I have read so much on this forum about who did or did not lead to the decline of SAS. No doubt here were many factors. Let me throw out another one. JMP played a huge role in the decline of SAS. I always figured that the CEO let his EVP start JMP and lose tens of millions per year to keep him out of his hair. The revenue numbers I used to see on the internal web before I retired always seemed to suggest that JMP could not possibly be profitable given the number of people who worked on it. JMP colleagues always claimed otherwise. Who knows. Then there was that disastrous JMP/SAS integration project that needlessly diverted R&D talent away from profitable activities. JMP competed with SAS costing SAS licenses. Finally, the PROC MIXED developer left SAS/STAT for JMP providing the opening that the forester filled. The forester was a great mainstream SAS/STAT developer and colleague. Things went south (as did his personality) when his work ventured beyond that. If the JMP EVP had stuck with mainstream SAS instead of starting a new product, maybe things would be different now; or maybe not. Still at the heart of the problem is a CEO who surrounded himself with sycophants and put several totally unqualified people in charge of R&D and later much of the company. Despite all that, for us old-timers who got buyouts around the time we were planning on retiring anyways, it was a long and great run. I will always be grateful for that.
30 replies (most recent on top)
“JMP competed with SAS costing SAS licenses.”
This is true to an extent. However, JMP is only on the Desktop; it doesn’t operate in the Cloud.
Also, JMP is designed for statisticians, scientists, and engineers who need exotic techniques. It’s much too complex for the Business Intelligence market; it's no threat to Tableau or PowerBI.
JMP has ~500 employees to target the scientific / engineering market on the Desktop. SAS has ~12,000 employees to target the BI market and the Cloud.
One can argue with how the founders divided their company, but the SAS side was certainly given much greater opportunities.
“ If there have been any offers post Broadcom, the fact that we know nothing of that suggests those offers were embarrassingly low in the minds of the founders. If so, the heirs might inherit SAS before it sells.”
Or it suggests that they don’t consider it a priority to tell you.
JG. “Hey JS. We just got an offer of n billion what do you think?”
JS. “Well I’ll have to think about it. But hey we better loop Bob in building R basement in so we can get his thoughts also”
JG. “Good call. Oh we can’t forget about @6arq+1tWPCbLH on the layoff.com. Have to tell her also”
JS “Sc--w @6arq+1tWPCbLH and all those other whiners. I only care about Basement Bob”
If there are heirs who are interested in the continuity of SAS(as we know it) post JG and post JS, that has to be the best kept SAS secret ever.
If there have been any offers post Broadcom, the fact that we know nothing of that suggests those offers were embarrassingly low in the minds of the founders. If so, the heirs might inherit SAS before it sells.
When they inherit SAS, expect them to be as expeditious as the current sluggishness. Why? It is a huge intertwined bundled mess that they seem to have zero interest in. The land and buildings will instantly become the only lasting artifacts of the former greatness. Everything else will evaporate faster that a teacup of water splashed on pavement in the hot Sahara sun. Really sad but if it plays out this way, it won't be the first time that inheritance reveals that the goals of the heirs are nothing like the goals of their parents.
On a more positive note, it will be very interesting to see how the heirs go forward. I wish them well with their beginnings. The same good wishes are extended to the founders with coping with their ending.
SAS would be a terrible asset to inherit, because it can’t be divided. It must be sold for heirs to realize its value.
If SAS is inherited, heirs might be forced to sell into a poor market. The better course is for the owners to sell it slowly and carefully, to get the best possible price, and then let the heirs inherit cash.
The owners know this. Slowness doesn’t mean they’re reluctant to sell. A simpler explanation may be that no one has offered a good price.
"Simply because they might not live long enough to see how a buyer eviscerates the company . Quite frankly, that could be why there is so much foot dragging regarding a sale. They prefer the idea of a sale more than the actual selling itself."
Agree. They don't really want to sell and they're not ready to let it all go.
SAS and JMP are their "babies". No one wants to see someone else tear their babies (creations) apart while still living and frankly I understand their hesitation
(psychologically and emotionally) . It's easier to just pass on the decisions to the heirs to deal with the aftermath without them knowing. It may not be wise but it may be their sentiment.
"prefer the idea of a sale more than the actual selling itself"
No buzz since Broadcom's flirtations. That supports the above speculated preference. Comfort over expediency is hardly surprising behavior from knocking at the door octogenarians.
