Brightwork does not sell information from message boards on SAP and Oracle. How would that even work? The information on the public message board is available for anyone to see. You seem to have a poor understanding of what type of information is sellable.
Brightwork is a real research group. There is no need to use quotation marks. The fact that Brightwork contradicts your employer does not make the information, not research. The reason that SAP resources undermine SAP's research is that it fact checks SAP. In contrast, virtually every other entity that covers SAP is paid by SAP (ComputerWorld, IDG, Gartner, Forrester, etc..) Please try to deny that every source on SAP except Brightwork is paid by SAP. Do undisclosed payment to entities that publish on SAP meet your definition of "research." Do you find it curious that the one entity that publishes on SAP that you have a problem with is the one that takes no money from SAP? Is that a good design you think...where everyone is on SAP's payroll – and then multi-billion dollar consulting companies also repeat anything that SAP says? I bet you think the coverage that SAP gets from ComputerWeekly or TechTarget is just dandy don't you? You should, SAP paid for it.
Even if Brightwork's main business was selling much competitive intelligence business, which it isn't, that does not constitute financial bias. Financial bias is publishing information while being paid to do so (check the entities already mentioned.) See the bias regarding a directly paid article from SAP here http://example.com/2BlUrUK.
Brightwork, in fact, has historically very little involvement with vendors and recently introduced a policy of having no relationship whatsoever with vendors. http://example.com/2RgaFHr
The competitive intelligence business of Brightwork was always very small and will probably be non-existent in the future, but not because there is any conflict. In our experience vendors lack the understanding even to take advantage of competitive intelligence, and it is overall just a bad business.
That is also not true that people are making a business out of competitive intelligence. You can't name a single company that has a business around competitive intelligence for vendors. Most vendors rely on their own internal competitive intelligence groups.
Given the enormous lies told by SAP, the underhanded nature of the SAP and SAP partnership and the lies told by SAP consulting companies to their clients, the idea that a firm providing competitive intelligence is unethical is as ridiculous as it gets. Secondly, the articles are not attacks. They are fact checking. However, fact-checking tends to trigger SAP resources because so many SAP resources live in a self-reinforcing bubble that they are uncomfortable with being challenged. SAP resources have on several occasions, tried to warn others from reading the articles as we cover in the article http://example.com/2VctRtQ. The reason is simple, SAP resources do not want the articles read. All truth is found at sap.com. "The bestest and most accurate website ever."
Secondly, naturally, as an SAP employee, you will find Brightwork's coverage of SAP problematic. It makes your job more difficult. However, as a person with a 100% financial bias in favor of SAP, you are in a bad position to accuse others of having a financial bias. Brightwork wrote an article that covers the problem of financial bias hypocrisy. http://example.com/2s7PChUc You work for a company that makes $24 billion per year selling an enormous amount of poorly functioning software. And you don't care because its how you make your money.
Brightwork takes no money from any vendor, and the competitive intelligence business, which is not a conflict as is it only performing analysis of vendors, is so tiny Brightwork does not even bother marketing it anymore.
You have made a number of incorrect claims. And your main objective is to smear Brightwork Research & Analysis so that no one reads the material because you don't want to address the conclusions brought up in BR&A articles.