Glenn Marcos. Selection Committee RLI No. R R2 Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution

Transcription

1 Finance and Administrative Services Department PURCHASING DIVISION 115 S. Andrews Avenue, Room 212 Fort Lauderdale, Florida FAX DATE: September 27, 2013 TO: FROM: RE: Selection Committee Members Brenda J. Billingsley, Director, Purchasing Division Glenn Marcos Digitally signed by Glenn Marcos DN: cn=glenn Marcos, o=purchasing Division, ou, c=us Date: :51:54-04'00' on behalf of Brenda J. Billingsley Selection Committee RLI No. R R2 Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution This memorandum contains supplementary communication which includes the following attachments: Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Ciber, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Infor, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from CedarCrestone, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Applications Software Technology Corporation. Additional correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Applications Software Technology Corporation. dated September 27, 2013 from Ciber, Inc. Presentation/Ranking Meeting Minutes from. c: Glenn Marcos, Assistant Director, Purchasing Division Karen Walbridge, Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division Carolyn Messersmith, Purchasing Agent III, Purchasing Division Glenn Miller, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office Andrea Froome, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office Rene Harrod, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office John Bruno, Chief Information Officer, Enterprise Technology Services Division Melissa Grimm, ERP Project Administrator, Enterprise Technology Services Division BJB/cmm attachments Broward County Board of County Commissioners Sue Gunzburger Dale V.C. Holness Kristin Jacobs Martin David Kiar Chip LaMarca Stacy Ritter Tim Ryan Barbara Sharief Lois Wexler

2 September 27, 2013 To: From: Subject: Broward County Ciber, Inc. Responses to the alleged misleading claims for RLI R R2 We welcome the opportunity to respond to certain claims made by competing vendors, as provided in attachments delivered to Ciber via on September 26, 2013, regarding the subject RLI. Top 20 Counties CedarCrestone Letter Dated September 24, 2013 CedarCrestone s claims are inaccurate regarding the Top 20 Counties portion of the Ciber presentation: Ciber s position is we are the only vendor competing at Broward to have Primed similar scoped ERP implementations at the Top 20 Counties, which we still believe is correct o Apparently CedarCrestone, or members of their team, have contracted with some of these Counties for services, but only Ciber has Primed Top 20 County ERP implementations o CedarCrestone s aggregated list as provided to Broward via a letter dated September 24, 2013 is meaningless in the context of this subject about Priming the largest County ERP projects Top 20 Criteria o Ciber s slide #17 clearly states the criteria for Top 20 inclusion as Rankings based upon Annual Operating Budget, Population, and Number of Employees, not as measured by population as CedarCrestone claims King County Project o Ciber Primed and completed the ERP implementation known as the King County ABT Program, as is stated on our slide #21 o King County is a reference customer for Ciber and the video we presented from the King County Chief Administrator at the 9/11 SC meeting is proof o Ciber acknowledges that CedarCrestone has a few former Ciber employees who did work on the King County project during their employment at Ciber o CedarCrestone s continued claims around the King County project are blatantly misleading o Note that Ciber s King County project included transit; Ciber also implemented ERP for Denver RTD Page 1

3 September 27, 2013 Document Management System CedarCrestone Letter Dated September 18, 2013 CedarCrestone s claims are inaccurate regarding the WebCenter product inclusion: Ciber s clear intention to provide this product is shown in our response to the subject RLI, Exhibit 2 Functional Requirements Matrix, where we list WebCenter in the Module Required column for certain categories (IT 39.00, 40.00, 41.00, , and ) The WebCenter product was incorrectly categorized and inadvertently left off of the Oracle software pricing itemization of products in our response Ciber s letter dated June 28, 2013 was not an offer as claimed, but a response to a specific clarification question asked by the County following Oral presentations, Please clarify the cost of the proposed Web Center document management solution that was proposed including all relevant cost components. o Ciber replied with a detailed and itemized response for all relevant cost components as requested o As this cost was part of our overall cost estimating, there is no incremental charge to the County o Ciber did not offer any free labor as CedarCrestone claims This was not a change to our proposal but the clarification of an oversight We understand the significance of this project to the County, and very much appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. Thank you, Vic Bentley Client Partner, Public Sector Oracle Practice Ciber, Inc. Page 2

