Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

43
Executive Summary Manhattan Associates, a supply chain software company had an amazing record of 18 straight years of growth and profitability, growing to $337 million in revenue by 2007. Along with Business Objects, Kronos, Microsoft, and SAP, it was one of only five software companies in the world that had record of ten or more years of continuous growth and profitability. Then came the year 2008 which did not bode well for Manhattan, it’s revenues dipped for the first time in the history of the company and then it dipped further in 2009 by 26%. This report first attempts to look at the strategies which helped Manhattan compile it’s amazing record of growth for so many continuous years and then it tries to find out the reason for it sharp decline in the recent past.

Transcript of Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Page 1: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Executive SummaryManhattan Associates, a supply chain software company had an amazing record of 18 straight years of growth and profitability, growing to $337 million in revenue by 2007.Along with Business Objects, Kronos, Microsoft, and SAP, it was one of only five software companies in the world that had record of ten or more years of continuous growth and profitability. Then came the year 2008 which did not bode well for Manhattan, it’s revenues dipped for the first time in the history of the company and then it dipped further in 2009 by 26%.

This report first attempts to look at the strategies which helped Manhattan compile it’s amazing record of growth for so many continuous years and then it tries to find out the reason for it sharp decline in the recent past.

Page 2: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Table of ContentsExecutive Summary.....................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................3

Company Introduction.................................................................................................................................4

Company History:....................................................................................................................................5

Solutions Offered By Manhattan.................................................................................................................9

Competitors...............................................................................................................................................11

Direct Competitor Financial Comparison...............................................................................................11

Software Companies Ranked By Sales...................................................................................................12

Best of the Breed Players:.....................................................................................................................13

JDA Strength and weaknesses.............................................................................................................14

Gartner Magic Quadrant for Warehouse...............................................................................................15

Gartner’s view about Manhatttan.........................................................................................................16

Gartner’s view about RedPrairie............................................................................................................19

Summary of capability comparison.......................................................................................................21

Financial Position in 2006......................................................................................................................21

Financial Position in 2009......................................................................................................................22

What had worked well for Manhattan in the past.....................................................................................22

What Went Wrong then............................................................................................................................24

What lies ahead.........................................................................................................................................26

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................26

References.................................................................................................................................................27

Appendix...................................................................................................................................................27

Table 1: Revenue and Income statement..............................................................................................27

Table 2: Balance Sheet for last 10 years................................................................................................28

Table 3: Income statement 10 years......................................................................................................29

Table 4: Cash flow Statements for last 5 years......................................................................................29

Manhattan Associates Company Principles...........................................................................................31

Manhattan Associates Technology partners-........................................................................................32

Page 3: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Introduction This study aims to find out the reasons behind Manhattan’s sudden reversal in growth while its competitors market share grew. Late 2008 was when the effect of global economic meltdown started becoming visible- but it was not the first time Manhattan was witnessing the downturn – in 2001 during the dot com burst it weathered the storm pretty well and in fact its revenue grew by close to 13%; actually during the recessionary times the spending on product to improve the supply chain efficiency actually grows as companies could not afford to have their supply chain in disarray.So what is the reason which prevented Manhattan to leverage the situation to best of its advantage, what prevented it to foresee the market trend?

The answers to these questions are very important if Manhattan has to go back to its earlier growth trajectory.

I have spent close to eight years in Manhattan and through this report I want to highlight how even good performing companies too can make blunders and deviate from its own chosen path. I have tried to present the analysis through publically available literature and data and tried to avoid giving any insights from my personal experience.

The report will look at the company’s background- its guiding principles- what made it so successful, will look at the industry in general and its niche competitors in particular. Financial data available from yahoo finance, msn finance or company’s website is used in the report. Research reports available from market researchers like Gartner and Arcweb are also used in the analysis.

Page 4: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Company Introduction

Manhattan Associates, Inc.

Address: 2300 Windy Ridge Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30339 U.S.A. http://www.manhattanassociates.com

Statistics: Public Company Incorporated: 1990 as Manhattan Associates Software, L.L.C. Stock Exchanges: NASDAQ Ticker Symbol: MANH NAIC: 511210 Software Publishers

Company Perspectives: Large or small, global or local, established or newcomer ... if you're in business today, you're under pressure to be efficient, cost-effective and competitively astute. The old days of going out to the warehouse, picking products off the shelves and shipping customers a month's worth of inventory are gone. Today, advanced capabilities, automated operations, accelerated responsiveness and a rapid return on investment differentiate those who succeed from those who do not.

Key Dates: 1990: Manhattan Associates Software, L.L.C. is formed in Manhattan Beach, California. 1995: The company relocates to Atlanta, Georgia. 1998: The company completes its initial public offering of stock, becoming Manhattan Associates, Inc. in the process. 2000: Manhattan acquires Intrepa, L.L.C. 2002: Manhattan acquires Logistics.com, Inc.2003: Manhattan acquires Streamsoft LLC-Certain Assets from Streamsoft LLC2004:Manhattan Associates Inc acquires Avere Inc 2005:Manhattan Associates Inc acquires Evant Inc 

Principal Subsidiaries: Manhattan Associates Software, L.L.C.; Manhattan Associates, Ltd.; Manhattan Associates Europe, B.V.; Manhattan Associates, Pty Ltd.; Manhattan Associates (India) Development Centre Private Limited.

Page 5: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Principal Competitors: JDA; RedPrairie Corporation; SAP AG; Oracle; Catalyst International, Inc. ;

Page 6: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Company History:

Manhattan Associates, Inc. helps companies navigate their products through the supply chain, providing technology-based solutions to improve the efficiency of the distribution and transportation of goods. Manhattan's software, hardware, and services coordinate the flow of information among manufacturers, distributors, retailers, suppliers, transportation providers, and consumers. The company operates in eight markets, serving nearly 1,000 clients in the consumer goods, food, government, high-technology, industrial, life sciences, retail, and third-party logistics industries. Manhattan operates internationally through offices in the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Germany, and Asia, generating nearly a fifth of total sales from its overseas business.

Origins

As the 1980s began, the U.S. textile industry faced a daunting challenge. Global competition had intensified, with many foreign manufacturers selling their apparel for prices that undercut the capabilities of most domestic producers. The U.S. manufacturers needed to find a way to beat back the ever encroaching presence of overseas competitors. They needed a solution that would enable them to compete effectively. The problem was widespread and it was growing worse, prompting the industry as a whole to take action. Midway through the decade, studies were begun that brought together experts from a number of different fields. The studies were part of an industrywide initiative focusing on the supply chain, the various steps a product took to get from a manufacturer to a customer. The national undertaking hoped to lower the cost of goods sold by increasing the efficiency of the supply chain. "Quick Response" was the result of the inquiry.

