Active Endpoints hosted a webinar today with Dennis Callaghan from the 451 Group on the business and technology factors of where BPM is headed. In an interesting echo of a comment that I heard at the time of the Progress-Savvion acquisition, Callaghan links the idea of Progress losing Lombardi as a partner to them acquiring Savvion, although this all happened in such a short time frame that it’s not clear that was the primary driver. He gave some estimates of annual revenue – $30M for Lombardi, $21M for Savvion – that are likely based on the final securities filings around the acquisitions, so may be reasonably accurate. In a follow-up question at the end of the webinar, he stated that Progress paid $49M for Savvion (which is public knowledge), and that 451’s unconfirmed estimate is that IBM paid $170M for Lombardi: a big difference if you consider relative revenues. He said “we have no evidence that IBM and Progress were in a bidding war for Lombardi”, although no one actually asked that question…
Not much else from Callaghan: he walked through an extremely brief overview of the remaining pure play vendors (Pegasystems, Active Endpoints, Intalio, Appian, Metastorm, Ultimus and Global 360), including such jewels of analysis as “Metastorm – still waiting for IPO”, then continued on to point out that BPM needs to bridge business and IT, and that SOA, BPM and CEM/CEP are starting to come together.
By quarter past the hour, we were into an activeVOS demo, and I’m not sure if it left me feeling more-ish or relieved. Don’t get me wrong, the demo was fine, just not what (I thought) I signed up for. You can see a replay of this webinar and many more on their iTunes podcast channel (direct iTunes link, watchable on iTouch/iPhone or on your computer) or on their website. Personally, I’m waiting for yesterday’s CTO Tuesday podcast to be posted, which had John Newton of Alfresco Software making a guest appearance to discuss linking content management and BPM using CMIS.
Disclosure: I have done a paid webinar for Active Endpoints in the past, although my future in that regard is likely in question after writing this blog post.