CMS Watch OmniUpdate Feed

Trends in SaaS Web Content Management - 2009

jgingras@cmswatch.com(Jarrod Gingras) — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:34:00 -0500

The technology marketplace has seen consistent growth in the acceptance of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) models, and Web Content Management is certainly no exception. CMS Watch Analyst Jarrod Gingras uncovered several inter-related trends in the SaaS Web Content Management space that current customers and prospective buyers will want to know...

Decoupled Web CMS vendors have not disappeared

tbyrne@cmswatch.com(Tony Byrne) — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:44:00 -0400

Over the past two years, Web Content Management vendors have fallen over themselves to provide more interactive services on the front ends of websites, closely tied into traditional content production services on the authoring side. Put another way: in an attempt to appeal to the ever-alluring (but often elusive) web marketing manager, CMS vendors are increasingly binding website management to content management.

Even Percussion -- onetime stalwart defender of the decoupled approach, advocate for flexible delivery environments, and ardent supporter of the website developer working separately from content people -- now talks avidly of combining content and interaction management.

At one level this all makes sense. You want to obviate the need for pervasive IT support for interactive websites.

But I'm also noticing a certain subset of customers feeling quite left out. Those who want a Web CMS that won't dictate (or interfere with) their delivery environment are becoming chagrined by constricting choices in the marketplace. They look around and see the likes of SDL Tridion, Interwoven, and RedDot (all traditionally decoupled systems) placing increasing emphasis on marketing applications and Web 2.0-style interactive services.

So it's worth noting that some established Web CMS vendors continue to buck the trend, including Refresh Software and Hannon Hill. As Web CMS Report readers know, Refresh Software appears headed in a newish direction though, towards DITA and component content management. Hannon Hill is more interesting, because they tout their unfashionable avoidance of interactive marketing with great pride. They argue that their higher education and government customer bases prefer simpler systems that "bake" static pages. SaaS provider OmniUpdate -- also decoupled -- makes the same argument. I suspect it's true.

To be sure, it's possible to embed dynamic logic in any of those systems for an interactive experience on the front end, but then previewing pages means the hassle of pushing content to a staging environment first. And perhaps more importantly, non-coders have no control over interactivity. So, there are trade-offs to the decoupled approach, but advantages as well. The good news is, you still have choices.

SaaS Web CMS vendor Marqui going belly up?

jgingras@cmswatch.com(Jarrod Gingras) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:51:00 -0400

I follow several Software as a Service (SaaS) web content management vendors for the The Web CMS Report. This includes SaaS vendors Clickability, CrownPeak, OmniUpdate and Marqui, a small SaaS-based content management and campaign management vendor headquartered in Vancouver, Canada. In the last version of The Web CMS Report 2008, we recommended that potential buyers of Marqui "perform due diligence before signing deals." While this is good advice when preparing to make any software acquisition, Marqui's previous management overhauls and financial secrecy presented warning signs of potential financial difficulty.

Recently, I was alerted to TechVibes' news that Marqui was in receivership (Investopedia defines receivership as: "A type of bankruptcy a company enters when a receiver is appointed by bankruptcy courts or creditors to run the company.").

Our multiple attempts at contacting Marqui through calls and e-mails have been unreturned. To date, there has been no official communication from Marqui. There have been no Marqui press releases since March and no blog entries on their company blog since September of 2007. Customers we've contacted have remained mum.

One of the arguments against the adoption of a SaaS CMS is exactly this scenario: what happens to my content if my SaaS provider goes out of business? You can typically export all your content via XML, but that's only a part of your web publishing effort, which includes templates, layouts, access controls, and so forth, all of which need to be recreated in a different system. It remains to be seen what will happen to Marqui and how their clients will fare, but buyers certainly need to do their digging on financial stability of any Web CMS partner.

The other lesson here is not to assume that outside funding will automatically improve a vendor's long-term viability. Marqui somehow blew through a considerable investment of approximately $11 million in venture capital, without much to show for it but a long list of creditors.

We will continue to do some digging of our own to find out Marqui's plan for their existing customers.