Quick Response relied on technology to give U.S. clothing manufacturers an advantage over foreign competition. Through the use of technology, the flow of information among manufacturers, distributors, and retailers was improved substantially, allowing retailers to inform manufacturers and distributors of what merchandise they needed more rapidly. Manufacturers and distributors, for their part, were able to restock retailers more efficiently. The reduction in idle inventory enabled textile product retailers to reduce the cost of goods sold, making the industrywide initiative a success.

Manhattan's four founders were involved in the studies that produced Quick Response. The founding group was led by Alan J. Dabbiere, the individual who would lead the company during its first decade of existence. Dabbiere participated in Quick Response pilot projects as part of his job at Kurt Salmon Associates, a management consulting firm he joined in 1986. Kurt Salmon, which specialized in consumer products manufacturing and retailing in its consultancy work, served as an instrumental contributor in developing the blueprint for Quick Response and its counterpart, Efficient Consumer Response, a system for improving efficiency in the food and grocery industry's supply chain. Dabbiere represented an integral component of Kurt Salmon's efforts. He was joined in founding Manhattan by three technology-oriented executives from Infosys Technologies Limited, an India-based software development company founded in 1981. When Infosys opened its first international office in the United States in 1987, Deepak

Page 7: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Raghavan, Deepak M.J. Rao, and Ponnambalam Muthiah joined the company. In the years preceding the formation of Manhattan, Raghavan and Muthiah both worked as senior software engineers, specializing in the design and use of information systems for the apparel manufacturing industry. Rao, who performed the duties of an assistant project manager at Infosys, specialized in the design and use of information systems for the banking industry.

The four founders gathered in Manhattan Beach, California, as the new decade began. Their interest in enhancing supply-chain execution centered on one part of the complex process that carried a product from manufacturer to customer: the warehouse. They believed that distribution centers offered an ideal way to demonstrate what information technology solutions could deliver in efficiency to the supply chain. Manhattan Associates Software, L.L.C. was formed in 1990 to bring their idea to the marketplace. Dabbiere became the new company's president and chief executive officer, Raghavan its chief technology officer, Rao a vice-president, and Muthiah a vice-president.

PkMS Software Driving Growth in the 1990s

Manhattan was a new company in a new field, one in which the company would come to dominate. Its first software product aided customers in complying with the shipping-label specifications of retailers. Manhattan signed its first client in 1991, beginning a steady march that saw the company develop quickly. The centerpiece of the company's business was a warehouse management system, Manhattan's proprietary PkMS, which was developed not long after the company was founded. PkMS, a flexible, modular software system that controlled the efficient movement of goods through the supply chain, drove Manhattan's physical and financial growth throughout the 1990s. By using PkMS, a company could manage the checklist of tasks assigned to a distribution center. PkMS managed receiving stock, locating stock, picking stock, verifying orders, and packing and shipping product, orchestrating, in an efficient manner, the complex dance of packages moving in and out of a warehouse. The benefits to the customer were as numerous as the number of tasks that fell under the purview of PkMS. Inventory turnover increased, inventory accuracy improved, response time decreased, labor productivity increased, and customer service improved, yielding advances in efficiency that translated into reduced costs and increased profits for the customer.

Manhattan's solutions resolved some of the most pressing problems challenging U.S. textile manufacturers, distributors, and retailers. The idea that began in Manhattan Beach flowered into a growing financial enterprise. By 1993, Manhattan had developed into a $3.3 million company. The following year, when it signed its 50th customer to license PkMS, the company nearly doubled its sales, generating $6.5 million in revenue. In 1995, a year that marked the arrival of the company's 25th employee, Manhattan relocated from the beach that gave it its name and settled in Atlanta, Georgia. Sales during the year leaped upward again, reaching $11.2 million. After a modest gain to $14.4 million in 1996, Manhattan recorded a remarkable surge in financial growth in 1997, more than doubling its sales to $32.4 million. By this point, the Dabbiere-led venture was contemplating its debut on Wall Street.

By the end of 1997, Manhattan had made its mark in the warehouse management system sector of supply-chain execution. The company added 56 new clients during the year, giving it a

Page 8: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

customer base of more than 250 companies. These customers, who reflected Manhattan's diversification beyond the apparel industry, included members of the consumer products and the foodservice and grocery industries. Calvin Klein, Dean Foods, Mikasa, SEIKO Corporation of America, and Patagonia were PkMS licensees, each finding rewards in using Manhattan's software system to manage their distribution centers. The company's payroll swelled, particularly in 1997, when the number of Manhattan employees shot up from 88 to more than 200. In October 1997, Dabbiere made room for the robust growth of the company by announcing that Manhattan was relocating its headquarters to another facility in Atlanta that was more than three times the size of the company's existing headquarters. To Dabbiere and his colleagues, the strident growth of the company suggested more than a move to larger quarters. The time had come for Manhattan's end as a limited liability company and its debut as a publicly traded company.

Initial Public Offering of Stock in 1998

Dabbiere and his team prepared for Manhattan's initial public offering (IPO) of stock, desiring to take advantage of the company's strong position. Manhattan's PkMS was the only warehouse management system designed exclusively for manufacturers and distributors who shipped to retail and grocery. After acquiring Performance Analysis Corporation, whose software helped determine the optimal storage location for inventory within a distribution center, Manhattan filed for an IPO in the spring of 1998. Manhattan Associates, Inc. was formed to acquire the assets of Manhattan Associates Software, L.L.C., leading to the sale of 3.5 million shares of stock on the NASDAQ at $15 per share.

Dabbiere quickly made advances after Manhattan's IPO. In July 1998, the company announced the formation of a subsidiary in the United Kingdom, an office near Heathrow Airport in Stockley Park. By this point, the company already enjoyed a European customer base, serving Revlon, Warnaco, Ocular Sciences, and Venator Group's European Footlocker. The subsidiary was formed to provide better support to Manhattan's existing clients and to cultivate additional European customers. The year of Manhattan's public debut also saw it become the first company to guarantee ongoing compliance with the stringent and specific guidelines demanded by the leading 100 retailers in the United States. Dabbiere also tapped into one of the strengths of his former employer in 1998, agreeing in September to acquire DCMS, the Distribution Center Management Systems software product developed by Kurt Salmon. By the end of the year, Manhattan boasted more than 350 customers operating in more than 750 sites worldwide.

