Rest Rating

SUMMER 2006A SUPPLEMENT TO HOSPITALITY TECHNOLOGY

Rating TOP POS SystemsB A S E D O N U S E R S A T I S F A C T I O N S C O R E S

Contents4 Top 20 Systems

Now in its third year, the POS Scoreboard offers the industry’s only ranking of the top foodservice point-of-salesoftware companies based on company size, number of installations and user satisfaction.

4 Top POS Software Companies

6 User Satisfaction ScoresHow do POS software systems compare in the opinion offoodservice operators? The user satisfaction scores offercharts and analyses of how systems fared in the criteriadeemed most important by the operators themselves.

6 Top POS Software Systems

6 User Satisfaction

8 Overall Performance

8 Strategic Value

10 Total Cost of Ownership

10 Return on Investment

12 Ease of Upgrade

12 Support and Service

14 Start-up Restaurants (1-4 units)

14 Small Chains (5-50 units)

14 Large Chains (51-200 units)

14 Enterprise Chains (200+ units)

14 A Final WordWho participated in the 2006 POS Scoreboard and what questions were asked? Look here for a final word on thestudy’s methodology why some responses were excludedfrom the study.

Summer 2006

PUBLISHER

Lenore O’Mearaext. 245 ■ [email protected]

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Reid A. Paulext. 315 ■ [email protected]

ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE

Leah Segarraext. 270 ■ [email protected]

CREATIVE DIRECTOR

Colette Magliaroext. 203 ■ [email protected]

ART DIRECTOR

Pamela C. Ravetierext. 255 ■ [email protected]

WWW.HTMAGAZINE.COM

CHAIRMAN/CEO

Gabriele A. Edgell

PRESIDENT

Gerald C. Ryerson

®

www.htmagazine.com Special Supplement ■ POS Scoreboard ■ 3

FOUNDER

Douglas C. Edgell1951-1998

2006 • RATING TOP POS SYSTEMS

Foodservice point-of-sale systems continue to elicit a great deal of loyalty and showcase technological

innovation. With more than 400 responses to this year’s study, POS users ranging from owner/operators

of single-unit restaurants to CIOs at major restaurant, casino and hotel companies responded to the

study. Now in its third year, the POS Scoreboard highlights key changes that continue to reshape the

foodservice technology industry.Clearly, the POS industry is be-

coming increasingly diverse. Once thesole purview of casual-dining chains,POS solutions can now be found invirtually every setting. In recent years,the emergence of POS solutions de-signed for single-unit restaurantshave helped transform the industry bymaking the POS touch screen thehallmark of restaurants worldwide.

The juxtaposition of off-the-shelfsolutions, next to pizza point of sale,next to high-end casino solutionsmakes for an odd reading of the POSScoreboard. Hospitality Technologydoes not portend to suggest whichsolution has the best golf module orthe easiest interface or the best take-out solution. Nor would we suggestwhich solutions makes the mostsense for your individual foodserviceoperation. Nevertheless, there aremore essential elements that foodser-vice POS solutions have in commonthan separate them. While many ofthese companies may not competedirectly with each other, they all offerfoodservice point-of-sale solutions.

This top 20 chart and especially therankings that follow, represents the

opinions and feedback we receive from the survey respondents. This feedback—the “User Satisfaction”score worth 45 points in the overall ranking—is the essential element that helps determine where the POScompanies fall. For the Top 20, we also factor in POS functionality (35 points), number of terminals in-stalled (10 points) and company revenue (5 points). Of course, how each restaurant company values thesevarious elements may differ and are part of what makes the POS choice so complex and unique.