4 Infor Response to BROWARD COUNTY R R2, Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution Response to the Alleged Misleading Claims September 27, 2013 Submitted by: John Cifor, Sr. Account Executive office: mobile: Infor Public Sector

5 September 27, 2013 Ms. Carolyn Messersmith, Procurement Agent II Broward County Finance and Administrative Services Department Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida RE: Responses to the alleged misleading claims Dear Ms. Messersmith: Infor appreciates the opportunity to respond to the alleged misleading claims regarding our proposal. As you heard at the Selection Committee meeting, Infor is a responsive bidder to RLI No. R R2, and is the lowest cost responder by over $15 million. This is significant cost savings relative to the other bidders, and this should matter a lot to the citizens of Broward County. We are able to offer the lowest cost because our single handshake solution provides inherent cost savings that we are able to pass on to you. Infor is the only bidder implementing, hosting, and supporting our own software. As such, there is no risk premium for finger pointing in our proposal. We accept full responsibility for the success of the County ERP project. No other bidder brings the software manufacturer to the table to stand behind your success and verify the roadmap of the solution you will implement. Unlike the Oracle ERP solutions under consideration, the Lawson ERP is our go-forward solution that will continue to be invested in and supported. The PeopleSoft roadmap presented by Cedar Crestone was misleading in that they used it to argue that PeopleSoft, not E-Business, is Oracle s future. The truth is that neither PeopleSoft nor E-Business is Oracle s future their future is the Fusion ERP. We recommend that the County clarify directly with Oracle what platform Fusion is being built on, as well as confirm in writing that a migration from PeopleSoft or E-Business to Fusion would be free to the County (including implementation costs) in order to avoid investing in a solution that has a roadmap to replacement. The Infor proposal offers not only the lowest cost, but the lowest risk and greatest value to Broward County. As the 3 rd largest supplier of enterprise applications and services worldwide, Infor is exponentially larger than the other bidders under consideration. We have the financial fortitude and deep resource bench to deliver this critical County project, and we stand behind our original proposal. We intend to deliver this project on time and within budget. Performance Management and Data Warehousing/Analytics As you heard directly from Infor s President, Duncan Angove, during the opening session of our solution demonstration, Infor is investing heavily in expanding and enhancing the Infor Lawson solution. Capabilities of the Lawson solution have evolved significantly since our proposal response was submitted. The licenses that were proposed now offer greater functional fit to the County's requirements, particularly in the areas of Performance Management and Business Intelligence. Our original proposal included Lawson Business Intelligence (LBI), and as noted in our Responses to Clarification Questions document dated July 20, 2012, "The latest version of Lawson Business Intelligence, including Lawson Analytics and Business Performance Warehouse, will be provided to Broward County as part of our proposal at no additional cost." This is not a deviation from our original proposal; it is simply an evolution of capabilities of the proposed LBI license.

6 Similarly, we now offer robust performance management capabilities as part of our proposed Budgeting and Planning solution. We learned during the software demonstrations that Broward has a performance-based culture, and that establishing performance goals / providing timely reporting and feedback are critical. We are pleased to be able to assure Broward County of our ability to meet your needs in this area. This is not a deviation from our original proposal; it is simply an evolution of capabilities of the proposed Budgeting and Planning license. Provision of Hosting Infor offers the County a true single point of accountability for the entire ERP solution, including hosting. Infor is the single point of contact for all hosted and managed services items ranging from system administration, maintenance, end to end monitoring, service delivery management and product support. Broward County will not interact with Amazon as Infor is only leasing infrastructure through their service; contracting and delivery is handled between Infor and the County. Amazon Web Services provides system resources such as hardware, storage and secure facilities to Infor to provision our Cloud Customer base. Customers have their own Virtual Private Cloud that is created, maintained and managed by the Infor team. Best regards, John Cifor - Sr. Account Executive office: mobile: fax: john.cifor@infor.com