As Manhattan concluded its first decade of business, the company was demonstrating surging growth. Fruit of the Loom became the 100th customer to install PkMS in 1999, representing a 56 percent increase from the previous year in the number of new clients secured. To help manage this growth, which saw sales increase to $85.2 million for the year, Dabbiere looked for outside help, announcing the appointment of Richard M. Haddrill as president and chief executive officer in October 1999. Dabbiere took the title of chairman, leaving the day-to-day management of the company to Haddrill, who had spent the previous three years serving as president and chief executive officer of Powerhouse Technologies, Inc., a $250 million diversified gaming technology company.

Page 9: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Under Haddrill's leadership, Manhattan celebrated its tenth anniversary and plotted its course for the new decade ahead. Late in the company's anniversary year, it acquired a Mishawaka, Indiana-based company named Intrepa L.L.C., a developer of transportation and distribution applications with more than 100 employees and seven offices in the United States. Intrepa served more than 250 customers in the healthcare, automotive, publishing, and industrial wholesale industries, counting Nissan, Dupont Merck, Gerber Products, and Novartis as some of its better-known clientele. The $30 million transaction was expected to add between $14 million and $18 million to Manhattan's revenue volume, giving the company more than 750 customers in 11 markets. "Intrepa LLC's current technology, broad solution footprint, deep domain expertise, and an impressive client list were key drivers behind our decision to acquire Intrepa," Haddrill remarked in a December 2000 interview with Manufacturing Systems.

The early years of the decade marked a serious decline in technology spending, making for a bleak start to the 21st century for many software companies. Manhattan was insulated somewhat from the downturn because of its focus on warehousing. In tight economic times, companies could not afford to have their warehouses in disarray. "Warehouse software is a less discretionary purchase than other areas of technology," an analyst explained in a December 3, 2001 interview with Investor's Business Daily. "Customers tend to invest in such software when they have some kind of significant problem. It's not just a matter of getting to the next level of performance." Manhattan's advantageous position as a warehouse specialist in the broader supply-chain software field helped the company record impressive growth while others suffered from the downturn. The company expanded into Germany and France in 2001, ending the year with more than $138 million in revenue. Manhattan's focus on warehousing shielded it from the worst of a recessive economy, but the company's niche in the supply-chain software field also was threatening to become a detriment. The dynamics of the supply-chain execution industry were changing. Manhattan, the "king of warehouse management," according to the January 17, 2003 issue of Investor's Business Daily, needed to widen the scope of its kingdom.

A More Comprehensive Manhattan Emerging in 2002

Competition within the supply-chain execution industry was taking on a new dimension. Companies larger than Manhattan, competitors such as Manugistics Group Inc., I2 Technologies Inc., and SAP AG, were encroaching on Manhattan's warehouse niche. Each of the three companies offered a wider range of business software than Manhattan, offering their customers a more comprehensive solution to problems along the supply chain. Haddrill needed to extend Manhattan's reach, and in November 2002 he announced a deal that expanded the services the company could provide to its customers. Manhattan agreed to acquire Logistics.com, Inc., a Burlington, Massachusetts-based logistics planning and execution firm. Logistics.com developed software to help trucking and rail companies handle routing and planning, offering three products: OptiManage, a comprehensive transportation management solution for shippers; OptiBid, a procurement solution for shippers; and OptiYield, a decision support and optimization solution for carriers. The acquisition of Logistics.com moved Manhattan out of the warehouse, giving the company the capability to address problems in both distribution and transportation.

As Manhattan reshaped itself from a warehouse management software provider to a broader supply-chain execution provider, changes in leadership set the stage for the company's future. In

Page 10: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

May 2003, Dabbiere announced he was leaving the company to devote more time to his family. Less than a year later, Haddrill announced he was leaving as well, which led to the appointment of Peter F. Sinisgalli as chief executive officer in July 2004. Under Sinisgalli's stewardship, Manhattan was expected to continue expanding its involvement along the supply chain, as the company endeavored to be not only the king of the warehouse but a dominant player in the supply-chain execution industry as well.

Solutions Offered By ManhattanPlatform Thinking™: The Common Approach for Uncommon Supply Chain Performance

Manhattan’s point of view is that a platform-based approach is the best way to optimize supply chains and promote innovation, long-term growth and enduring market advantage. Platform Thinking drives our supply chain principles, practices and solutions and makes possible economies of scale and efficiencies that bolster profitability, interactions that optimize service, and business insight that underlies uncommon competitive advantage.

Manhattan SCOPE®: Supply Chain Optimization - Planning through Execution is the embodiment of Platform Thinking. Manhattan SCOPE enables "whole chain awareness"-the power to see and act in ways that factor in storage, labor and scheduling constraints; transportation capacity, routing plans and fuel cost parameters; and inventory planning and buying decisions-whether real-time or ahead of time-so that company performance is optimized every time.

Manhattan SCOPE is expressly designed to capture the holistic power of your complex supply chain to increase profitability and deliver service levels that help your organization prosper. Only SCOPE provides a full range approach-from planning through execution-to optimize every link of your supply chain for an improved total outcome for your business.  

With unrivaled predictive technologies, a common process platform and key visibility, intelligence and adaptive functionality, SCOPE leverages the spectrum of people, tasks and events across your supply chain for the most efficient, accurate performance possible. SCOPE's modular service-oriented architecture facilitates the creation of cross-suite applications to address specific requirements core to your goals.

In an increasingly complex world of demand, you can't afford to simply manage your supply chain anymore-you have to optimize it. SCOPE: Supply Chain Optimization-Planning through Execution-is focused on getting you there.

Page 11: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Pic.: SCOPE Platform

The company offers Manhattan SCOPE and Manhattan SCALE, which are platform-based supply chain software solutions. Its Manhattan SCOPE is a portfolio of supply chain solution suites that include planning and forecasting, inventory optimization, order lifecycle management, transportation lifecycle management, and distribution management. The Manhattan SCOPE also includes X-Suite solutions comprising flow management and extended enterprise management. The company’s Manhattan SCALE is a portfolio of logistics execution solutions. It also provides professional services, including planning and implementation services; and customer support services, as well as training services. In addition, Manhattan Associates, Inc. sells computer hardware, radio frequency terminal networks, RFID chip readers, bar code printers and scanners, and other peripherals. The company offers its solutions in premise software and hosted Software-as-a-Service models. It serves suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and logistics providers.