Top 20 Systems

4 ■ POS Scoreboard ■ Special Supplement www.htmagazine.com

TOTAL POS COMPANY USERPOINTS VENDOR TOTAL SATISFACTION

87.42 1. Micros Systems 50 37.4287.34 2. Radiant Systems 49 38.34

86.47 3. POSitouch 48 38.47

85.75 4. Maitre’D 46 39.75

85.30 5. Squirrel Systems 45 40.30

83.50 6. Digital Dining 45 38.50

77.91 7. xpient 39 38.91

76.67 8. pcAmerica 41 35.67

72.59 9. Restaurant Manager 36 36.59

72.50 10. ParTech 43 29.50

72.44 11. SilverWare 41 31.44

72.17 12. Panasonic 35 37.17

72.14 13. Speedline Solutions 33 39.14

70.18 14. Torex Retail 31 39.18

69.89 15. InfoGenesis 35 34.89

69.14 16. FuturePOS 33 36.14

68.88 17. Volante Systems 31 37.88

68.39 18. Aldelo Systems 39 29.39

51.32 19. H.S.I. 16 35.32

34.30 20. FireFly Technologies N/A 34.30


In addition to the point-of-sale software compa-ny, respondents to the POS Scoreboard wereasked to identify the software version they cur-rently used. To qualify, a top POS system neededto have at least five responses. For the secondyear in a row, Digital Dining version 7.3 rankedfirst. Squirrel Systems One version 3 made itssecond straight appearance as did Maitre’D, although with its 2005 release, rather than the2003 release that was fourth last year. POSitouchversion 5.2 made a return appearance, havingfirst appeared in the 2004 Scoreboard, but miss-ing in 2005. And Torex Retail (formerly Savista)version 3.5 made its debut in the chart this year.

User satisfaction represents the total score for allnine questions (see Methodology, page 14, for thelist of all the questions) presented to POS systemusers. Each question was worth five points for apossible total of 45 points. Once again competi-tion was extremely tight across all the scores, withless than two tenths of a point separating the topthree scores in the more than 100,000 installs cat-egory. The two other categories were similarlycompetitive, although not quite as tight. Top com-panies tended to have a high average score acrossall nine questions. The average user satisfactionscore for the entire study was a solid 35.9, whichtranslates to a score of 80% across the board.

There were some significant changes from theleaders reported in the 2005 Scoreboard. In fact,of the top three solutions in 2005, only DigitalDining, Radiant Systems, Torex Retail (Savista) andSpeedline repeated from last year.

Top POS Software Systems


SCORE COMPANY VERSION

40.2 1. Digital Dining 7.337.3 2. POSitouch 5.2

37.2 3. Torex Retail 3.5

35.8 4. Squirrel Systems One Release 3

33.9 5. Maitre’D 2005

SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. Digital Dining 38.50100,000 2. POSitouch 38.47Installs 3. Radiant Systems 38.34

20,000 to 1. Squirrel Systems 40.30100,000 2. Maitre’D 39.75Installs 3. Torex Retail 39.18

Fewer than 1. Speedline Solutions 39.1420,000 2. Volante Systems 37.88Installs 3. FuturePOS 36.14

User Satisfaction


Each year, respondents are asked to indicate thecriteria that is most important when selecting aPOS system, and in previous years overall per-formance was selected by a wide margin. Whilein 2006, service and support won out, overall per-formance remains an important measure of thegeneral attitude towards POS systems.Interestingly, the average score for all the re-sponses was quite high—4.11, .08 higher than forany other question—reflecting a general happi-ness with POS systems in the industry.

In the more than 100,000 category, the threetop companies from 2005 all repeated, althoughwith higher scores. Similarly, Torex (Savista) andInfoGenesis repeated as did Volante Systems andSpeedline Solutions.

While foodservice operators may be happy withtheir POS systems overall, there is a senseamong restaurateurs that the systems may belacking as a strategic asset. Respondents gavethe lowest marks overall in this category, with anaverage score of only 3.92, which may suggestthat there is room for improvement.

The responses to this question may reflect agrowing attitude that POS is becoming more of acommodity and that differentiation will come fromother criteria like sales and support and costs.Perhaps it should not be a surprise that the mostcritical respondents were the largest operatorsevaluating the larger POS software companies.As a result, scores for all the companies, includingthe top performers seemed to be a bit depressedin this category. Among the repeats from last year’stop performers were Micros Systems, ParTech,xpient, pcAmerica, and Speedline Solutions.

