January 5, 2009 3:19 PM PST

Two big reasons Dell should buy Red Hat

by Matt Asay
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 19 comments

Dell's biggest problem is that its one-time differentiation--low-cost hardware assembly and distribution--is now common industry practice. Indeed, it now routinely gets beaten at its own game, as called out in a recent article by Ashlee Vance in The New York Times.

Dell's growth, to revenue of $56 billion in 2006 from $5.3 billion in 1996, has come from within. But company executives now concede that they need to make a large acquisition, or a series of them, to tap the repeating, higher-margin revenue streams that come from the software and services businesses....

"It's not a question of size (of acquisition)," said Brian T. Gladden, chief financial officer at Dell. "I think the question is more around diversifying our revenue base and becoming bigger in some things that are attractive for the long term...(Servers, storage systems, software, or services) is where we have to do an acquisition to become relevant. There is no question."

Assuming that this is correct, and that Dell needs to look beyond hardware for growth, it could hardly do better than to buy Red Hat, or possibly Sun or Novell, for two reasons. The first is that buying Red Hat might be the least painful option for Dell getting into software in earnest, as it would offer Dell a close analog to what it has done to hardware: a commoditized software business that depends heavily on low-cost assembly and distribution. Dell and Red Hat were made for each other, in many ways.

The second reason is that buying Red Hat would also position Dell to do what no other software company has done, but which offers tremendous financial promise: consolidate the open-source ecosystem to provide huge value to chief information officers. I argued earlier that Red Hat should do this and become the ASCAP of the software industry, allowing CIOs to subscribe to its ever broadening portfolio of open-source solutions. Dell could expedite this, bringing cash and heft to the relationship.

Of course, Dell doesn't have much of a history of acquisitions, and might struggle to incorporate Red Hat, or any other software vendor for that matter. Red Hat, for its part, has a checkered history with acquisitions, though it is now making its JBoss acquisition pay healthy dividends.

Red Hat is brilliant at consolidating and delivering open-source software. Dell is brilliant at consolidating and delivering commodity hardware. Dell needs software to grow, and Red Hat could use some financial cushion as it seeks to expand its business beyond application servers and operating systems. Imagine if Dell/Red Hat could start offering open-source customer relationship management, enterprise resource planning, IT management, and more.

If you were a sales guy calling on CIOs, wouldn't you want to be selling the Dell/Red Hat suite of hardware, software, and services? The two companies routinely top CIO Insight's annual CIO surveys--combining them would give CIOs an amazing alternative to Microsoft and other solutions.


Update: The VAR Guy smacks me around a bit for thinking Dell would imbibe Red Hat. His thinking is strong, but I still think it depends far too much on Red Hat boxing itself into a corner as "the Linux company." If Red Hat gets ambitious with open source, all bets are off.

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.
Recent posts from The Open Road
An application war is brewing in the cloud
2010 the year of cloud-computing...M&A
Canonical shines its Ubuntu light on consumers
Open source became big business in 2009
Will we see an open-source IPO in 2010?
Could Apache keep Google's regulators at bay?
Red Hat's Q3 earnings defy gravity
Canonical's opportunity to simplify Ubuntu
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (19 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by JunkSiu January 5, 2009 4:19 PM PST
If I were Dell, why should I take part in the windows / linux war?
Reply to this comment
by tm_anon January 5, 2009 4:40 PM PST
What war? Nobody's fired anything. You either pay for software that gets bogged down with viruses unless you're constantly running an antivirus program, pay for proprietary software because that's what windows users around you are doing, run a defrag that takes a day to finish and end up having to replace your software by buying another OS in a few years because the one you bought won't be serviced anymore or you download a complete OS or attain one for free, legally, that doesn't have nearly as many viruses written for it at the moment, you have the option for an antivirus program, but not the necessity for the most part, you are able to get free software that does at least as good a job for most applications and you have a huge number of people to ask if you happen to run into any problems. If you download Ubuntu or ask for a free disk or borrow someone elses to install, you don't even have to pay for the disk. Doesn't seem like a war to me, just seems like good business sense to go with the guy who isn't going to try and make you do everything their way in order to get any kind of support.
by dennisl59 January 5, 2009 4:20 PM PST
Market Caps.

redhat=2.7B
sun=3.3B
novell=1.3B

Does anyone honestly think that Dell would spend, at least, and this economy, 2.7 Billion Dollars for RedHat?