7 September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL Direct Phone: Brian E. Fees Chief Financial Officer Dear Ms. Messersmith: During Infor s presentation on September 11 th, Mr. Beal expressed his opinion that our comparison between the PeopleSoft roadmap and the E-Business Suite roadmap was a little misleading. To the contrary, the statements that were made while discussing the roadmaps for these application suites (slides 7 and 8, shown below) are simply factual observations that were submitted for the Selection Committee s consideration, including: New versions of PeopleSoft are being released more frequently than new versions of the E-Business Suite. The current version of PeopleSoft (which is 9.2) was released 40 months after the release of the previous version (which was 9.1). In comparison, the current version of the E-Business Suite (which is 12.2) was released 52 months after the release of the previous version (which was 12.1). The PeopleSoft roadmap slide has more definition than the comparable roadmap slide for the E-Business Suite: o The PeopleSoft roadmap slide shows planned dates for future releases while the E-Business Suite roadmap slide does not. o The PeopleSoft roadmap slide shows multiple future versions (9.3 and 9.4) while the E-Business Suite roadmap slide only shows versions up to 12.2, which is the current version. o We are not aware that any E-Business Suite roadmap slide exists which shows future dates or any future versions beyond Each of the roadmap slides shown below has been included in a publicly available document from Oracle, and the specific source has been cited within the slide Alderman Drive Alpharetta, GA p f

8

9 Applications Software Technology Corporation September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL Re: s from September 26, 2013 for RLI R R2 Dear Ms. Messersmith, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the claims being made by one of the vendors participating in the County s ERP bid process. We understand that this is a significant project for the County, and AST always strives to excel in competitive procurements based upon our qualifications and track record. We believe that it is important that we respond to these claims, and have carefully reviewed the other bidder s letters provided by you. We would like to submit the following clarifications to clear the deliberate negative campaign launched by CedarCrestone. 1. The assertions made by CedarCrestone against AST are baseless and intended to deliberately mislead the Selection Committee. For example, in paragraph one, they list the top Counties they have previously contracted with. This is a careful choice of words because the work performed at these Counties by this vendor is add-on miscellaneous work, and does not include a full implementation of the ERP software. Some of the Counties listed do not even use the PeopleSoft software, which CedarCrestone has proposed, for all of their ERP requirements. The listed Counties used other system integrators for their ERP system implementations and CedarCrestone and their partners provided small roles either during or after the implementation. As a matter of fact, CedarCrestone has not provided a single CedarCrestone County Government reference in their RFP response. If they had comparable ERP implementation experience at any County, we question why they were not provided in their proposal. It should also be noted that many of the proposed team members of this Vendor, including their proposed project manager, highlighted their experience working for a competing vendor and not for the CedarCrestone team. During their presentation and subsequent correspondence, they have tried to divert attention away from their lack of full life cycle ERP implementation experience for a local government inside the State of Florida or anywhere in the USA. 2. In paragraph 3, they have made baseless accusations about AST s track record by turning on its head the customary day to day project logistics that routinely adjust schedules for interim milestones and does not constitute the delay of the overall project itself. We stand by our claim of 100% on-time and on-budget performance. We have always worked with our customers to keep the ERP projects within scope and schedule and have never failed in our implementations or have projects terminated or litigated against. We fully understand the 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

10 Applications Software Technology Corporation resource constraints and organizational change management challenges faced by our local government customers when implementing such large transformation projects. We have demonstrated the flexibility in making small adjustments to go-live dates to meet the Customer s specific business needs, logistics and staff availability, which is within the prerogative of project managers and is done with mutual consent. To take out of context such interim phase/wave milestones and equate them with project delays is not only incorrect, it is deliberately misleading. At Pinellas County, the project plan included HR/Payroll going live first; the Financials modules were second; followed by other waves for budgeting and business intelligence etc. The first wave went live on January 1 st, 2011 as per the original schedule. The Finance team at the County requested an additional two months (for the second wave only) in order to use their reduced staff to complete the testing and training. The 5% county-wide staff reduction affected their team the most. It should be noted that the Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting module selected by the County (against our advice) was a brand new module and Pinellas County needed the extra time to test and absorb the module. AST and the County mutually agreed to move the go-live dates for Financials at no additional charge to the County. This was an interim phase within the larger project. We continued with the other phases of the project to deliver the entire project on time and as per Pinellas County s expectations. A minor (one person) staff reduction in the Purchasing team was made on a temporary basis by AST to accommodate the pairing with the County s available staff and was done with the County s understanding. AST provided unplanned additional resources free of cost to the County to help configure the Hyperion module when needed. Overall, the County received more consulting service hours than was originally proposed at no additional cost. The Hillsborough County and City of Tampa timeline quoted in the letter was what was listed in the statement of work based on a specific start date. The originally proposed project start date was not adhered to due to the delay in the execution of the contract. Once executed, the end date was appropriately adjusted. Please note that the adjustments to the project wave 1 go-live dates at Hillsborough were done with mutual agreement. The Hillsborough County and City of Tampa system has been live and stable for close to 2 months and the subsequent waves are progressing well. The fact that the AST team has accomplished the largest of its kind, shared service model of an Oracle ERP implementation for two municipalities in record time is a matter of pride and recognition, and not deserving of these baseless allegations. The management at the City and County recognize our accomplishments and were very complimentary of the hard work of both our AST employees and the flexibility shown by AST management to meet their unique needs. 3. AST had stated in our presentation that EBS was Oracle s flagship ERP system, and the only ERP product developed by Oracle on Oracle s technology and database platform. The other ERP software now owned by Oracle, came through acquisitions and do not exclusively run on Oracle technology and were not developed to fully leverage the Oracle technology. We had also pointed out that Oracle s safe harbor policy prohibits anybody from speculating on future releases of Oracle software. Oracle s Applications Unlimited policy attached herewith is the 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