Industries it caters to

Manhattan draws on its extensive experience with customers in your industry to develop SCOPE: Supply Chain Optimization—Planning through Execution solutions to help you meet the challenges you face every day:

Consumer Goods : Improve customer satisfaction, increase profits, implement complete traceability and reduce inventory levels and costs, all while expanding outlets and increasing profits.

Page 12: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Food : Respond quickly to changing demands, comply with burgeoning regulations and improve service levels. At the same time, enhance profits by reducing transportation costs and speeding deliveries.

Government : Procure, secure and track goods; reduce transit time; and manage returns and redeployments.

High Tech/Electronics : Share data and coordinate processes within divisions and among your trading network. See what's happening at every point in your supply chain to achieve competitive advantage despite industry consolidation and increased competition.

Industrial/Wholesale : Gain control of an increasingly complicated, worldwide supply chain with enhanced visibility of every step from order to delivery. Get your products to market faster, and at lower cost, by effectively managing transportation and warehouse costs and processes.

Life Sciences : Ensure compliance, increase security and improve tracking—all while minimizing logistics costs to make you more competitive.

Logistics Service Providers : Manage inventory and expectations, clients and channels at levels of efficiency you only dreamed of before.

Retail : Reduce inventory and increase turns while minimizing time to customer and stock-outs—all while reducing warehouse and transportation costs.

Transportation Providers : Avoid Hard Times Despite Soft Market and Rising Fuel Costs

Competitors

Direct Competitor Financial Comparison  

MANH JDAS ORCL PVT1 Industry

Market Cap: 649.25M 1.33B 164.66B N/A 274.72M

Employees: 1,900 3,000 105,000 N/A 511.00

Qtrly Rev Growth (yoy): 13.40% 65.30% 46.50% N/A 25.00%

Revenue (ttm): 246.67M 555.57M 31.99B 261.00M1 134.18M

EBITDA (ttm): 20.39M 136.87M 12.63B N/A 20.47M

Operating Margin (ttm): 8.57% 15.24% 34.00% N/A 8.47%

Net Income (ttm): 16.56M 20.37M 6.78B N/A N/A JDAS = JDA Software Group Inc.ORCL = Oracle Corp.Pvt1 = Red Prairie Corporation (privately held)Industry = Application Software1 = As of 2009  

Software Companies Ranked By Sales  

Company Symbol Price Change Market Cap P/E

Page 13: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Microsoft Corporation MSFT 28.83 1.32% 246.61B 12.42

IBM Software "Private"

Oracle Corp. ORCL 32.59 0.93% 164.66B 24.50

SAP AG SAP 56.13 1.76% 66.66B 23.78

CA Technologies CA 23.47 -7.45% 12.01B 15.29 

Best of the Breed Players:

There are only three major best-of-breed players above $100 Million in revenue within the Supply Chain Planning/Execution space – JDA, Manhattan Associates and RedPrairie.

JDA -Acquired i2 Technologies – January, 2010- the combined entity is almost twice the size of Manhattan.

Red Prairie- Privately held company- acquired in March 2010 by New Mountain Capital (NMC)

Manhattan’s Strength and weakness Analysis Manhattan Associates software strengths include its best in class WMS and TMS and this supply chain management system should be considered for any SCM initiative seriously looking at WMS and TMS. Manhattan Associates system weakness includes the absence of CRM software and an SRM system. Without an integrated suite of enterprise-wide applications, Manhattan is at a disadvantage when competing against other vendors such as Oracle and SAP.

Manhattan’s line up of SCM planning products is narrow and lacks robust features. S&OP and demand management lack the multi-level and the longer horizon planning structure of other enterprise software vendors, and they do not address demand shaping. Supply management supports replenishment features, but lacks support for other areas of supply management.

Manhattan’s Software architecture and cross application support lacks the robust features and functionality of several other software technology vendors.

Warehouse management systems make up 60% of the company’s revenue, with 40% derived from the other applications and modules.

MA Revenue and Income Statement - 10 Year Summary (in Millions)

Sales% Sales Growth EBIT

% Profit

Growth Depreciation

Total Net

IncomeProfit

Margin EPS

Tax Rate

(%)

Page 14: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Dec-09 246.67 -26.85% 20.39-

35.29% 11.4 16.56 6.71% 0.73 18.76

Dec-08 337.2 -0.06% 31.51-

33.90% 12.7 22.8 6.76% 0.94 27.64Dec-07 337.4 16.80% 47.67 38.62% 13.7 30.75 9.11% 1.13 35.49Dec-06 288.87 17.24% 34.39 4.37% 13.3 19.33 6.69% 0.69 43.79Dec-05 246.4 14.65% 32.95 -5.51% 12.1 18.64 7.56% 0.64 43.45Dec-04 214.92 9.20% 34.87 4.90% 10.78 21.63 10.06% 0.7 37.95

Dec-03 196.81 12.00% 33.24-

13.41% 11.01 20.58 10.46% 0.67 38.08Dec-02 175.72 12.37% 38.39 49.32% 8.57 23.61 13.44% 0.78 38.51Dec-01 156.38 12.81% 25.71 -1.15% 10.96 16.19 10.35% 0.53 37.04Dec-00 138.62 26.01 5.48 16.27 11.74% 0.53 37.45

Although the company has had a software-as-a-service (SaaS) offering with its TLM product for several years, management reports little interest in SaaS products.

AMR Research, however, has seen a significant rise in the interest for software as a service.

JDA Strength and weaknesses

JDA’s tradition and strengths are in retail systems, and their merchandise and store planning systems are leading products for the retail industry. Manugistics is considered a leader and innovator in SCM for manufacturing and distribution companies. Their combined enterprise software products, best practices and industry knowledge put JDA in a leadership position in S&OP, Demand Management and Supply Management. The TMS product acquired through the Manugistics acquisition is a full featured and top caliber transportation management system.

JDA’s weakness is the absence of WMS, CRM and SRM products. Without a complete integrated suite of SCM products, JDA is at a disadvantage when competing against vendors for who have integrated WMS, CRM and SRM.

The JDA software architecture and cross application support lacks the features and functionality of the other enterprise software solutions, including advanced functionality for system integration, web services and data management. With their diverse technologies (including IBM midrange, Microsoft .NET and Java), JDA architectural challenges are further complicated

Red Prairie Strength and Weakness analysis

Red Prairie’s supply chain software strengths are in WMS and TMS, along with a software

Page 15: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

architecture that supports critical functions for integrating third party systems and custom applications. The WMS and TMS applications are considered best in class distribution products and should be considered for any SCM software initiatives related to WMS and TMS.

