 Okay, we're back live here. This is Sapphire now. This is SiliconANGLE and Wikibon's theCUBE, our flagship program. We go out to the events, extract the signal from the noise. I'm John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE, and I'm going to be hosting the wrap-up of day two with Wikibon co-founder and CTO, David Floyd and Wikibon analyst, big data analyst, Jeff Kelly. Guys, day two is in the books. We had a big day here, co-CEO's, doing the keynote, co-CEO, and then they had both CEOs on the panel, on a Q and A in front of the global press corps. We had a variety of conversations in the hallways here on theCUBE with customers, partners, the ecosystem. It's all about Hannah and the cloud is evolving. As I told Schnabay, it's up in the air. He kind of got a kick out of that cloud and sky. Kind of put it together, a real sharp guy. But, David, I want to ask you guys, David and Jeff, what you think of day two. Okay, day one was Hannah all day long and today we heard business value. I think we heard business value as a theme very, very consistently today. And their starting point in discussion is business value. They think in business value terms. And that from a marketing and from a ability to get into high levels in the business side is part of their secret source, part of their success. I think there is a sometimes an over-valuation of the products they have in terms of the business value and some claims which were very interesting but maybe a little excessive. But the fact that they were focusing on that and focusing on getting the nods from the executives in the audience, that to me was very impressive. Very impressive indeed. And it's something that from the technology sales point of view other companies should be doing more of. That there's clearly getting customers to do the talking, getting the business value of their products over is something that every high-tech company should be doing more of. Jeff, I made a comment in the Q and A kind of hinting, not a jab, but kind of saying you guys have been hiding from big data. Last year, Schnabe told me that that's not a big message for them in terms of trying to hype it up. Although he considers themselves a big data company. So, I mean, is SAP a truly a big data company? I think absolutely. Big data is a broad term and a broad category of both technology solutions and also kind of a mindset about how you monetize data and the new data, assets, data sources that are coming online today that are now available to the enterprise. So, if you look at that way, there's no question that SAP is a big data company. I agree with you that they're hiding from that term a little bit. We hear it occasionally here at this show. Again, last year, occasionally, year before that, not at all. So, I think the issue for SAP is one, they are a marketing machine and they like to keep control of their messaging. And so, they decided at a high level that it is not in their best interest to associate themselves with big data. Perhaps they are thinking about some of the technological limitations of their portfolio, as David was mentioning earlier. And it's not a good idea to kind of tie them to the big data movement, if you will. Because once you bring big data into the equation, people start thinking, okay, on structured data, various data sources, they start thinking things like Hadoop. And when you get into that conversation, SAP simply doesn't have the functionality of the product line to support some of those workloads. Now, that's not to say, again, that HANA is not a great product and it's not very good at what it does. But once you bring big data into the conversation, you really open it up to a whole new level. And I don't know if, my opinion is that SAP just doesn't want to have that conversation right now. You know, they're pitching very much HANA as the be all and all. They're talking about analytics. I mean, analytics is a big message. Mobile and analytics is huge. But it's too consumer, you know. It's analytics on a fairly narrow set of data. It's the data that SAP has. And they're extracting that and they're doing analytics on that. And they're doing a very good job. They're doing real-time analytics on that data. But it's not the same as taking a fire hose from the Twitter plus a fire hose from the web itself and extracting the noise. The signal from the noise. That's us. So David, you know, business value. I love to hear the executives got so smooth, especially Bill McDermott. You know, the question comes up as total hard fastball. He kind of fouls it off and answers the question. Then he pivots directly to business value. Shnava did the same thing. That's obviously their messaging. When in doubt, always go to business value. Take the moral high ground. Well, let's drill into it. Because you had some compelling business value data you shared on theCUBE today. I thought that was really one of the highlights of today's CUBE sessions were your presentation of your data. What did you present? And what was the big takeaway from your research? Well, so what we looked at was consolidation and virtualization of SAP. And we looked at it from two perspectives. What was driving it from a business point of view, the business value of that consolidation, of those applications, and what was driving it from an IT and a technical point of view. And we looked at technical first and there's a very good sound case for using virtualization, consolidation onto higher performance servers, onto flash, onto high performance IO, and reducing the number of cores, the number of actual servers. And from that reducing the cost of the Oracle, the cost of the infrastructure. And most important, almost most of the important level the cost of the people themselves. So there's a clear business case to be made within IT of consolidation. But the real interest is, why are they doing consolidation, not necessarily just of SAP, but why are they consolidating all the different versions of SAP that they have in each of the divisions or in the different companies that they have. Why are they trying to do that? And that's where the real value is, to have a consistent view of data where the data means the same thing, where you put the data in each of the subsidiaries or divisions, and that data rolls up directly into that single instance of the, quote, truth about the organization. Truth about the financials, truth about the shipments, truth about the inventory, truth about the work in progress, et cetera. I got to ask you, Jeff, about your opinion on the big data value proposition, because big data has a lot of pretty tangible benefits. And one of the things that David pointed out as research we discussed was, there's a lot of labor efficiencies and obviously operational