billion in 2011-that's up 16% percent from 2009 when Gartner sized the market at $7.9 billion. Additionally, momentum shows no signs of slowing as SaaS and cloud continued to converge in 2011. Gartner predicts a more than 16% growth rate for 2011 with SaaS revenue to hit $10.7 billion.
SaaS's dominance of cloud computing is not particularly surprising given its maturity relative to other approaches like IaaS and PaaS. It can serve as a gateway to other cloud-based initiatives, according to Jeff Kaplan, managing principal at THINKStrategies, a Wellesley, Mass.-based consultancy.
"It's the success of SaaS that opened the door to the broader idea of cloud computing," he said.
Looking at the evolution of SaaS, it was typically brought into an organization by a renegade user, like a sales manager who bought a few seats of Salesforce.com, or some other sort of productivity-oriented application, Kaplan said. Once they found success, SaaS often found its way into the rest of the organization, with users looking at front and back office tools. From there, organizations often began thinking of other cloud-based applications that meet their industry requirements.
"Then IT takes a look and says, 'maybe we can get them to work for us as well,'" Kaplan said. "That's where storage as a service and infrastructure as a service comes in."
A company's size, age and infrastructure clearly play a part in their willingness to adopt SaaS or other cloud technologies. As Hassman mentioned, Pella has to consider the investments it's already made in infrastructure.
"The more established companies who have a tremendous amount invested in infrastructure are less inclined to give those up and migrate over to a SaaS app unless they feel confident they can do it with little pain," Kaplan said.
While its CRM OnDemand deployment has helped Pella prepare itself for the idea of other cloud initiatives, SaaS is no panacea.
Is the business applications market coming down to Salesforce, Oracle and SAP?
Recent events suggest that Oracle, SAP and Salesforce.com will soon be all that's left of the enterprise software vendors – at least when it comes to the cloud.
An examination of recent announcements from the three demonstrates that the business applications giants are investing heavily in the cloud and competitors better watch out.
Current and potential customers of SAP, Oracle or Salesforce should be also concerned because consolidation is seldom a good thing for buyers.
After the last several weeks, it certainly looks like these three vendors will be the ones reigning over applications in the cloud. We start with Oracle.
Oracle acquires RightNow
Oracle has gobbled up plenty of cloud-based application vendors over the years (and plenty of other vendors as well) but its acquisition of RightNow brought a competitor of Salesforce.com's Service Cloud in-house. The addition of the customer service offering also served to help round out Oracle's cloud-based CRM portfolio.
Competition aside, what's also interesting is that RightNow's architecture is not, by most definitions multi-tenant. As Oracle moves its Fusion Applications — and subsequent acquisitions to the cloud — it's clear it's focused on virtualization as the underlying architecture and not multi-tenancy. Why does that matter to enterprise software buyers? In general multi-tenancy creates economies of scale, at least some of which get passed on to customers. Oracle does not seem interested in that.
Salesforce.com releases the Social Marketing Cloud
Perhaps the most interesting tidbit from Salesforce.com's Cloudforce event in New York last week was CEO Marc Benioff's aside during a press QandA about Oracle, multitenancy and their product line. Benioff, taking great pleasure in tweaking his rival in Redmond Shores, pointed to a fundamental difference in the competitors' approaches to cloud computing.
"We heard this week– now this is just something I heard — that Oracle is discontinuing Oracle CRM OnDemand and shutting down that organization and that sales force and moving everyone onto Fusion, which is not a multi-tenant system," he said.
Meanwhile, Benioff continued to preach the gospel of the social enterprise with the release of the Social Marketing Cloud (Paul Greenberg has a pretty good critique of the strategy). That line of business is based on Salesforce.com's acquisition of Radian6, a onetime independent cloud vendor. In fact, Salesforce.com has bought up more than a few independent SaaS vendors to add to its suite. That's likely the fate for many rising SaaS companies– getting acquired by one of the new big three.
Which brings us to…
SAP to buy SuccesFactors for $3.4 billion
Compared to SAP's acquisition of BusinessObjects for $6.8 billion, the purchase of on demand talent management software SuccessFactors over the weekend seems not nearly as big a deal. But as co-CEO Bill McDermott said on the call with reporters, "we will become the No. 1 business software company in the world in the cloud. It's only a question of what year."
Clearly the race is on to move existing apps to the cloud (Fusion Apps); build new ones (Salesforce.com's Chatter, SAP's Business ByDesign); buy up what's already doing well (RightNow, SuccessFactors); and stake out positions (multi-tenant vs. single tenant). And, as Oracle and SAP are seeking to become more like Salesforce.com, Salesforce.com is doing its part to be more like premise-based enterprise software, offering an enterprise license agreement and a database residency option for customers that absolutely, positively can't let some data leave their home.
What about the others?
Of course, those three are not the only companies selling enterprise software.
I suppose apologies are due to Microsoft, which has a competitive cloud-based CRM offering and is scheduled to release its Dynamics NAV ERP application on SQL Azure in 2012. But in July, there was plenty of concern that Azure is not ready to run ERP and NAV is a newer, more Web-enabled application. Moving Dynamics GP (Great Plains) and AX (Axapta) and their client-server code bases could prove a more daunting challenge. We'll hold off on Microsoft.