11 only official and correct statement of direction on the longevity of the products and clearly establishes continued support for the Oracle EBS applications, for as long as Broward County would own the software. During our presentation, AST also stated that the use of Oracle EBS applications is more prevalent among local government jurisdictions and certainly among the local governments in Florida. The EBS list provided by CedarCrestone is incomplete and deliberately misleading. In the short time available to us, we have completed a partial list of EBS customers which shows many additional local government customers that utilize Oracle EBS. 4. Lastly, we would like to point out that Oracle cancelled CedarCrestone s partner status, and filed a lawsuit against them due to concerns regarding their deliberate misinterpretation of confidential information available to partners from Oracle. We suggest that the County should not waste its time on CedarCrestone s baseless and sweeping allegations against all other bidders and disqualify them immediately for lack of qualifications and unprofessional conduct. The consistent completion of ERP projects on-budget is rare in the industry and stands in stark contrast to the examples from our competitors on this RFP. To quote a few: Montgomery County, MD (EBS implementation) the final cost was almost double from the original proposed and contracted amount. King County, WA final cost reached almost 150% of the original contract. AST s qualifications and track record of full lifecycle E-Business Suite implementations for Florida government entities is unparalleled. This week we won the Oracle Excellence Award ( Partner of the Year, previously known as the Titan Award) from Oracle Corporation at its OpenWorld conference in San Francisco on September 22 nd, We have won the Oracle Partner of the Year award three times in the last four years, which further establishes our credentials. It is obvious from the references provided in the RFP responses that AST is the only vendor under consideration with multiple full lifecycle ERP implementations for comparable Florida municipal government entities. We look forward to further meaningful discussions with the County on this important engagement and stand ready to answer the Selection Committee s specific questions. If you have any additional questions or clarifications, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Regards, Rick A. McGaughy Regional Sales Director

12 Applications Software Technology Corporation September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL Re: s from September 26, 2013 for RLI R R2 Dear Ms. Messersmith, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the claims made by one of the vendors participating in the ERP bid process. AST always strives to win projects based on our qualifications and track record and we pride ourselves on communicating honestly and truthfully with both current and potential clients. We have carefully reviewed the other bidders letters provided to you and would like to submit the following clarifications to clear the deliberate negative campaign launched by CedarCrestone. 1. CedarCrestone s allegations against AST are baseless and intended to deliberately mislead the Selection Committee. For example, in paragraph one, they list the top Counties they have previously contracted with. However, what CedarCrestone fails to mention is the fact that the work they have performed at these Counties is add-on miscellaneous work, and does not include full implementation of the ERP software. Some of the Counties on the list do not even use the PeopleSoft software, which CedarCrestone has proposed for Broward County. Additionally, the Counties they have listed used other system integrators as the Prime Contractor for their ERP system implementation, while CedarCrestone and their partners provided small roles either during or after the implementation. In CedarCrestone s RFP response they did not include a single reference from a full lifecycle ERP implementation at a County government. The selection committee should seriously consider why, if CedarCrestone had the comparable ERP implementation experience, did they not provide these references with their formal proposal. Also many of the proposed team members from this Vendor, including the project manager, highlighted experience; most of which was actually performed while employed by another competing consulting firm. During the presentation and subsequent correspondence, through a clever of choice of words and baseless allegations against all other bidders, they have tried to divert the attention away from their lack of experience in delivering a full life cycle ERP implementation for a local government inside the state of Florida or anywhere in the USA Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

