The atmosphere is very tense, but I don't think that attrition will increase significantly in the coming months, although frustration with the company and working conditions probably will.
I stopped wondering what will change for the better, I only wonder what will become worse.
12 replies (most recent on top)
Also keep in mind that legacy is legacy. Why put a new horse in front of the old cart that's falling apart and barely working? CVAD is the old horse that is perfectly capable of pulling the old cart of legacy apps. Few customers are going to spend the money and time (which is money) to replace Citrix in those environments. They might squeal about pricing, but most will ignore whatever transition and tradeup is called these days and renew to close to what they have currently.
I was in sales at Citrix previously. Customers have been tolerating price increases with the changes from perpetual to subscription licensing in the last few years. Were they happy about it? Heck no. Most of them complained and threatened to move to something else all the way up until they signed their new subscription license agreement. Sure, a few actually dropped licenses or actually didn't renew and moved to VMW or AVD, but they weren't the majority. As others have said, these are sticky environments - to migrate/move to an alternative is not only a highly complex exercise, but it introduces significant risks and cost that makes it a non-starter for most customers.
@1zcb+1kEeXdhk you are giving TK too much credit. He's not bright enough to realize that we WILL lost the big customers he's trying to keep (I can think of one that he specifically mentioned that has 9 of their 10 toes already outside the door). Either that, or he doesn't care--he'll have his bonus and be gone by the time those losses are finalized...
"The biggest customers aren't going to pay 'outrageous' price increases"
Spoiler Alert: Krause has proof, from prior experience, that IT leadership at most customers of legacy software vendors are inherently lazy (changing vendors = unscheduled work), so they pay the price increase. Talk to the folks at Symantec and CA for examples of the proof points.
"Thanks for the comment. I'm not sure I get what you're saying. Why would a big customer agree to a massive price increase?"
Because effectively it will be very hard/impossible for many large customers to transition to alternative solutions within reasonable time from the moment CSG share the renewal pricing ahead of the renewal due date. With all the legacy VirtualApps delivered applications that are still out there, without an easy migration path to alternative deployment methods, or available SaaS versions of those applications, this would give CSG all the leverage to apply pricing of their choice for a new multiyear contract extension. Customers will scream, they will shout, and they will look into taking legal action. In the end, I believe most would pay rather than risking having their EUC environment at a standstill.
I would recommend customers to request renewal pricing as early as possible. I would think, however, that CSG will be very unwilling to share any pricing if the renewal is too far away in the future.
Thanks for the comment. I'm not sure I get what you're saying. Why would a big customer agree to a massive price increase?
"The biggst customers aren't going to pay "outrageous" price increases, and Krause will have no choice but to give in. The whole strategy is to rely on the existing customer base, so if you p#ss them off, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Krause needs them more than they need him."
The whole $16.5B transaction is based upon massive cost reduction in combination with steep price increases. Don't confuse how PE's act versus regular public businesses. There is no long term vision here. The stickiness of the solution will allow for this business model, which really is the core reason why the PE targeted Citrix specifically.
He has done it before and he will do it again. It will be outrageous. But for sure, let's agree to disagree on this one :)
The biggst customers aren't going to pay "outrageous" price increases, and Krause will have no choice but to give in. The whole strategy is to rely on the existing customer base, so if you p#ss them off, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Krause needs them more than they need him.
"Someone seems to post in every thread about "outrageous price increases". What are the actual prices now compared to 2-3 years ago?"
Not an insider in this construct, but I would recommend to look into what TK has done previously in regards to Brocade, CA and Symantec's pricing. After this analysis, make your own judgement what will happen as they go to market with the new strategy.
Someone seems to post in every thread about "outrageous price increases". What are the actual prices now compared to 2-3 years ago?
Most who were going to leave have left. Everyone else is waiting for a package or to get picked up by Broadcom.
This thing isn't moving before May now. So, head down, get your work in, and wait for rsu's and bonus time. Sock away cash.
Transfering excessive amounts of $$$ via outrageous price increases, from loyal and heavily invested customers into the pockets of the PE for sure won’t be too pleasant for the sales teams, I would say.