« Time when you’re dead | Main | Yes, We Lowered Our Prices on our Security Event Manager Appliances Part 2 »
Yes, We Lowered Our Prices on our Security Event Manager Appliances
Many of you will have noticed that Monday we announced a price cut for our SEM products. We did this for one reason only, to establish a market value for the core features of security event management. There are many blogs talking about what we did, but one of the most thoughtful ones to catch our attention was by Rocky over at VisibleRisk.
Let me explain the rational, but first, before you get all glass-half-empty on me, I’ll point you to our last 3 earnings statements (3rd quarter, 4th quarter, 1st quarter). For those of you with an investment in our future, relax, we’re doing great.
We just want alerting
So back to the price slashing. As you know, we have a new leadership team here at Logging Towers™ under the watchful eyes of Guy Churchward and a re-energized board. One of the first tasks this new team undertook was a market assessment and an install base assessment. Together they’ve racked up thousands of air miles listening to customers, partners, prospects and the competition.
What they found was that the overwhelming majority of our customers and prospects express their needs as this – they want core functionality, like alerting.
A bit like when you try and buy a new car, you ask for something sexy and fast but in reality you actually want something sexy and fast, that gets the kids to school, gives good MPG, has long service intervals, has a bike rack for the weekends, maybe a roof rack for the HomeDepot run. Oh and you need a Sat Nav. Does it come in Red?
SEM is just the same. Our customers want a flashing box, a pager alert, an email, or a trouble ticket opened when “bad things” happen. That’s the sexy and fast. But they also then want to ask what I’ve previously called The Million Dollar Question, what else happened to cause the alert (investigative forensics). This then leads to demands for regular reporting, trending analysis, and closed-loops to improve the alerting. Then they start thinking about the drive to school; should there be an alternative route, what if we need to car pool, etc, and so HA, pipe-management, roles based access, and infrastructure integration get discussed.
The conversation is always long and convoluted, but still, the customer only wants the basics. And they should be charged accordingly. That’s what we’ve done.
Posted May 18, 2010 in LogEd , LogLogic News | Permalink
August 2010
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |
Categories
Archives
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
Blogroll
Blogroll
Compliance
Good Reading
- Internet and Web Security Review
- Log Management ROI
- Log Management Best Practices
- SANS Institute Log Management White Paper