13 Applications Software Technology Corporation 2. In paragraph 3, they made baseless accusations about AST s track record by misrepresenting the adjustments made to a 3 year schedule for interim milestones and which does not constitute the delay of the project itself. We stand by our claim of 100% on-time and on-budget performance. We have always worked with our customers to keep the ERP projects within scope and schedule and have never failed in our implementations or have projects terminated or litigated against. We fully understand the resource s and organizational change management challenges faced by our local government customers while undergoing large transformational projects. We have routinely demonstrated flexibility in making small adjustments to the go-live dates to meet the Customer s specific business needs, logistics and staff availability, which is within the prerogative of project managers and is done with mutual consent. To take out of context such interim phase/wave milestones and equate them with project delays is not only inaccurate, it is deliberately misleading. At Pinellas County, the project plan called for HR/Payroll to go-live first; Financials modules were second; followed by other waves for budgeting and business intelligence. The first wave went live on January 1 st, 2011 as per the original schedule. The Finance team at the County requested an additional two months (for the second wave only) in order to use their reduced staff to complete the testing and training. A county-wide staff reduction of 5% affected the implementation team the most. It should be noted that the Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting module selected by County (not on AST s advice) was a brand new module and Pinellas County needed the extra time to test and absorb the module. AST and the County mutually agreed to move the go-live dates for Financials at no additional charge to the County. This was an interim phase within the larger project. We continued with the other phases of the project to deliver the entire project on time and per Pinellas County s expectations. A minor staff reduction of one person in the Purchasing team was made on a temporary basis by AST to accommodate the pairing with County s available staff and was done with the County s understanding. AST provided unplanned additional resources, free of cost, to the County to help configure the Hyperion module when needed. Overall the County received more hours of consulting services than originally proposed, at no additional cost. The timeline quoted in the Hillsborough County and City of Tampa letter was what was listed in the statement of work based on a specific start date. The project start date was not adhered to due to the delay in the execution of the contract, therefore the end date was appropriately adjusted. The adjustments to the project wave 1 go-live dates at Hillsborough were done with mutual agreement Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

14 Applications Software Technology Corporation The system has been live and stable for close to 2 months and the subsequent waves are progressing well. We are proud of the fact that the AST team has accomplished the largest of its kind shared service model of an Oracle ERP implementation for two municipalities in record time and CedarCrestone s allegations of problems with this project are baseless. The management at the City and County recognize the accomplishments and were very complimentary of the hard work of AST employees and with the flexibility shown by AST management to meet their unique needs. 3. AST stated in our presentation that EBS was Oracle s flagship ERP system, and the only ERP product developed by Oracle on Oracle s technology and database platform. The other ERP software now owned by Oracle, came through acquisitions and do not exclusively run on Oracle technology nor have they been developed to fully leverage Oracle technology. We also pointed out that Oracle s safe harbor policy prohibits anybody from speculating on future releases. Oracle s Applications Unlimited policy attached herewith is the only official and correct statement of direction on the longevity of the products and clearly establishes continued support for the Oracle EBS applications, for as long as Broward County would own the software. 4. Lastly, we would like to point out that CedarCrestone has demonstrated unprofessional, speculative and liable behavior which includes deliberate misinterpretation of confidential information available to partners from Oracle. Their actions have in the past resulted in the cancelation of CedarCrestone's partner status with Oracle, as well as Oracle filing a lawsuit against them. We suggest that the County not waste time considering CedarCrestone's baseless and sweeping allegations against other bidders and disqualify them immediately for lack of qualifications and unprofessional conduct. The consistent completion of ERP project on-budget is rare in the industry and stands in stark contrast to the examples from our competitors on this RFP. To quote a few: Montgomery County, MD (EBS implementation) the final cost almost doubled from that in the original contract. King County, WA cost escalated significantly from the original contract. AST s qualifications and track record of full lifecycle E-Business Suite implementations for Florida government entities is unparalleled. This week we won the Oracle Excellence Award ( Partner of the Year previously known as the Titan Award) from Oracle Corporation at its OpenWorld conference in San Francisco on September 22 nd, We have won the Oracle Partner of the Year award three times in the last four years, which further establishes our credentials Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