If JMP is truly making money, then the best path forward with regards to preserving JMP is to sell it separately. The give JS best chance of having a trajectory influencing role. Unbundled, there is less chance it gets cancelled because the buyer has made a decision to buy one specific item. Conversely, the more bundled it is, the more likely it gets tossed aside. Keep in mind that the lowest hanging fruit is the V9 revenue stream and a buyer who buys the entire bundle might choose to ditch everything(for a tax write off) except the lowest hanging easy fruit.
Of course selling JMP separately and sooner, involves dipping toes into uncharted water sooner. Water that does not have "status quo" as a label. And that likely is the reason it won't happen. Adding 5 more years to either founder's odometer gets both men closer to not caring about SAS' eventuality. Simply because they might not live long enough to see how a buyer eviscerates the company . Quite frankly, that could be why there is so much foot dragging regarding a sale. They prefer the idea of a sale more than the actual selling itself.
@3gcv+1tWPCbLH You might not be happy there. There’s a fair amount of political BS in JMP now too. The Peter Principle has been operating there for 35 years.
Regarding profitability, the best argument I can make is that the CEO approves hiring. Given their relationship, he would never approve ~500 people for the EVP unless it were profitable.
But there is one other argument: SAS recently made JMP a subsidiary.
Subsidiaries are often created to facilitate a sale. The finances of the subsidiary become clearer, making it easier for a buyer to spin it off.
Would SAS want those finances clarified, if JMP were losing money?
"all I know is that JMP was better run"
The bottom line is.... does JMP make money? How fast JMP gets cancelled after a sale will answer that question.
all I know is that JMP was better run and the employees I knew who left SAS and went to JMP were much happier. a lot of them were people who deserved to move up at SAS but because of all the political BS that goes on here, they couldn't. went to JMP and got much better titles commensurate with their skills and better pay and overall more life satisfaction, all while keeping the same benefits etc.
I wish I had gone. i'm the id--t for staying on this side.
“The EVP who famously did not get along with the CEO could have easily used his incredible wealth, which came from SAS, to support/bankroll his passion, his JMP work…”
If the EVP had done that, he would own JMP. It would not be a subsidiary of SAS. Because it is a subsidiary, the EVP does not control hiring; that must be approved by the CEO.
As you assert, their relationship is not close. That's why the hiring would never have been approved — unless it made money for both of them.
Agree with the OP. SAS did way more for JMP than JMP did for SAS.
"That's how we know that JMP is profitable. JG would never allow >400 employees in that subsidiary if it was not making money."
Really? The EVP who famously did not get along with the CEO could have easily used his incredible wealth, which came from SAS, to support/bankroll his passion, his JMP work, regardless of how much money it lost. If the internal web page of revenue by product was right, even if it was off by an order of magnitude, JMP had to have been losing money given the number of people working on it. I'm not disputing that JMP had great people working on a great product. Many were my friends, that I totally respected them as I did the EVP, worked on it. I just think JMP never would have gone anywhere if its founder had not become a billionaire while competing with the product that made him a billionaire.
"What about the impact of closing EMEA HQ?"
That happened nearly 20 years ago....
What about the impact of closing EMEA HQ?
"Can't whoever owns >50% of a company (JG in this case) call all the shots?"
That's how we know that JMP is profitable. JG would never allow >400 employees in that subsidiary if it was not making money.
"JS owns one-third of SAS and has the right to run and manage his own product under his vision without interference ......"
Can't whoever owns >50% of a company (JG in this case) call all the shots?
"JMP has already spun off from SAS."
No. JMP is separated but has not spun off. It is run by one of the two SAS owners under the SAS umbrella on the SAS campus. JS owns one-third of SAS and has the right to run and manage his own product under his vision without interference, just as JG runs and manages SAS for everything else. Both of them are tied to each other for life unless one can afford to buy out the other and if they are both willing and agree to completely split up.
JMP and SAS are like a couple that separated but still is not divorced legally.. :-)
Depends on how the company chargebacks are tallied. If JMP has increased this amount, then they aren’t necessarily getting free rent, etc. The eventual plan is for them to do so.
"JMP has already spun off from SAS."