(UPDATE: one day after publishing this post, Josh Greenberg at EAC made a pretty good case for Microsoft joining this list thanks to some cross-company synergies)
What about Infor? Judging from Infor CEO (and former Oracle CEO) Charles Phillips' appearance with Benioff in New York, it's clear the Salesforce.com platform is their cloud platform of choice while Infor services its existing premises-based customers itself.
Bottom line for buyers?
What does that mean for enterprise software buyers in the long run? Buying cloud-based apps means savings on hardware and maintenance and, while calculations differ, generally appears cheaper on a per user basis. How long will that last? Doug Henschen at InformationWeek lays it out pretty explicitly in his coverage of the SAP news:
What's more, cloud apps vendors earn notoriously slim margins. SAP had to reassure financial analysts that cost synergies and growing scale driven by cross selling would improve SuccessFactor's profit picture. The company lost $12.5 million on $205.9 million in revenue last year.
As Oracle, SAP and Salesforce increasingly compete with packaged cloud applications, they as well as a host of other companies are also pushing hard on the PaaS front, bringing a new dimension to the ages-old build vs. buy dilemma.
Think another vendor should be included? Make your case below.
Oracle-RightNow: Expert reactions and the future of the Cloud Services Agreement
There's been no shortage of takes on Oracle's acquisition of RightNow Technologies.
Opinions about the motivation and the market impact run the gamut.
Mike Fauscette sees it as way for Oracle to bolster its recently-released Public Cloud initiative.
He writes:
Oracle's Public Cloud offering, up to this announcement, was presumed to be composed of existing Oracle products including Fusion Applications, but clearly now Oracle plans a more aggressive move into the SaaS apps space.
R Wang sees some merit to that rationale, but cautions that RightNow, not being truly multi-tenant and therefore not truly SaaS, will require Oracle to deliver a multi-tenant version of Fusion Middleware. And, like many others, Wang saw the move as partly a competitive play against Salesforce.com, but also a longer-term customer experience management move. RightNow has for years given up calling itself CRM and instead focused on branding itself as customer experience management technology.
Wang writes:
Social business, online experience optimization, and gamification represent huge holes in Oracle's product portfolio. RightNow brings tremendous amounts of thought leadership to the table should Oracle retain the product teams. More importantly, the SMB focus will help Oracle bring in a new customer base.
Phil Wainwright, on the other hand, rejects the idea that Oracle bought RightNow as a reaction to Salesforce.com's acquisition of Assistly. He sees it as Oracle buying up the SaaS old guard, and offers a lengthy and well-documented take on the multi-tenancy vs. SaaS argument.
Wainwright writes:
The choice of RightNow sends further signals about the kind of cloud vendor Oracle will prefer to acquire. Over the years, RightNow has had more than a few critics of its SaaS model, which has been much closer to Oracle's notion of hosting customers in clustered 'pods' of servers than more purist definitions of multi-tenancy (of which there are many). RightNow's variety of SaaS model is more prevalent than you'd believe from listening to the hype that comes from the industry. There are large numbers of vendors with similar architectures, and it's a tough path they've chosen. As time goes on, I suspect they'll find it harder and harder to compete against more technologically and economically agile vendors that more effectively leverage true cloud architectures.
Meanwhile, Beagle Research's Denis Pombriant offers a similar reaction to Wang's, seeing the long-term potential for customer experience management.
Pombriant writes:
Seriously though, Oracle, ATG and RightNow might be a thing in the future. Multi-channel communication combined with e-commerce outreach could be very important. Add to this Oracle's success in what it has called clienteling (sp?) in which store sales associates carry mobile devices that can orchestrate customer centric shopping, and you might see a pattern. If the customer can't come to the store, perhaps the store will come to the customer.
The ATG connection is an interesting one. It got relatively little attention in the marketplace when it happened and Oracle's CRM executives have cited it repeatedly as a differentiator. Seen through the lens of IBM's Smarter Commerce push, in which IBM is combining its own acquisitions of Sterling Commerce, Unica, Coremetrics and SPSS, software buyers might actually have the luxury of pitting Oracle against IBM once again.
Forrester's Kate Leggett wonders how Oracle will rectify all the overlapping functionality.
She writes:
Oracle has many overlapping and competing assets for CRM and customer service as well as for point solutions (e.g., email, chat, and knowledge management). Oracle must position RightNow as a unique offering in its current solution portfolio and must clearly message and steer customers to the right solution for their particular business need (for example, if I am a customer needing knowledge management, do I buy InQuira from Oracle or RightNow from Oracle? What about a chat solution? Do I buy InstantService from ATG/Oracle or from RightNow or the Oracle product?).
Of course people were posing those same questions about PeopleSoft CRM, and Siebel. The answers remain elusive.
Leggett raised another interesting dilemma, that of clashing corporate culture. Normally, I wouldn't put much stock clashing cultures. They're part of acquisitions, people meld or move on, sometimes the acquiring company changes up. Yet in this instance, the two companies could not be more different — at least based on public perception.