15 Applications Software Technology Corporation It is obvious from the references provided in the RFP responses that AST is the only vendor under consideration with multiple full lifecycle ERP implementations for comparable Florida municipal government entities. We look forward to further meaningful discussions with the County on this important engagement and stand ready to answer the Selection Committee s specific questions. Please feel free to reach me at the contact information below for any further clarifications. Regards, Rick A. McGaughy Regional Sales Director Attachments: Oracle Applications Unlimited Brochure Oracle Lifetime Support Policy Brochure Oracle EBS Customer List 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL Phone Fax

16 An Executive Guide to Oracle Applications Unlimited Summary of Applications Unlimited: 1. Applications Unlimited is Oracle s plan to provide ongoing enhancements to all our application product lines beyond the delivery of Oracle Fusion Applications. The key driving factor is the protection of our customer s investments. Our commitment has been demonstrated by new major releases of all our applications product lines. 2. Not only will we keep enhancing our applications, we will also keep supporting them. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy further extends Oracle s support for its applications. 3. Applications Unlimited does not impact the timeline around Oracle Fusion Applications. The scale of our applications business allows us to continue investing in all of our existing product lines, including our Fusion Applications, which in turn allows us to address a wide range of customer requirements. 4. Choice is the operative word. Customers can stay where they are for as long as they want or move to next-generation applications when they are ready. Everybody can get there, in time, based on their business needs. There will be no forced migration. Applications Unlimited is Oracle s plan to provide ongoing enhancements to all our applications product lines beyond the delivery of Oracle Fusion Applications. Applications Unlimited will provide customers with more visibility into our plans and help you derive continual success with your current applications by delivering dedicated, worldclass development and support for years to come. The key driving factor behind this strategy is protecting our customer s investments. To further protect our customer s investments, Oracle offers a Lifetime Support Policy. Oracle s industry-leading support policy covers your entire technology environment, from database to middleware to applications. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy puts our customers in control of their upgrade strategy. Our flexible support policy stages make it easier to plan and budget for Oracle s product upgrades. Along with the Lifetime Support Policy, Applications Unlimited is beneficial to customers because Oracle is giving customers the option to choose what is best for their business. Customers can continue to derive value from their existing applications, which we plan to continuously update, or they can upgrade to future technologies if there is a business case to do so. It is entirely the customer s choice. There will be no forced migrations. Applications Unlimited will not impact the planned delivery of Fusion Applications. In addition to providing ongoing enhancements to the current Oracle Applications, Oracle has dedicated development teams designing the first release of Oracle Fusion Applications and working through upgrade scenarios with customer advisory boards and user groups. Our strategy allows us to protect the investments customers have made in Oracle Applications. Oracle has the resources to continue working on our existing product lines. When Oracle acquired PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, and Siebel, the vast majority of their development and support teams were retained. In addition, we are leveraging our Oracle Fusion Middleware platform and infrastructure investments across all product lines. Prior to the acquisitions, each of the product lines had significant resources allocated to individual next-generation initiatives. The combined companies have more resources than the acquired companies Copyright 2006, Oracle. All rights reserved. Oracle, JD Edwards, and PeopleSoft, and Siebel are registered trademarks of Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Page 1 of 2