efficiencies. But beyond that, there's new efficiencies that get created, new revenues generated, new decisions are made faster. So part of big data is making decisions faster. What have you found in your research around some of these new values that are soon to be quantified? I don't even think David probably collected all of them. And there's probably some zillions we missed. So what are you seeing? Well, sure, there's lots of benefits that big data brings on the business side, beyond some of the technology-related benefits like augmenting your data warehouse with something like Hadoop to offload some of that data, make your data warehouse perform better and lower the cost. But on the business side, I mean, there's just so many different benefits depending on the vertical you're in. I've done some research recently around the use of big data retail organizations and there's things like dynamic pricing. So retailers are taking in streams of data from internal sources, from suppliers, from could be market data, bringing that into an internal source, analyzing it in real time to make real time decisions about how their pricing products are either often online, but in some cases even in brick-and-mortar stores. So if you're able to do that, and if you tie that to a particular business goal, then you really have something. So perhaps it's not always trying to find the optimal price to sell the most product. Sometimes your goal might be, for instance, to undercut a competitor for a certain period of time. You need to bring in data from that competitor, you've got to bring in market data, and you've got to understand what that's going to do to your bottom line. And it makes sense that you can kind of turn the knobs and levers to hit the right price point. So that's just one example of some of the business value that big data can deliver. And that's in retail, and we're doing similar research. We've done it in banking, and healthcare, and energy. In mobile as well. Yeah, mobile. Remember we did some research in mobile where we looked at the cost of churn and the potential benefit of understanding a churn earlier, being able to identify the key things that are predictors of that, and put in processes, ultimately, in real time, that can be done that. And then, of course, there's the ad serving as well, which people like Aerospike are doing the work on, where huge amounts of volumes of data where they are pricing the ad, putting the bids on the ad in real time. In real time and related to churn, not just placing what are the most appropriate ads in front of people, but also understanding how valuable those people are. So if it's in the churn example. Or how not. Or how not. In the mobile churn example, yes, you may have some, when you know someone's about to churn based on previous patterns, you've seen it in other customers, you could kick off a series of events to help prevent that. But you may also determine simultaneously, well, this is not a customer that's worth putting that effort and time and money into saving. So there's different types of analytics that have to take place and be integrated. So there's a lot of business value that can get very complex, which is why there's so much focus, I think on the services side of this business right now, people trying to understand what are the possibilities? What are the different streams of data I've got to bring together? What are some of the analytics I need to provide? How do I actually deliver that? Put those into productions so I can make those real-time decisions. And that's often services-led. So yeah, there's a lot of business value to be had across verticals. If you can come up with a vertical that can't benefit from big data, I'd be interested to hear. So I don't know. I agree. Even agriculture could benefit. Oh, absolutely. Day two is in the books. We're doing day two wrap up an in-summary. It's business value. And we had this Jim Schnabe keynote, one more product. Tomorrow is going to be Vishal Sikha's keynote with the founder of SAP, Hassel Plotner, and we're going to hear that tomorrow. But you know, guys, just to summarize some of the things I heard that was fun was quotes, just some fun quotes. Business value. We talked about that. Best of breed, it's best, but not breeding. It was a quote by Bill McDermott. Great. That's best, but not breeding. Best of breed is what they want. One platform. For all, one platform, all problems solved. That was a sound bite by McDermott. Interesting factoid, the HANA projects, code name was called the petabyte farm. That was pretty interesting. 90% of the SAP's customers could run in memory on HANA. That was McDermott. But then, Schnabay off camera, and I was there with Eric Lundquist, who's editor at eWeek, and he and I were peppering Schnabay with questions. He said, quote, we have a two-year lead over our competitors with respect to HANA. And he said, and as he was talking to another judge, I overheard him say, competitors don't like that HANA exists. So interesting commentary. And then finally, he broke down the revenue of the question I asked her in the Q&A session that we streamed live. And he actually got some specifics. For their new opportunities in their growth strategy, in their innovation strategy, they're seeing currently a third of the new business, third of the HANA customers are non-SAP customers, new customers for them, a third are SAP customers, and a third of them are non-SAP customers running non-SAP apps. So very telling, it's really split across the board. And obviously, you know, Arib is the big acquisition. Not a lot of, you know, $4 billion, at least when SideBase was bought. There's a big part of the story here at Sapphire. Arib is not so much. So, those are some of the comments that I've heard. Any commentary on those guys? Well, like I said, I think that the one platform for all your data needs, I think sounds fantastic. And if they could pull that off, I think they would be sitting on a goldmine. But for some of the reasons we've talked about today, I don't see how that's possible with HANA unless they significantly increase its capabilities. And again, that's not to say it's not a good point product, but that's what it is. A petabyte of DRAM is pretty expensive. Yeah, well, I was going to say, John, you pointed out they could run 90% of their customers' workloads in memory on HANA, but would their customers be able to afford it? Yeah. That's the question. Well, it's a technical stat. Obviously, they want to swing the big stick in the marketplace and show the world that they got some of the power. We've heard 1,000 times faster. We've had some great interviews. I want to highlight and get you guys to wrap, as we wrap up here, talking about the VCE. We had the VC guys in here. We