Other than some very basic inventory management features, Red Prairie only supports supply chain execution functions. The inventory planning is for short-term horizons and lacks the structure of more full featured supply management solutions.

If a fully integrated SCM solution is high on the requirements, Red Prairie will be at a disadvantage, because of the cost and time to integrate and support a broader enterprise software solution.

Currently, RedPrairie has a major opportunity in front of it. Earlier this year RedPrairie was acquired by New Mountain Capital which is a private equity firm. According to Mike Mayoras, CEO of RedPrairie, this acquisition is a positive situation. According to him, RedPrairie is now positioned for making strategic acquisitions in areas such as SaaS where there is white space in their domain coverage.Here is the current go–to-market approach of RedPrairie along different areas such as process scope, industry coverage etc.

SCM process scope – Primarily Execution with limited planning. Strength in workforce management at DC and store. Beginning time phased replenishment with Flowcasting

Industry Coverage – Retail, food/beverage and consumer manufacturing. Presence in third party logistics, industrial manufacturing and Wholesale

Platform strategy – Works with Microsoft, LINUX and UNIX from a hardware platform perspective. On the retail side, RedPrairie has adopted the Microsoft software platform

SaaS Strategy – Hosted solution & SmartTurn’s multi-tenant WMS solution, Collaboration portal

RedPrairie has added SmartTurn’s multi-tenant SaaS WMS product to its E2e suite and renamed it RedPrairie On-Demand WMS. Over time, the product will be integrated with (or interfaced to) appropriate complementary RedPrairie’s offerings. Under SmartTurn’s pay-as-you-go (PAYG) model, customers pay a fixed monthly cost of US$1,200 per site/facility with unlimited users. There is also a one-time US$4,000 setup fee. Such appetizing functionality and price should help RedPrairie finally attract the lower end of the market.

Gartner Magic Quadrant for Warehouse

Page 16: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Pic: Gartner Magic Quadrant for WMS

Gartner’s view about Manhatttan

Manhattan offers three distinct WMS offerings targeted at different markets: WM for IBMi, which caters to customers that prefer the reliability and ease of operation of the IBMi platform; SCALE (previously Manhattan's WM for Windows), which is based on a Microsoft technical platform and caters to the SMB and WMS markets in emerging geographies; and Warehouse Management for Open Systems (WMOS), which caters to sophisticated warehouse environments. WMOS is the vendor's flagship WMS offering and is built on the vendor's SCOPE technical platform, which includes Manhattan's other supply chain solutions, such as transportation, distributed order management, replenishment and planning. Although the

Page 17: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

company has global operations, the majority of its business continues to come from North America and Western Europe. SCALE, however, is gaining traction in emerging markets. Even though the vendor's financial performance in 2009 was down largely because of the weak global economy, it remains stable, profitable, with cash reserves, and has continued its historically conservative financial operations. Manhattan is inclined to drive innovation in-house, unlike many other WMS vendors that innovate and grow through acquisition. Although the vendor has made some acquisitions, they tend to be early-stage offerings that are more easily integrated into its solution portfolio.

Strengths

With its 2010 version release, WMOS was moved onto Manhattan's SCOPE technical platform in 4Q09. It is now seamlessly integrated with all the other newer SCM solutions the vendor offers, like transportation, supply chain planning, returns management, flow, and distributed order management.

WMOS is in the Leaders quadrant because it offers industry-leading depth and breadth of both core and extended WMS capabilities. Manhattan has also demonstrated a continued ability to bring innovation to its core WMS solutions, which augments WMS and extends SCE processes, such as adding returns management, distributed order management, mobile warehouse management and landed cost management.

By moving the product onto SCOPE, WMOS version 2010 is now better suited to support a zero-modification implementation in complex operations. It's approaching what Gartner refers to as a model-driven application. It also offers tools for functional customization, using process modeling, workflow and scripting tools, as well as Web services to integrate with external solutions.

Manhattan's WMOS is broadly used in a variety of WMS environments, from moderately complex to extremely complex, sophisticated and high-volume warehouse operations.

The vendor is stable and has conservative financial operations.

Although Manhattan has made some acquisitions (notably transportation and supply chain planning), it is more focused on organic, self-directed innovation. The vendor continues to bring to market self-developed and complementary components like returns, flow, cost to serve, distributed order management and a new mobile WMS capability called FieldScout.

The company has a compelling vision for a next-generation SCE platform that exploits emerging technologies and decision-making enhancement through the use of

Page 18: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

embedded analytics and BAM. Manhattan has strategies and capabilities that push the boundaries of traditionally execution-centric WMS by enhancing SCE decision-making capabilities through the use of science and math.

Now that WMOS is on the SCOPE platform, the company can deliver on its SCE convergence vision, which remains the most extensive of all the SCM suite vendors.

Manhattan has established strategic relationships with select customers that committed to its SCOPE platform. This is something not typical of best-of-breed software vendors that lack the C-level-executive clout of large-scale suite vendors.

Cautions

Although WMOS has now been moved onto the SCOPE platform and aligns with Gartner's definition of a model-driven architecture, this is only a recent occurrence (released 4Q10), with customers just beginning the process of converting. In the short term, questions about maturity, performance and reliability apply, although these will be addressed during the next few months as existing and new customers go live on the new platform.

Exploiting model-driven applications will require new vendor and user skills during implementation to ensure that tailoring and personalization flow smoothly. Given the newness of this architecture, prospective clients must scrutinize and validate implementation plans and activities. They should also talk to early adopters.

Even though WMOS is now part of a broader suite, users should be careful not to tackle too many solution implementations simultaneously, which could lead to excessively long projects or possible challenges because of overreaching objectives. Users considering multiple solutions should plan a phased platform strategy that includes implementations of these solutions over time.

Warehouse management remains Manhattan's predominant business. Compared to the number of WMS users, adoption of the other SCOPE-based applications remains low, although user demand and implementation is growing. Furthermore, outside North America, there is inconsistent support for non-WMS, SCOPE-based applications, such as supply chain planning or transportation.