17 had separately. These resources can be focused on functional enhancements instead of overlapping development on infrastructure for each of the product lines. With the simultaneous launch of five new product releases, Oracle is delivering on our promise of Applications Unlimited: providing customers with continued releases in each product line, lifetime support, and a clear upgrade path to future releases. Oracle is working closely with our customer communities - including our CIO Advisory Board, Product and Industry Strategy Councils, and Customer Advisory Boards (CABs) - and with individual customers to determine product direction. We are also dedicating extensive time to analyzing customer enhancement requests across all product lines. In addition, Oracle's independent global User Groups have created a single "Fusion Channel", through which user group members worldwide can assist and provide feedback directly into our development effort. To learn more about how to get involved with the Fusion Channel initiative, contact your local User Group, or go to Hwww.iouc.orgH for more information. More Resources: HTUwww.oracle.comUTH (search word: applications unlimited) HTUhttp:// tions-unlimited.htmluth The information provided is intended to outline our general product direction. It is intended for information purposes only, and may not be incorporated into any contract. It is not a commitment to deliver any material, code, or functionality, and should not be relied upon in making purchasing decision. The development, release, and timing of any features or functionality described for Oracle s products remains at the sole discretion of Oracle. Copyright 2006, Oracle. All rights reserved. Oracle, JD Edwards, and PeopleSoft, and Siebel are registered trademarks of Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Page 2 of 2

18 ORACLE INFORMATION-DRIVEN SUPPORT Oracle Lifetime Support Policy Oracle Applications

19 Oracle Applications Maximize your support investment, unlock the full value of your Oracle products, and control your upgrade strategy with the industry s leading support policy. Simple, predictable, flexible, and the most comprehensive support policy available, the Oracle Lifetime Support Policy helps drive your business success. Oracle s industryleading support policy covers your entire technology environment, from database to middleware to applications an industry first, only from Oracle. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy also puts you in control of your upgrade strategy. Our flexible support policy stages make it easier for you to plan and budget for Oracle s exclusive product upgrades. You ll enjoy continued peace of mind, knowing that we ll always be there to support your business. When it s time to upgrade, you ll have rights to major product releases, so you can benefit from Oracle s technology leadership and keep pace with the world of business. Expect lifetime support. Expect control of your technology future with Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 1

20 Oracle Lifetime Support: From Five Years to Forever Oracle Lifetime Support Policy With Oracle Support, you know up front and with certainty how long your Oracle products are supported. The Lifetime Support Policy provides access to technical experts for as long as you license your Oracle products and consists of three support stages: Premier Support, Extended Support, and Sustaining Support. It delivers maximum value by providing you with rights to major product releases so you can take full advantage of technology and product enhancements. Your technology and your business keep moving forward together. Premier Support provides a standard five-year support policy for Oracle Technology and Oracle Applications products. You can extend support for an additional three years with Extended Support for specific releases or receive indefinite technical support with Sustaining Support. Premier Support As an Oracle customer, you can expect the best with Premier Support, our award-winning, nextgeneration support program. Premier Support provides you with maintenance and support of your Oracle Database, Oracle Fusion Middleware, and Oracle Applications for five years from their general availability date. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates Tax, legal, and regulatory updates Upgrade scripts Certification with most new third-party products/versions Certification with most new Oracle products Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 2

21 Extended Support Your technology future is assured with Oracle s Extended Support. Extended Support lets you stay competitive, with the freedom to upgrade on your timetable. If you take advantage of Extended Support, it provides you with an extra three years of support for specific Oracle releases for an additional fee. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates Tax, legal, and regulatory updates Oracle Applications Unlimited: The Choice Is Yours Oracle Applications Unlimited and the Lifetime Support Policy represent our commitment to deliver an Oracle Superior Ownership Experience by protecting and extending your investment through enhancements to the products and solutions you have licensed. Oracle Applications Unlimited gives you the option to do what is best for your business: continue to derive value from your existing applications or upgrade to next-generation Oracle Applications, such as those built on Oracle Fusion Middleware, when it makes business sense. The choice is yours. Upgrade scripts Certification with most existing third-party products/versions Certification with most existing Oracle products Extended Support may not include certification with some new third-party products/versions. Sustaining Support Sustaining Support puts you in control of your upgrade strategy. When Premier Support expires, if you choose not to purchase Extended Support, or when Extended Support expires, Sustaining Support will be available for as long as you license your Oracle products. With Sustaining Support, you receive technical support, including access to our online support tools, knowledgebases, and technical support experts. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Fixes, updates, and critical patch updates created during the Premier Support stage Upgrade scripts created during the Premier Support stage Sustaining Support does not include New updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates New tax, legal, and regulatory updates New upgrade scripts Certification with new third-party products/versions Certification with new Oracle products For more specifics on Premier Support, Extended Support, and Sustaining Support, please refer to Oracle s Technical Support Policies. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 3