What I wonder is, what happens to the RightNow Cloud Services Agreement? Think Oracle will continue with sales based on a three-year price commitment plus a three-year renewal price cap? What about "pools of capacity" similar to wireless rollover minutes? Ramping licenses up based on seasonal demand?
One need only to look at Mark Fontecchio's reporting on SearchOracle.com to see questions about Oracle's commitment to support, Oracle's tactics when it comes to license audits, or its less-than-customer-friendly contract negotiation practices to find the likely answer to those questions.
Perhaps one of the most interesting revelations in the wake of the acquisition is the re-surfacing of an October 2010 interview with RightNow CEO Greg Gianforte on BusinessCloud9. It seems Gianforte had his own issues with Oracle licensing.
"Let me tell you about Oracle," says Gianforte. "We needed a new accounting system. The one we had was at end of life so we set out to procure a new one. There are really not that many options out there. That German company that makes accounting systems was probably too big for us, so we had a shortlist of Oracle and NetSuite. Now I didn't trust Oracle as far as I could throw a stick! We try to keep our data centres an Oracle-free environment."
In fact, RightNow had purchased some Oracle software the previous year, he recalled, but found that in order to scale, it was necessary to put it onto 30 servers. That resulted in a visit from Oracle's compliance people clutching a multi-million dollar tab. In the end RightNow settled for a lower rate of $250,000, but winning price certainty was a pre-requisite for this new accounting system.
As Rosemary Cafasso, reporting from the RightNow user conference is already discovering, many RightNow customers are nervous about their new software provider.
And from the take it for what it's worth department:
There's a major snowstorm in Colorado Springs at this moment.


text:
Angels non-tender Williams, Hanson, two others
Halos gain payroll flexibility; offseason deals squeeze out Nelson, Gutierrez
ANAHEIM -- The Angels non-tendered starters Jerome Williams and Tommy Hanson, third baseman Chris Nelson and reliever Juan Gutierrez on Monday, saving roughly $10 million in projected salaries for 2014.
The five other arbitration-eligible players -- designated hitter Mark Trumbo, third baseman David Freese, closer Ernesto Frieri, and relievers Kevin Jepsen and Fernando Salas -- were tendered contracts.
Hanson, Nelson and Gutierrez, who was designated for assignment to make room for new reliever Joe Smith five days ago, were no-brainers to become free agents prior to the 9 p.m. PT deadline.
Williams offered up an intriguing dilemma.
Since being acquired from independent ball in June 2011, Williams has provided the Angels with some valuable flexibility as an innings-eating reliever and part-time starter, posting a 4.46 ERA in 79 appearances (46 starts).
First and foremost, I wanna thank the Angels organization for the opportunity to get back in the big leagues. It's been an awesome time- Jerome Williams (@pinkpuka57) December 3, 2013
In a vacuum, they probably would've considered paying Williams his projected arbitration salary to return in the same role. But when Joe Blanton will be making $7.5 million despite having no place on the staff, and Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols absorbing much of the payroll, Williams' presence became a luxury for which the Angels weren't willing to allocate that much money.
Now, they project to be roughly $15 million below the luxury-tax threshold of $189 million, giving them more flexibility to add at least two starting pitchers to a staff that only has Jered Weaver, C.J. Wilson and Garrett Richards returning.
"We wanted to remain as flexible as we could as we worked through the offseason," Angels general manager Jerry Dipoto said, "and we felt like this was the best move for the club in order to do that."
Hanson, projected to make about $4 million next season, was acquired from the Braves for Jordan Walden last November and struggled mightily in his first exposure to the American League. His stuff continued to erode, he had a hard time holding runners, and by Aug. 7, upon his demotion to Triple-A, Hanson had a 5.59 ERA and an opponents' OPS of .838.
Nelson -- claimed off waivers in mid-May -- is slated to make $1 million in his first year of arbitration eligibility, but he batted .219/.283/.365 while playing every day in August, missed the last month of the season with a hamstring injury and has no role with Freese on board.
With a bullpen that already includes seven notable arms in Frieri, Smith, Salas, Jepsen, Sean Burnett, Michael Kohn and Dane De La Rosa, there was no real room for Gutierrez or Williams, either.
"It's always a tough decision when you're making determinations whether to move forward with a player or not, whether to sign a player to a contract or not, whether to do a trade or not," Dipoto said. "Obviously we still have plans for what we both want and need through the remainder of the offseason, and we just wanted to put ourselves in a position of flexibility and felt like, with making this move, we were able to do that."


text:
House Votes against "Strip‐Search" Machines
Yesterday the House adopted an amendment to the Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act that would prohibit the TSA from using Whole Body-Imaging machines for primary screening at airports and require the TSA to give passengers the option of a pat-down search in place of going through a WBI machine, among other things.
You can read the amendment here, and the roll call vote will soon be up here. Use it to decide whether to cheer or jeer your member of Congress.
More on strip-search machines here, here, and here.