SAP License Model 2019 vs. Voice & DSAG
Part 1 - Autengruber
Having spent more than ten years in SAP's legal department, I provide a perspective on how SAP thinks. The first antitrust complaint was filed by Voice after talks with SAP broke down in early 2018.
SAP was prepared for this and pulled the new "Indirect Digital Access" model out of the drawer. It is based on the same principles as the previous licensing model: Every access to SAP software is subject to licensing. Even the exchange of data.
The benchmark for access has been changed: SAP has recognized that named-user access is becoming too expensive from a visual point of view and is switching to document licensing.
Voice immediately recognized that the new Indirect Digital Access model contradicted the same EU rights objected to in the Named User usage model for "indirect" access and filed a second antitrust complaint.
It would have been logical for SAP to now pull a third usage model for "indirect" usage out of the drawer. But time was too short for that. SAP must and will respond with a new model.
Strategically, SAP will take into account: First, pure data exchange remains (becomes) license-free. Second, data exchange with use of SAP functionality will be chargeable. Third, named users and documents are too different across industries; comparable (and appropriate) units of measurement are needed.
The following SAP strategy is derived from this: In spring 2019, the third usage model for "indirect" usage will be introduced: This is transaction-based and places every program access under license obligation that is triggered externally. Pure data exchange remains (becomes) license-free.
The information comes from the SAP price list: Customers are advised to note the new item "SAP OpenHub for S/4 HANA". Attention: There is no OpenHub technology in "S/4HANA". Why a product with license obligation for something that does not exist?
If you look even closer, you will notice that SAP does not adhere to its own nomenclature. There is a space in "SAP OpenHub for S/4_HANA". This means it is no longer an "S/4HANA" product. I assume that there is a spelling error and request that SAP corrects this product name to avoid further confusion.
If SAP OpenHub for "S/4_HANA" were not an "S/4HANA" product, multiple licenses would be required for data exchange, which would have fatal consequences.
Part 2 - Dyer
It can't go on like this! What most members of the SAP community suspect, E-3 author and licensing expert Stefan Autengruber has recognized crystal clear and formulated, verified and defined here for the first time in Europe: 2019 will see another new licensing model from SAP, because the ERP world market leader needs the additional revenue from the "indirect use" item.
This SAP licensing model has become one of the most important "weapons" in the Walldorf-based company's arsenal. Why? Cloud computing is a success model, but not at SAP. The growth rates reported in SAP's financial statements are impressive, but only a very small portion of these success figures come from the core ERP components.
SAP cloud growth comes predominantly from purchased companies such as Ariba, SuccessFactors, Fieldglass, Concur, Callidus, etc. Harder means are needed to move SAP's existing customers to an ERP cloud: "indirect" usage is one of these levers.
The SAP sales representative threatens huge license back payments while promising that moving to the SAP cloud would solve all problems.
This tactical approach is in line with the overall picture: Either license revenue is increased through the special item "indirect use" or additional cloud users are gained. Because this approach is stringent, but perhaps not entirely legal, SAP will try a new licensing model.
The first attempt from April this year was not yet optimal, a second attempt should follow in 2019 according to Stefan Autengruber. E-3 author Autengruber explains the following: After the abolition of the Limited-Professional-User and due to the casuistic definition of the Industry-Specific-User, only the possibility of a Professional-User at 3200 Euro remained to meet the SAP definition of "indirect use".
And Stefan Autengruber goes on to argue that SAP recognized that named-user access to SAP software was becoming too expensive from a visual perspective, and thus switched to document licensing in April of this year.
Indirect Digital Access" is therefore document-based, but this is also not in line with EU legislation. Whether the user associations Voice e. V. and DSAG e. V. want it or fear it: SAP will try again next year with a new licensing model. Happy New Year!