Just wondering.

Thank You.
Reply to this comment
by Matt Asay January 5, 2009 8:40 PM PST
Well, it's only $2.7B today. Just wait for a few days. In this volatile environment, it could be $1B tomorrow. :-)

I think Red Hat's value is strategic and long-term, not a short-term buy for its revenue.
by Goodbye Helicopter January 5, 2009 4:29 PM PST
dell doesn't have the money to buy, nor the savvy to market it.
and in this economy, with their balance sheet, no loans are coming.
Reply to this comment
by solitare_pax January 5, 2009 5:22 PM PST
So in other words, Dell should marry their software and hardware together into a superior package that will blow Windows out of the water?

Sounds interesting - but didn't Apple try that one?
Reply to this comment
by nw15062 January 5, 2009 5:51 PM PST
Dell already sells computers with Ubuntu linux on them, why would they spend money on a software company that has shallow market share compared to Ubuntu, when they could just use Ubuntu free.

Red Hats client base is dwindle ever since they started marketing their operating system, and divided their product into Commercial / Hobbyist groups. Suse has suffered a similar fate since Novell bought them and the same rift occurred.

Personally I prefer Ubuntu when recommending it to new linux users because it has everything that Dell would have to change about Red Hat already implemented.
Reply to this comment
by Matt Asay January 5, 2009 8:37 PM PST
I'm actually thinking beyond just the distribution. Red Hat is a gateway to consolidating open-source solutions for enterprise IT. I think that's valuable beyond RHEL.
by shootthecops January 5, 2009 10:03 PM PST
what we really need here is a big budget commercial company sponsoring distros. a dell aquisition would do this, but would people buy the computers? android is a perfect example of what can happen when you have money to spend on a distro, but will that bring it functionality that people want? video editing/photoshop/etc windows is a powerful beast for a reason, developers developers developers...
by GellDuru January 6, 2009 10:07 AM PST
Which is great until Shuttleworth decides he doesn't want to fund the cash flow negative Canonical any longer as a hobby and it folds like the kiddie table after thanks giving dinner leaving the Ubuntu community high and dry. He has said he is happy to keep it up for 3 - 5 years, but then what?

I am also curious if you can substantiate your claims that Red Hat market share is shrinking when the company continues to post growth every quarter. That would seem to be two hard statements to reconcile.
by inscitekjeff January 5, 2009 5:58 PM PST
Good thing Matt Asay is not running Dell. Some basic math here:

Dell is a $60,000M+ dollar (revenue) company with $3,500M+ in profits
Red Hat is a $520M dollar (revenue) company with $70M in profits.

We're talking orders of magnitude difference here. Dell spends more on the UPS shipping costs of it's products than the entire size of Red Hat's business. Red Hat is totally inconsequential to Dell's scale and would do nothing to change it's financial business dynamics.

Not to mention, with Red Hat's insanely overvalued Market Cap of $2B+, what is the business case to buy a Linux distribution support company when it is a FREE operating system. If this is the path they wanted to go down, they could simply start supporting a distribution of their own for millions (not billions) of dollars or at the very least, pickup one of the secondary players for considerably less money....not that I think that would be a good idea anyway.

