Some perspective to Suns Q3FY2009 numbers

I'm a member of

Quicksearch

Codenews Search

Disclaimer

The individual owning this blog works at Sun Microsystems GmbH in Germany, a subsidiary of Oracle. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.

Navigation

< Q3FY2009 results | links for 2009-04-29 >

Some perspective to Suns Q3FY2009 numbers

Wednesday, April 29. 2009

I´ve searched for some financial data in the peer group of Sun to compare how Sun has done in the last reported quarter. After doing this i think i should i should add some perspective to the revenue numbers.

Company	Last reported quarter	Revenue	Respective Quarter FY2008	Revenue	Level 2009 comprd to 2008	Source of numbers
Sun	Q3FY09	$2.614 billion	Q3FY08	$3.266 billion	80.03 %	Earnings 4/04/2009
DELL all	Q4FY09	$13.428 billion	Q4FY08	$15.989 billion	83.98 %	Earnings 2/26/2009
DELL Server+Networking	Q4FY09	$1.347 billion	Q4FY08	$1.612 billion	83.561 %	Earnings 2/26/2009
Intel	Q1FY09	$7.145 billion	Q1FY08	$9.673 billion	73.865 %	Earnings 4/14/2009
IBM Systems and Technology	Q1FY09	$3.228 billion	Q1FY08	$4.219 billion	76.511 %	Earnings 4/20/2009
HP Enterprise Storage and Servers	Q1FY09	$3.948 billion	Q1FY08	$4.8 billion	82.25 %	Earnings 2/18/2009 Earnings 02/19/2008

At the end the revenue decline looks pretty much similar in the peer group of Sun. Some of our peers experienced a larger decrease of revenue than Sun, some experienced a smaller decrease.

Posted by Joerg Moellenkamp in English, Sun/Oracle at 11:49 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0)

Defined tags for this entry: storage

, sun

Related entries by tags:

View as PDF: This entry | This month | Full blog

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

I think you've either got the Intel numbers the wrong way around, or the Intel percentage change is very wrong.

#1 Chris Ridd on 2009-04-29 13:00 (Reply)

They were the wrong way round ... i´ve corrected this ... the percentage is correct.

#2 Joerg+M. (Homepage) on 2009-04-29 13:05 (Reply)

It would be even more interesting to see the GERMAN numbers, but sadly, nobody gets to see them publicly... ;-(

Thanks, Jörg, for putting things into perspective!

Matthias

#3 Mathias Pfützner (Homepage) on 2009-04-29 13:19 (Reply)

No. If you want to compare it the right way you have to compare Suns Systems Group with IBMs S&T and HPs ESS. For example here you compare Suns relatively good middelware sales with the HW groups of other vendors.

#4 Dennis on 2009-04-29 17:53 (Reply)

IBM sells point-of-sale terminal and printer, you can´t compare that really for example. I think this comparision of the peer group isn´t 100% precise, but should give a good overview that the numbers are inline to the peer group.

#5 Joerg+M. (Homepage) on 2009-04-29 19:10 (Reply)

The number you put out there for Sun is ALL of Sun revenue. For example, IBM as a whole was down only 11% vs. Sun's down 20% revenue. Services and software is what floated (relatively) IBM's boat.

Everyone on the list, excluding Sun, made a profit.

This thinking just goes to show that Sun IS a hardware company. All the talk of software being a Sun growth target is pretty much lip service.

#5.1 Dennis is correct on 2009-04-29 22:03 (Reply)

1. Yes, but you can´t really compare IBM and Sun. IBM is more a consulting company with a hardware workshop for example. Sun doesn´t do Outsourcing for example ...

I know, that there is too much in the Sun number, but there are other areas in the others company numbers (even in the one of one group) that aren´t in the Sun Number (best example, Sun doesn´t sell POS-Termials or .

Without an list of revenue broken down by product items this is as exact as you can get.

2. Yes i know they made a profit, but that wasn´t the point of this overview. It just should show that the decline in revenue was quite normal in our peer group. I started my observation with the thought "Ough, 20% less revenue ... pretty bad" but at the end it was consistent with our peer group. At the end we all work in the same economic circumstances.

3. To the lip services stuff just a number out of the results: "Total Software billings grew 28 percent year-over-year."

#5.1.1 Joerg+M. (Homepage) on 2009-04-30 06:34 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_.
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

View as PDF: This entry | This month | Full blog

Competition entry by David Cummins powered by Serendipity v1.0

Links in this article

The LKSF book

The book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here

Twitterfeeds

twitter.com/c0t0d0s0
just blogged: links for 2010-03-13: EsoWatch Â» Ein bisschen â€œhomÃ¶opathischeâ€ Brustkrebsfors... http://bit.ly/bCTDGu

twitter.com/codenews
6933979 s10u9_04 nxge: undefined symbol 'hv_niu_cfgh_tx_logical_page_info' http://bit.ly/b7GQB5

twitter.com/SunPatches
134008-32 - Cumulative Maintenance HOLDDATA Sun StorageTek ELS MVS 7.0. Available since Mar/11/10. http://bit.ly/c1Y5x1

twitter.com/SolPatchesX86
119784-15 - SunOS 5.10_x86: bind patch. Available since Mar/12/10. http://bit.ly/928cLT

twitter.com/SolPatchesSPARC
114014-26 - SunOS 5.9: libxml, libxslt and Freeware man pages Patch. Available since Mar/12/10. http://bit.ly/9nXcb4