Strategic Value

Overall Performance


SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. POSitouch 4.26100,000 2. Micros Systems 4.25Installs 3. Radiant Systems 4.18

20,000 to 1. Torex Retail 4.39100,000 2. Squirrel Systems 4.38Installs 3. InfoGenesis 4.31

Fewer than 1. Volante Systems 4.3520,000 2. Speedline Solutions 4.30Installs 3. FireFly Technologies 4.29

SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. POSitouch 4.09100,000 2. ParTech 4.07Installs 3. Micros Systems 3.85

20,000 to 1. xpient 4.40100,000 2. Squirrel Systems 4.33Installs 3. pcAmerica 4.18

Fewer than 1. Speedline Solutions 4.3320,000 2. FuturePOS 4.20Installs 3. FireFly Technologies 4.13


Across the board, scores for total cost of owner-ship (TCO) were extremely competitive in the sur-vey. All three categories were separated by nomore than one tenth of a point. With an averagescore of 4.01, it is easy to see that this is one ofthe most competitive criterion for selecting point-of-sale software.

Once again, there was a great deal of overlapwith the top companies from the 2005 Scoreboard.POSitouch, ParTech, xpient, pcAmerica, Dinerwareand Aldelo (NextPOS) all offered repeat perform-ances. Dinerware, however, was the only compa-ny to hold its number one position. Given the closeattention of many restaurant companies to TCO asa key measure for software systems, this consis-tency is hardly surprising.

Return on Investment (ROI) is another classicmeasure of value for technology solutions. Whileit is less in favor now than it was five years ago,most restaurant companies still focus on ROIwhen making any major technology purchase. Asignificant number of respondents identified ROIas the most important criterion when selectinga POS system.

Given that ROI and TCO are often conflated orviewed together, it is interesting that there is notgreater overlap between the top performers. Infact, few of the top companies in the 2006Scoreboard fared as well last year. Only MicrosSystems, xpient and Speedline Solutions didso. The average score for ROI across the entiresurvey was 4.01 this year, up slightly from 3.98last year, perhaps reflecting a growing sense ofsatisfaction across the industry.

Return On Investment

Total Cost of Ownership


SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. POSitouch 4.09100,000 2. Radiant Systems 4.07Installs 3. ParTech 4.00

20,000 to 1. xpient 4.41100,000 2. Squirrel Systems 4.34Installs 3. pcAmerica 4.33

Fewer than 1. Dinerware 4.3820,000 2. Speedline Solutions 4.35Installs 3. Aldelo Systems 4.28

SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. POSitouch 4.09100,000 2. Digital Dining 4.06Installs 3. Micros Systems 4.03

20,000 to 1. Squirrel Systems 4.43100,000 2. xpient 4.41Installs 3. Torex Retail 4.19

Fewer than 1. SilverWare 4.2620,000 2. Volante Systems 4.25Installs 3. Speedline Solutions 4.23


According to the 2006 Restaurant IndustryTechnology Study, 43% of foodservice companiesplan on replacing their POS system within the nexttwo years, and another 19% within four years, sig-nalling a period of significant change for the nearfuture. Clearly, the ability to easily upgrade the cur-rent system will have significant impact on theshape of the industry for years to come.

Interestingly, overall scores for ease of up-grade were relatively low, with an average scoreof 3.95. This question also had the broadestrange between a top score of 4.56 for FireFlyTechnologies and a low of 3.93 for Digital Dining.FuturePOS, Restaurant Manager, Digital Diningand Radiant Systems all scored well in the 2005Scoreboard on this question as well.