had EMC, which is a storage vendor who's done a lot of SAP virtualization. David Fleur, I want to get your perspective first about the innovation, the co-innovation between EMC and SAP, very, very strong. What's your take on that? Yes. The fundamental base of that technology is the VCE technology. They have dramatically improved that technology from the original days of just being a service-type company and sticking it together to a true integration of parts, putting the Cisco servers, the EMC storage, the VMware on top of that, and the orchestrational management level within that. So, producing a product, and on top of that, applying all of the changes to make that a single unit of operation by simultaneously applying all of the fixes to the server hardware, the storage hardware, the infrastructure software, doing that as a single fix on a three-month basis or a six-month basis, and then working with their customers to absolutely minimize the effort and risk of putting in these new versions, moving towards a continuous improvement model, the Apple-type model, as opposed to the new release every two years or three years. They have legs there with V-Block. Do you think they have legs with V-Block? I mean, V-Block has been getting traction and growing. They have real production use cases. What's the net net on V-Block, in your opinion? Well, net, the net, at the moment of V-Block is it's doing well. Whether, the key issue to me is, is that a viable model for EMC to continue? There are risks in that model. For example, what would happen if Cisco bought a storage company? And then put its effort into making the equivalent of VC of their own. What would they do then? Or should EMC buy a server company and go into that more and have more control on that outcome? Making it as a joint effort, I'm not sure that that is long-term viable. I can see a lot of scenarios where that might not work out so well. But the fundamental principle of putting that together, making it lower cost to operate, pushing that into the marketplace aggressively, I think is very good. That that's, that is adding value, much more significant business value than just the products themselves. I am very excited for SAP. I got to say, you know, and the SAP and EMC relationships you pointed out, but all their partners, we saw NetApp giving a great presentation out there. And, you know, again, NetApp's a sleeper in all this. And I think the nondescriptive operations mentioned that they have, you know, planned downtime is what SAP is moving towards that environment where Schnabe himself said, hey, customers don't like upgrades. That's the old model. We're going to have a platform and enable people. This is the API generation. This is what they're looking for. They want to be a platform. Another sighting note, we talked to the enterprise GM, Sameer Patel, new executive at SAP, great leader, he should do well there. But most of all guys, to wrap up, I'll get the final word in here and then we can break for the day because it's been a long day, is I am very, and you guys can comment as well on this point. I got to say, in following SAP with theCUBE here for this our fourth season, the swagger is at an all-time high. And so I am curious. I think there's something under the covers that we're not seeing. Schnabe and McDermott, McDermott's always pretty cocky in a good way and he's confident and he presents himself well. But Schnabe is very, very confident and it really shows. And so it makes me wonder what the buzz is going on around Hanna. Is a shoe going to drop? I know some of the things you commented on. So just, I'm putting it out there. Do you agree the confidence is at an all-time high? I think the confidence is at an all-time high. It is the basic model though. It's still of selling software, shrink-wrapped software or whatever software it is, two organizations and letting them piece the pieces together. It's not for nothing that a large number of the people here on the floor are service providers of one sort or another, consultants who are trying to add value, trying to sort out how to put SAP in. The risk to that model and the risk to the SAP ecosystem is that you get cloud providers with more data coming in from different sources, merging in the big data as well as the ERP systems, providing a service within a vertical that can compete very aggressively on price, on delivery cost, and most important of all on ability to integrate into the workflow of organizations more succinctly. That to me is the threat. And if those sort of systems are starting now in the garages in Palo Alto or in Boston, those are the systems which in three or four years time could mean a different level of swagger. At the moment, they have the market share. At the moment, they have the capability if they judge it correctly to go into that marketplace. But I think they've got to make more profound changes to their products than just putting in HANA. They've got to make it cloud friendly, multi-tenant. They've got to go after that marketplace. They've got to focus on providing something with more ability to follow the workflow the customer wants rather than imposing their own workflows. Yeah, I'd say they are certainly very confident for a number of reasons. I mean, right now they are, I heard one attendee mention to me earlier today that SAP, the Salesforce just has a knack for getting in front of the CEO of their customers. They're very good at that. They've got one of the hottest products on the market right now in HANA. They're writing whether they want to use the term or not the big data wave. You know, they're trading at a 52 week high. They're hot on Wall Street, very much talked about stock. So they have every reason to be confident right now. A lot of things go in their way. Again, in five years time, we'll see how that conversation changes. That's a wrap from day two. Some tidbits here. HANA is a revolution. We've asked people about the most amazing things we've seen. Well, revolution, maybe taking some liberties with that. But it's an innovation strategy from SAP. Their innovation strategy is outlined by the CEOs. A couple of years goes on track. Some new dimensions that are accelerating the change. That's HANA and the impact and the excitement that's generating. And obviously the continuous influx model of what the cloud's going to look like. Private cloud, public cloud, hybrid cloud. I believe that's going to continue to be influx. We're going to be following it on SiliconANGLE and Wikibon. Thanks for watching. Stay tuned for tomorrow as well. Day three of our three days of exclusive coverage from the Global Press Center, Communication Center here at Sapphire now in Orlando, the SiliconANGLE and Wikibon. Wrapping up day two. See you tomorrow.