Page 19: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Gartner’s view about RedPrairie

The company's roots in WMS go back two decades, and it has survived several technology life cycle changes, from minicomputer, to client server and now to open systems. It recently underwent a change in ownership when its previous financial partner, Francisco Partners, sold the company to private equity firm New Mountain Capital. RedPrairie has multiple WMS offerings, several of which are legacy products. There are two that somewhat overlap and are actively marketed today: WM/R (formerly Dispatcher) and WM/D (formerly Discrete WMS). The vendor offers a broad portfolio of applications, including WMS and multiple extended WMS components as well as transportation management and retail management. Over the last several years, RedPrairie has primarily bought innovation through numerous acquisitions, enhancing its position in areas like transportation with fleet management, as well as retail workforce management and store operations. Most recently, the vendor acquired an early pioneer in cloud-based WMS, SmartTurn, but this offering has not been included or considered in this research.

Strengths

WM/D offers functional strength and competitiveness in most major deals for complex warehouses.

WM/D is in the Leaders quadrant because it offers industry-leading depth and breadth of both core and extended WMS capabilities.

RedPrairie has a long track record of delivering WMS solutions for some of the most complex warehouse operations, combining strong WMS products and services to support the needs of demanding clients.

The vendor has an intriguing SCE convergence vision for retail-oriented and consumer-packaged-goods-oriented, end-to-end supply chain strategies focused on linking supply chain operations to in-store activities and demand signals. However, this remains unconventional and unproven at this point.

RedPrairie offers strong delivery of related products, such as labor management, transportation and performance management.

Notable support is provided for work order management supporting lightweight manufacturing execution activities.

The vendor is making progress in consolidating its legacy DLX/P customer base on the

Page 20: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

WM/D product, which will yield deeper functionality as these more complex DLX/P customers migrate to and test the WM/D platform.

Component-based architecture gives the product flexibility, but it is not an SOA stack, model-driven application or a business process management (BPM) tool.

The vendor's new platform strategy is based on Microsoft technologies.

RedPrairie has strong application hosting infrastructure and experience, which allows users the flexibility to choose the application deployment strategy that best fits their needs, such as on premises, single-instance hosted or multitenant hosted. This also allows user flexibility to change deployment strategies in the future if business conditions change, such as bringing a previously hosted application in-house.

Cautions

This WMS is not a model-driven application that supports user customization. Although the WM/D technical architecture is acceptable and mature today, given the number of acquisitions and the breadth of its product portfolio, users must monitor the vendor's ability to modernize its applications. Historically, the vendor has had a strong track record in adopting new technologies and modernizing its applications.

Although the vendor sells into multiple industries, its primary focus and solution strategies are in consumer goods and retail.

RedPrairie has grown through acquisition and now has a portfolio of products, including multiple WMSs, some of which are relegated to a legacy support status and others that are redundant to WM/D. The vendor's stated intention is to continue and — now because of the change in ownership — accelerate acquisitions, which could result in future solution rationalization challenges.

The vendor has been very aggressive in selling new deals, often bundling multiple components to sweeten a deal. If users will use these components in a reasonable time frame, this is acceptable. However, users must be cautious not to overbuy, making what appears a good deal not as favorable because of excessive shelfware.

By now it is but obvious that Manhattan and Redprairie are the equal rivals and they can eat into each other’s market space. JDA though bigger in size does not have a go to market strategy and should not affect either Manhattan or Redprarie market share.

Page 21: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Summary of capability comparison

Manhattan Red PrairieStrong WMS and TMS and on the same SCOPE platform

Strong WMS and TMS but not on the same platform

WMS gives 60% of revenue but no WMS on SaaS

WMS on SaaS

Works with ERPs but the products are made to leverage the power of the platform.

Established integration touch points with most of the ERPs, no platform concept.

Did not acquire any WMS player recently Acquired WMS players and got customers added to its portfolio.

Financial Position in 2006

Michael Mayoras, RedPrairie’s CEO said that the privately held company had a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of over 20 percent in last 5 years (RedPrairie being a private company- the financial data is not so freely available)

$130M ; 11%

$189M ; 16%

$289M ; 25%

$110M ; 9%

$102M ; 8%

Manhattan Associates

Red Prairie

SAP

Oracle

Infor

Aldata

HighJump

Swisslog

Knapp Logistik

Dematic

Page 22: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Financial Position in 2009

246.67; 22%

261; 24%

600; 54%

Manhattan Red PrairieOthers

It is obvious that Manhattan has lost the market share during this period while Redprairie has grown bigger.

What had worked well for Manhattan in the pastManhattan had simple but effective business strategies to suit its entrepreneurial existence- some of them are-

Dominate Your Market By Building For Speed

Build an easy to integrate, easy to implement, and easy to use software product that costs significantly less than your competitors. With this strategy competitors complete just 10 or 12 installations a year, Manhattan Associates installed 67 systems in 1995 alone.

Architect Your Software Product For Low-Cost Development And Implementation

In designing their software product, PkMS, Manhattan Associates made several key architectural decisions that aligned with their business strategy.

Page 23: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

-- No custom code - This was the company's mantra. Build a software product that provided 80% of the required function out-ofthe- box. The rest would be handled not by custom code but by parameter settings in tables.

-- Make It Simple - When providing 80% of the functionality, do it with only 20% of the complexity. Competitors built very sophisticated products with all the proverbial bells-and-whistles.

-Take Advantage Of A Customer's Existing Systems – While other vendors were duplicating data that existed in customer's backend systems, Manhattan Associates interfaced directly with these.

Keep Customers For Life

While deciding on a set of market entry and R&D strategies, necessity again, led them to another set of fundamental decisions, all dealing with creating an intensely customer-focused culture. Without venture-backed funding, Manhattan Associates needed cash to keep the business going. The best way to get cash is to have satisfied customers who always stay as customers.

-- To Ensure Customer Satisfaction, Be A Solutions Company -Manhattan Associates faced a business model choice: be a product software company and let others use the software to provide customer solutions, or be a solutions company that provides the software and services to solve a business problem. Given the nature of the problem Manhattan was solving-warehousing systems and compliance with retailers' packaging requirements-Dabbiere and his partners believed that they needed a direct relationship with the customer. Therefore, they opted to be a solutions company.

-- Create "Ecstatic" Customers - Raghavan said their goal was not to create "happy" customers but to create "Ecstatic" customers.

Hire Smart Committed Employees With A Strong Work-Ethic

Lastly, like Microsoft, which acted as their model, the founders took hiring very, very seriously, instituting an extensive hiring process. And this didn't change as the company grew. When Richard Haddrill, the next CEO, was interviewing for the job, he went through a set of exhaustive interviews with the board and with the executive leadership-and, surprising for someone at his level, he took an aptitude test as well as a psychological test.