22 Oracle E-Business Suite Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends May 1999 Feb 2007 Not Available Jan May 2000 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite Oct 2000 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite Jan 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite Jun 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite Sep 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite Jan 2002 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite May 2002 May 2007 Not Available Indefinite Nov 2002 Nov 2007 Not Available Indefinite Jun 2003 Jun 2008 Not Available Indefinite Nov 2004 Nov 2010 Nov 2013* Indefinite 12 Jan 2007 Jan 2012** Jan 2015 Indefinite 12.1 May 2009 Dec 2016 ** Dec 2019 Indefinite 12.2 Sep 2013 Sep 2018 Sep 2021 Indefinite *For Sustaining Support for Oracle E-Business Suite , provided from December 2013 December 2015, Oracle will continue to provide: Severity 1 fixes, critical patch updates and United States Tax Form 1099 updates for the 2013 and 2014 tax years. During this period, payroll regulatory tax updates will only be provided for the countries and tax years specified below. Country 2013 Tax Year 2014 Tax Year United States and January 1, 2013 December January 1, 2014 December 31, 2014 Canada 31, 2014 United Kingdom N/A April 6, 2013 April 5, 2014 Australia N/A July 1, 2013 June 30, 2014 Customers must have the indicated baseline patches (or above) for new Severity 1 production bug fixes as per Patch Requirements for Extended Support of Oracle E-Business Suite Release (see Doc ID ). ** For more detailed information on EBS 12.0 and 12.1 bug fixing and for Extended Support minimum patch pre-requisites, please refer to the EBS Error Correction Support Policy (Doc ID ) For additional information regarding the above points, please see the EBS Support Policies FAQ (Doc ID ). Customers running Oracle Fusion Middleware 10gR2 and 10gR3 in the Oracle E-Business Suite version 12 internal technology stack will remain supported for the duration of the support period for Oracle E-Business Suite 12. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 8

23 Oracle s Product Hub Options for E-Business Suite Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Demand Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN 12.1 May 2009 May 2014 Not Available Indefinite Supply Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN Nov 2004 Nov 2010 Nov 2013 Indefinite Supply Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN 12 Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Jan 2014 Indefinite Oracle ilearning Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends ilearning 5.0 Jan 2005 Jan 2010 Not Available Indefinite ilearning 5.2 Sep 2008 Sep 2013 Sep 2016 Indefinite ilearning 6.0 Dec 2011 Dec 2016 Dec 2019 Indefinite Oracle Student Learning Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Student Learning 3.1.x Jan 2009 Jul 2014 Not Available Indefinite Student Learning 3.2.x Sep 2012 Jul 2014 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 9

24 Oracle s Hyperion Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustianing Support Ends Oracle Enterprise Performance Management Releases Essbase Analytics Link for Hyperion Financial Management ( and higher) Essbase Analytics Link for Hyperion Financial Management Link ( and higher) May 2011 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Essbase x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Essbase x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Application Builder for.net x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion BI x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion BI x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Hyperion Business Rules x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Capital Asset Planning x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Capital Asset Planning x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Data Integration Management x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Data Relationship Management x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Data Relationship Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Disclosure Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Close Analytics Dashboard x Oct 2011 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Close Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Quality Management x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Quality Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Management x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Financial Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Management Enterprise Edition x Apr 2013 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Performance Scorecard x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Performance Scorecard x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 23

25 Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Hyperion Planning x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Planning x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Project Financial Planning x Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Profitability and Cost Management x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Profitability and Cost Management x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Quantitative Management and Reporting for Solvency II 2.1.x Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Strategic Finance x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Strategic Finance x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Tax Provision x Feb 2013 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Workforce Planning x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Workforce Planning x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Crystal Ball x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Crystal Ball x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Oracle Integrated Margin Planning x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Oracle Strategic Operational Planning x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite System 9 Products Application Link 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Jun 2010 Application Link 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2009 Not Available Jun 2010 Business Intelligence x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.0.x Business Intelligence + Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.2.x Business Intelligence + Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.3.x Business Intelligence + Application Builder (J2EE and.net) 9.0.x Business Intelligence + Application Builder (J2EE and.net) 9.2.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 24

26 Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Capital Expense Planning 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Capital Expense Planning 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Capital Expense Planning 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 25