Think bigger. I would be going after Cisco with competitive routers, switches and VoIP telephony equipment and systems. Do what they originally did to IBM and Compaq to Cisco. Target a feature set and price point that hovers somewhere around or between Linksys brand and native Cisco brands. Those are large businesses with relatively good margins compared to Dell's main business and if even reasonably successful at it could potentially double their bottom line within several years.
Reply to this comment
by Mam00th January 5, 2009 6:25 PM PST
Actually going in the router market would not be that of a bad idea, the only problem being that they have no expertise at all in that domain. Dell is a hardware company, routers on the other hand require quite a bit of software. I don't know if they'd be able to pull it out, they can always buy the expertise though.
by Matt Asay January 5, 2009 8:39 PM PST
I think Dell's lack of experience in M&A make "thinking bigger" difficult for Dell, though I take your point. And I'm not interested in Dell picking up $500M or so in software, but rather using Red Hat as a means for Dell to become the commodity software player (i.e., center of the open source solution universe). That's pretty big, no?
by MSSlayer January 5, 2009 9:03 PM PST
Bad idea, the network game is not only Cisco.

Dell would have to outperform and outprice someone like Foundry, something that even Cisco can not do.

You are looking just at money, not the real value and leveraging that buying RH might bring.

*******************

Dell is NOT a hardware company. They are an OEM. They buy hardware that others make and slap it together. Intel, AMD, NVidia, Cisco, etc, etc are hardware companies.
by GellDuru January 6, 2009 10:10 AM PST
So why did Dell buy Everdream, Message one and Silverback, whose combined market cap was below Red Hats? Dont limit your thinking in that Dell cannot make strategic plays outside of hardware, indeed they must and small ones that cost very little but give them potential advantages in positioning their hardware in the datacenter is going to be money well spent. I am not sure Red Hat is it, but writing the concept off entirely is too broad a brush.
by MSSlayer January 5, 2009 9:04 PM PST
Dell is a maker of third rate computer systems coupled with low class service. They need to fix that before trying to take on the world.
Reply to this comment
by db001b January 6, 2009 10:31 AM PST
I read that story and agree but also disagree. The biggest mistake Novell did to loose to Microsoft in 80's was to sale NetWare and give away eDirectory. Novell allowed Microsoft to basically give NT away while developing AD loosly around eDirectory while Novell struggled to sale NetWare. Linux is the same senario, why buy something that you can get for free.

Buying Red Hat makes no since while giving SUSE away and aquiring a reoccuring revenew stream that Novell poses is a better aquisition for Dell. Dell doesn't need an OS to give away it needs an engineering platform like eDirectory with products it can control much like IBM.

To Aquire Novell is like asking to buy the Louvre, it's easy to put a price on the building but try putting a price on the art inside. Love or hate Novell you can't argue with it's ability to engineer and If Dell can pull off a Novell aquistion it will have plenty of art to hang on it's walls.
Reply to this comment
by jusben1369 January 12, 2009 9:11 AM PST
Matt,

Surely MSFT would be unimpressed and Dell can't risk having poor relations with MSFT via a RHAT frontal assualt? I do think the Dell guys know what you're thinking though - the acquisition of ASAP software by Dell was supposed to fix some internal compliance issues BUT also position Dell to manage the commodity elements of software purchasing and management into a one stop for CIO's
Reply to this comment
by gerrygadget January 15, 2009 4:45 PM PST
Red Hat and Canonical need to merge -- one for the server, the other for the client. Some might say that's impossible, but probably not. If they were both under the Dell umbrella, it makes a lot more sense. If Google's Android makes inroads on netbooks, laptops, and "nettops", Canonical's niche shrinks, and it can't afford to wither even a little or it's all downhill.

There's a few other open source companies that would be worth bringing under the same umbrella if Dell or somebody else (Sun?) decides to build out a reasonable stack of software for small/mid-size companies as well as enterprise. If Dell bought Sun they'd need to close down or sell off parts of it in order to stay solvent long enough to swallow and digest.

Dell needs to do something to diversify, no matter what happens. There's too much pressure from Acer, Asus, and others in the consumer market, as well as HP (even though it's hardware business customer service has won the "suckiest" award from PC World two years running). Dell could use software as one way to do that, assuming they feel they can avoid all the problems Sun has had as a combo hardware/software vendor. IBM sold off most of their business to focus on services and software. They only reason IBM is still in hardware is because they have a strong R&D background and are still generating patents. Dell isn't into R&D.
Reply to this comment
(19 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right