Solve Your Customer's "Customer Problem"While Manhattan's Associates competitors in the Warehouse Management System focused solely on wringing cost out of warehouse operations, Manhattan Associates

Page 24: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

took a broader approach, linking a manufacturer's warehouse operation with the needs of the retailer who received the goods.

What Went Wrong thenLet’s analyze some of the possible causes that may not have worked for Manhattan in recent times-

Misalignment of Business with respect to the Strategic Plan

Founders often don't stress strategic planning. They instinctively know their business and have executives who have all known each other for quite a while. So their management style is more informal. But as a company grows, it becomes increasingly harder to keep it aligned, having all parts of the organization working in sync on a common set of goals. With all the founders and initial set of executives gone and with some many M&A later the original values and guiding strategic principles are all lost.

With 2002 acquisition of Logistics.com came the LEMA platform (which was renamed SCOPE in 2010) which was a robust application development platform-but it was complex at the same time. Developing new applications using this platform was time consuming and error prone too- with not much investment done in automation of QA processes- it became costly to develop and maintain code.In 2007-2008 company spent close to $50M in migrating the WMS application to this platform. This high cost development violated their first two strategies- this must have put pressure on margins as well, which is shown in low profit margin of around 7%.

Steep learning Curve and inexperienced work force

In order to reduce cost and meeting the growing customer demand- management felt the need of hiring fresh college graduates in bulk from different universities across India.

Most of them had no or little programming skills- they were given a week’s training in the basic programming skills but this was hardly adequate. Making them learn SCOPE platform was another herculean task- supply chain domain itself is complex. On top of it they did not had the right monitoring and managing structure in place- to learn and be productive took almost an year for most of them. This strategy backfired – product quality suffered and cost of development further went up. This was again a violation of their original strategies.

Operational In-efficiencies

Page 25: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

By end of 2004 most of the development work started getting out of India office- including the major customer support activities- and below was the organization structure-

Pic.: Organizational structure before the restructuring

This org structure became a bottleneck in due course of time- for department heads sitting in US, to get any work done from their counterparts in India they had to go via the MD of India, which caused lots of customer issues.

Realizing the problem, the org structure was changed subsequently in early 2008 to a more network structure.

Not adequate attention was paid to quality during the product development- did not have any unit test cases- since the most of the framework code was legacy and no unit test was written ever- developing unit test cases for the whole system was not an easy task- hence it took backseat forever. QA test scripts were also not 100% automated. All of these resulted in poor code quality, which made customer unhappy.

With newer technologies replacing older technologies- the older staff of Manhattan became obsolete- causing drain on the bottom-line.

Departure of one of the key executive member and other key resources

On December 31, 2008, Pervinder Johar resigned from his position as Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of Manhattan Associates, Inc. (the “Company”) effective as of January 15, 2009. It is anticipated that Mr. Johar provide transition services to the Company until February 28, 2009. Pervider was playing a key role in giving a strategic direction to company, with his departure the company became direction less at least for some time. In all TMS deals he played a key role.

In a year or so – many key resources left the company on their own seeing no direction from higher management.

WMS- Head

MD(India)

IT/HR/Finance

TMS- Head AP - HeadDOM/RL-

Head

EVP(US)

Page 26: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

No new initiatives or innovation on product front-

Redprairie came with SaaS solution to capture the low cost segment but MA did not have such plans. It also did not try to make any serious attempt to get a different stream of revenue other than WMS- it had so many other products but they could sell only WMS. Over dependence on WMS did them in.

What lies aheadWith its most recent 2010 release, Manhattan announced that its WM for Open Systems (WMOS) is now available on its supply chain process platform (SCPP) and that all applications are now available with a single common data model, common transactional objects, and common functional components. The introduction of the support for a componentized architecture and a unified platform is good for Manhattan’s existing and prospective customers, but many other vendors in the market have had these capabilities for several years, like i2 Technologies with its Agile Business Process Platform (ABPP). Of course, the big ERP vendors have their own versions of this unified platform approach, too: Oracle’s Fusion Middleware and SAP’s NetWeaver. Manhattan is on the right track with its SCPP platform approach and may have jumped the market by using such standard technologies as AJAX interface technology and the Eclipse workflow modeling tools.

Although Manhattan has long had the capabilities to solve the backend requirements of store replenishment and direct-to-consumer fulfillment, there’s been a lack of sales and service applications required for true anywhere retailing. Now, integrating with IBM’s WebSphere Commerce product, Manhattan’s DOM is capable of capturing an order from any channel and fulfilling it from any location in the supply chain. In fact, DOM received the Best ISV Partner Innovation award from IBM at its WebSphere Commerce Leadership Summit.

ConclusionManhattan will need to continue to see an increase in the $1M-plus deals, differentiate itself from the big ERP vendors, and expand internationally in order to maintain its leadership position in the market. It seriously needs to think of getting into low cost WMS market and still provide the power of the SCOPE platform- which can happen only through WMS through SaaS.

Page 27: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Resources are the key to any organization’s success- this must be realized and key resources need to motivated and well taken care of.

Product Quality needs to be improved- more attention need to be paid on unit tests, continuous integration and automation of tests.

A culture of supporting innovation needs to be cultivated to survive in this high tech industry.

With these things in place Manhattan can not only retrace it growth path but can grow even more vigorously.

References1. Company’s Introduction: http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Manhattan-

Associates-Inc-Company-History.html2. Solutions Offered By Manhattan: http://www.manh.com/solutions/solutions-overview3. Competitors Data: http://in.finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=MANH4. Manhattan S/W analysis :http://www.erp.asia/manhattan.asp5. JDA S/W analysis :http://www.erp.asia/jda.asp6. Redprairie S/W analysis and financial data :http://www.erp.asia/redprairie.asp,

http://blogs.aberdeen.com/2010/05/27/redprairie-in-growth-mode-updates-from-redshift-20107. Gartner Magic quadrant:

http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/oracle/article147/article147.html

8. www.manh.com/library/case_studies.html .9. http://www.implu.com/releases/2009/20090107/19353/implu_viewer10. http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/stock-price?symbol=MANH 11. www.softwarebusinessonline.com:”Manhattan Associates: Skyscraper built”12. http://blog.technologyevaluation.com/blog/2010/06/07/redprairie-makes-a-smart-turn-into-

saas-wms/

Appendix

Table 1: Revenue and Income statement 2009 2008 2007 2006 Revenue:

Software license $34,68

6 $65,31

3 73,031 66,543

Page 28: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Services 189,85

0235,96

7 226,153 194,521 Hardware and other 22,131 35,921 38,217 27,804

Total revenue 246,66

7337,20

1 337,401 288,868 Costs and Expenses: Cost of license 4,726 5,961 5,334 5,796

Cost of services 84,349116,70

7 109,758 93,427 Cost of hardware and other 18,386 29,270 32,268 24,515 Research and development 36,681 48,407 46,594 41,468 Sales and marketing 36,137 51,177 53,406 45,888 General and administrative 29,946 37,145 33,366 29,143 Depreciation and amortization 11,418 12,699 13,617 13,247 Asset impairment charges -- 5,205 270 Restructuring charge 3,882 4,667 2,303

Total costs and expenses 225,52

5311,23

8 294,343 258,113 Operating income 21,142 25,963 43,058 30,755 3,390 3,443 Other (expense) income, net -756 5,545 1,218 195 Income before income taxes 20,386 31,508 47,666 34,393 Income tax provision 3,824 8,710 16,915 15,062

Net income $16,56

2 $22,79

8 30,751 19,331

Table 2: Balance Sheet for last 10 years

Page 29: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Balance Sheet - 10 Year Summary (in Millions)

Current Assets Current Liabilities Long Term Debt Shares OutstandingDec-09 264.71 81.35 0 22.5 MilDec-08 270.22 90.38 0 23.6 MilDec-07 271.66 85.96 0 24.9 MilDec-06 314.89 77.75 0 27.6 MilDec-05 273.4 68 0 27.2 MilDec-04 290.24 51.22 0.15 29.6 MilDec-03 266.61 42.45 0.29 30.1 MilDec-02 220.2 34.91 0.24 29.0 MilDec-01 180.72 39.52 2.18 27.7 MilDec-00 152.38 42.37 5.87 26.4 Mil

Table 3: Income statement 10 yearsIncome Statement - 10 Year Summary (in Millions)

Sales% Sales Growth EBIT Depreciation

Total Net

IncomeProfit

Margin EPS

Tax Rate

(%)Dec-09 246.67 -26.85% 20.39 11.4 16.56 6.71% 0.73 18.76Dec-08 337.2 -0.06% 31.51 12.7 22.8 6.76% 0.94 27.64Dec-07 337.4 16.80% 47.67 13.7 30.75 9.11% 1.13 35.49Dec-06 288.87 17.24% 34.39 13.3 19.33 6.69% 0.69 43.79Dec-05 246.4 14.65% 32.95 12.1 18.64 7.56% 0.64 43.45Dec-04 214.92 9.20% 34.87 10.78 21.63 10.06% 0.7 37.95Dec-03 196.81 12.00% 33.24 11.01 20.58 10.46% 0.67 38.08Dec-02 175.72 12.37% 38.39 8.57 23.61 13.44% 0.78 38.51Dec-01 156.38 12.81% 25.71 10.96 16.19 10.35% 0.53 37.04Dec-00 138.62 26.01 5.48 16.27 11.74% 0.53 37.45

Page 30: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Table 4: Cash flow Statements for last 5 years 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

Period End Date12/31/200

912/31/200

812/31/200

712/31/200

612/31/200

5Period Length 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 MonthsStmt Source 10-K 10-K 10-K 10-K 10-KStmt Source Date 2/19/2010 2/24/2009 2/25/2008 3/14/2007 2/25/2008

Stmt Update Type Updated Updated Updated UpdatedReclassified

Net Income/Starting Line 16.56 22.8 30.75 19.33 18.64Depreciation/Depletion 11.42 12.7 13.62 13.25 12.07Amortization 0 0 0 0 0Deferred Taxes 2.08 -1.39 -2.76 -0.57 1.37Non-Cash Items 8.69 13.63 5.91 8.76 3.53Unusual Items 0.13 5.36 0.01 0.29 0.08Other Non-Cash Items 8.56 8.27 5.89 8.47 3.45Changes in Working Capital 19.58 16.1 -9.24 3.35 -2.22Accounts Receivable 26.66 7.08 -10.62 -1.62 -8.69Prepaid Expenses 0 0 0 1.6 -1.6Other Assets 3.06 2.69 3.45 -3.48 -4.38Accounts Payable 0 0 0 3.81 0.38Accrued Expenses 0 0 0 0 7.28Payable/Accrued -10.45 6 -5.34 0 0Taxes Payable -3.5 -1.32 1.53 0.37 1.36Other Liabilities 3.82 1.66 1.74 2.67 3.44Cash from Operating Activities 58.32 63.84 38.27 44.12 33.39 Capital Expenditures -2.38 -7.71 -9.4 -9.64 -8.49Purchase of Fixed Assets -2.38 -7.71 -9.4 -9.64 -8.49Other Investing Cash Flow Items, Total 0.08 21.62 84.52 -38.26 12.34Acquisition of Business 0 0 0 -0.13 -48.79Sale/Maturity of Investment 0 345.58 772.69 793.8 931.25Investment, Net 0.08 0 0 0 0Purchase of Investments 0 -323.96 -688.17 -831.93 -870.12Cash from Investing Activities -2.29 13.92 75.12 -47.9 3.85 Financing Cash Flow Items

Page 31: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

0.06 0.1 0.72 2.52 0Other Financing Cash Flow 0.06 0.1 0.72 2.52 0Total Cash Dividends Paid 0 0 0 0 0Issuance (Retirement) of Stock, Net -21.77 -31.93 -89.02 0.13 -54.34Issuance (Retirement) of Debt, Net 0 0 0 -0.15 -0.1Cash from Financing Activities -21.71 -31.83 -88.3 2.5 -54.44 Foreign Exchange Effects 0.16 -4.86 1.14 0.31 -0.8Net Change in Cash 34.48 41.06 26.23 -0.97 -18.01

Manhattan Associates Company Principles

1. We provide value to our customers by listening carefullyand providing innovative products and services delivered inan effective and efficient manner, and we receive fair considerationfor that value.2. We make commitments carefully and honor our commitments.We "do what we say will do."3. We are clear and direct in our communication. "Badnews does not get better with age."4. We are action-oriented.5. We provide growth opportunities for our people throughopen communication, challenging work, fair compensationand proper training.6. We treat people fairly and with respect7. We conserve our customer's and the company'resources with at least the same vigilance that we would useto guard own personal resources.8. We strive to increase shareholder value over the longterm and will not sacrifice our future for short-term gain9. We bring honesty and integrity to everything we do10. Work is an important part of life, and it should be fun.

Page 32: Manhattan Strategies - Analysis

Manhattan Associates Technology partners-