Ease of UpgradeSIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. POSitouch 4.13100,000 1. Radiant Systems 4.13Installs 3. Digital Dining 3.93

20,000 to 1. Squirrel Systems 4.32100,000 2. pcAmerica 4.27Installs 3. Restaurant Manager 4.14

Fewer than 1. FireFly Technologies 4.5620,000 2. Dinerware 4.37Installs 3. FuturePOS 4.31

More than ever, restaurant operators seem con-cerned with the quality of service and support.Seventeen percent of the POS Scoreboard re-spondents listed service as the single most im-portant criteria when selecting a POS system,or as one respondent wrote, “service, service andthen more service.” Interestingly, the secondmost important criteria was reliability or stabilityat 12%, both were well ahead of last year’s lead-ing response overall performance, which receivedjust 5% of the vote.

As important as service is, it is a good signthat foodservice operators seem to be happy withthe quality of service they are receiving from theirvendors. Restaurant Manager’s 4.70 is the high-est score for any company on any question in theentire survey. The average score of 4.02, more-over, is the second highest overall (tied with easeof installation).

SIZE COMPANY SCORE

More than 1. Digital Dining 4.36100,000 2. POSitouch 4.31Installs 3. Radiant Systems 4.30

20,000 to 1. Restaurant Manager 4.70100,000 2. Squirrel Systems 4.49Installs 3. Maitre’D 4.27

Fewer than 1. FireFly Technologies 4.5720,000 2. FuturePOS 4.39Installs 3. Speedline Solutions 4.36

Support and Service



A Final Word


As we discovered in the 2005 Scoreboard restaurant companies of various sizes seem to have dif-ferent attitudes towards their POS software solutions. In general, smaller restaurant/foodservicecompanies (as determined by number of units) tend to be more lenient when rating their POS sys-tems than larger operations. This pattern is even more pronounced than in 2005, with smaller restau-rants providing among the highest evaluations in the survey.

METHODOLOGYBetween May and June 2006, 403 restaurant, hotel, casino and other foodservice operators oper-ators completed an online survey developed by Hospitality Technology magazine. Respondents

were asked a series of ques-tions about their point-of-salesoftware solutions and to pro-vide an email address for verifi-cation. The survey containedfour questions about the restau-rant/ foodservice company(how many units does the com-pany operate, how many unitsare you directly responsible forand what POS vendor and ver-sion do you use). In addition,operators were asked to ratetheir POS software version on ascale from 1 (abysmal) to 10(perfect) in the following criteria:overall performance, total costof ownership, return on invest-ment, strategic value, ease ofupgrading, ease of installation,ease of integration, ease of ad-ministration/maintenance andquality of support and service.Each of these questions had a

weighted value of five and taken together constitute the user satisfaction rating (See page 6).As the Scoreboard has grown in prominence, so too has the incentive to cheat or exaggerate

scores. In an effort to make sure the Scoreboard is fair, accurate and beyond reproach, we took anumber of steps to ensure a level playing field. Respondents that were identified as POS re-sellers or vendors were eliminated. In addition, any scores deemed exceptionally high or low thatcould not be attributed directly to a recognized restaurant company (via email address) were alsoremoved from the survey—scores averaging higher than 43.0 (95%) or lower than 15.0 (33%). It isour belief that there are no perfect POS systems out there, yet there were a disproportionate num-ber of perfect and near perfect scores. Nearly every POS company had scores disqualified as a re-sult, though undoubtedly, the effect was stronger on some company scores more than others. Infuture years HT will continue introduce more safeguards to ensure accuracy and fairness.

SIZE COMPANY SCORE RESTAURANTRESPONSES

Start-up 1. FuturePOS 41.6 12Restaurants 2. FireFly Technologies 40.3 141-4 units 3. pcAmerica 40.0 12

Small 1. Volante Systems 41.1 49Chains 2. POSitouch 36.6 1185-50 units 3. Maitre’D 35.6 167

Large 1. Squirrel Systems 35.1 670Chains 2. xpient 32.3 106351-200 units 3. Radiant Systems 31.6 753

Enterprise 1. Micros Systems 35.3 1651Chains 2. xpient 35.1 5665200+ units 3. Torex Retail 34.6 2883


Rest Rating

Technology

Transcript of Rest Rating