Kinda sorta. But not 100 percent spun off. In actuality, JMP is enjoying alot of "freebies" provided by SAS. Rent, utilities, fitness center, HCC , landscaping etc etc etc.
JMP has already spun off from SAS.
JMP is the small but mighty sibling of SAS. JMP has a graph for almost every statistic, great GUI. JMP has a nice niche and can be a successful spin-off from SAS if JS wants to do it. I don't know why he hasn't done so. I wonder if he needs agreement from JG to do so.
JMP is a very popular product especially with engineers in the semiconductor industry (I have family members working in this industry and they all use JMP and like it).
JMP is geared toward scientists, engineers, and other researchers who need to analyze data with a great JMP GUI. JMP has all the graphical and statistical capabilities, easier to learn and cheaper than SAS. JMP is a great tool and very powerful - interactive and quick for data exploration with various approaches that engineers like to use while developing an analysis.
The largest user group of JMP consists of engineers and statistical support specialists in manufacturing, particularly in pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, chemicals, and consumer products.
JG pushed his best technical leader into JMP, and promoted sycophants and incompetents instead. That decision led SAS to decline.
Time proved that the mainframe had much more life remaining and making SAS look and feel the same(mostly) across different platforms was a wise move. Especially at the point when the mainframe was still king and other platforms were making inroads. JG made the right decision. Furthermore, does anyone remember the cluster attempt of SAS on the Mac?
Pivot to money...SAS revenues always greatly outpace JMP revenues. That is reality.
Nothing against JMP. Just have to wonder if JS would have had the revenue hunger aggression(if he was head of R&D) that was necessary to propel SAS to a multi billion organization. JS seems happy in his small niche. Going out on a limb but I wonder if JS finds selling SAS very unsettling. He seems to want to continue playing safely in his sandbox. Nothing lasts forever.
I knew RC and all his successors. Talked to them fairly regularly. They all had one characteristic that JS lacked. Ability to converse without acting strained. JS is a very smart man but he acts uncomfortable when having a conversation(especially with other males) and his body language indicates discomfort(wanting to end the convo pronto) and the desire for "flight". Ability to converse at ease is imperative for an executive, even for the head of R&D.
You could not build a Graphical User Interface on a mainframe. They were limited to character cells, generally 25 rows by 80 columns, and 16 colors. At the time, mainframes were the source of almost all SAS revenues.
JS wanted to build a Graphical User Interface, pixel-based, with thousands of colors, and a mouse. This sort of product could only be done on PCs and Macs.
In hindsight, it’s clear that JS saw the future. But at the time, some customers said that they wanted SAS to look and feel the same on all devices. This saved them training costs. JG believed this was the right path, and RC and others kept telling him how right he was — in order to advance their own careers.
RC was indeed positioned as a savior. But he wanted power, and worked to control or block projects that were not his. Finally he was appointed to lead development of Version 7. That release was such a disaster that it earned zero dollars, and RC left the company. There’s a modern parallel, but even Viya makes some money. RC was much worse than OS.
The difference is, at that time, SAS had no open source competition. We could handle a failed release. We quickly recovered, shipped Version 8, and the revenues kept flowing.
Eventually, we even began building Graphical User Interfaces for the PC. But JS never came back.
"JG believed that SAS should look and feel the same on all platforms. He had support from some customers who said they wanted this."
What exactly was the disagreement?
JMP originated in a technical disagreement.
At the time, SAS revenues came primarily from mainframes and minicomputers. Personal computers brought in little money, and few SAS leaders understood them.
When the Graphical User Interface was introduced, JS believed that it required a fundamentally different type of product.
JG believed that SAS should look and feel the same on all platforms. He had support from some customers who said they wanted this.
RC exploited this disagreement to advance his own career. Technically, I don’t suppose he knew which way was best. But politically, he knew enough to say, “Yes, JG, yes. You are so right!”
JS hated these politics. But the primary reason he left was that he believed he was right. Events later showed that he was.
SAS began to decline after JS left. We had other technical leaders -- but none with the political clout of an owner. Thereafter, R&D became increasingly driven not by technology, nor by sales, but by politics.
The JMP EVP might not have started his own product if he hadn't been pushed out of being the head of R&D by the return of RC, who was cast as the savior of the company.
The best way to demonstrate the value of JMP is to sell it by itself. I.E. totally unbundled.
Do not hold your breath.