back to article Sage struggles in subdued market

Software specialist for small and medium businesses Sage said the weak pound had helped offset a subdued market for its products. For the three months ended 31 December 2008 trading was in line with expectations. Sage chief executive Paul Walker said: “We are pleased to report that, despite volatile conditions in many of our …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Mark Wills

    There's the problem right there...

    >The company employs 14,500 people

    There's the problem. I mean, Sage, right? Payroll, ledger, accounts payable, that sort of stuff?

    Can anyone explain to me why it takes 14,500 people to manage a software product that could be entirely managed, by, say 4 or five coders in someone's shed?


    Is it me?

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well the over optimism has gone :)

    There use to be the couple of days of, oh look IT is impervious, yeah right, IT is always the first to go, because no one inside of management really understands it.

    Sure, IT is more important than marketing but not in perception, only in reality.

    Remember kids, never study for IT or Comp Sci., it will get you nowhere, it is not a sexy job, it is not an easy job, it is all consuming, abandon all hope ye who enter here should be the IT mantra.

    So, now we have the job cuts, good good, same old IT boom, bust cycle, sure they will be some opportunity in the market place both on the way down, and the way up again.

    More will be muttering about turning to the dark side, and hey there is a lot more info already for you to embrace that side of things. And those with the light bent, well there is always doing your own project and selling it to the Iranians, when the embargo gets lifted :)

  3. Norfolk Enchants Paris

    I'm with Mark

    Except that with the sheer volume of customers that they have (about 750,000!) they'd need a few support techs and implementation dudes, let alone the sales bods and managers.

    Happily, their stuff behaves as if it was made by five blokes in a shed. Which keeps the likes of you and I in a job.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    I'll tell you.

    They're all support people. The product itself sucks, and is extraordinarily confusing. It takes months to learn the idiosynchracies, such as why you can't select a past pay slip from within the normal payslip report screen, instead you have to navigate somewhere entirely non-intuitive (I can't even remember it now without my cheat-sheet in front of me) . The upgrades routinely don't work, but fail silently. Basic usage requires administrative permission. AND the basic version doesn't run under WINE, and the 'native linux' version is WAY TOO EXPENSIVE ! I can't understand how they stay in business personally.

    A big thumbs down to Sage

  5. Anonymous Coward

    Sage may be bad

    But the rest are no better, I should know I make a living fixing, supporting and modifying the competition.

  6. J Welek

    Thinking the same...

    14,500 people?!? Really??

  7. Flugal

    14,500 staff?

    I'm guessing that figure also includes staff working for their various re-sellers. I worked for one of them once - nice guys, but my team was supervised (or "managed" as the fat welsh militaristic c*nt inisted) by a twat of the highest order.

  8. john oates

    Sage staff


    This is from the Sage website:

    # Global company with over 5.8 million SME customers worldwide

    # Over 14,500 employees

    # Over 36,000 customer support service calls daily

    # Global network of over 30,000 reseller partners and 40,000 accountants



  9. uk086242

    @ Flugal

    Would you have commented in that way if your "manager" was Asian or black?

    You know, "Fat **ki Bastard". How about "Fat N****r bastard"?

    Admin - you should not have let that post through with that comment. Red card.

  10. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: @ Flugal

    Don't you red card me, you ridiculous hysteric. 'Welsh' does not equate to 'Paki' and you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting it does. There's more than one way to be offensive, you know.



  11. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: @ Sarah Bee

    I'll cut and paste your response since you refrained from putting a little * in 'c*nt'. You're welcome.


    Ridiculous hysteric eh?

    That the poster chose to include their former manager's origin within the comment seems to infer some issue with that place of origin, otherwise why chose to state it? 'Fat Militaristic c*nt' would have sufficed I am sure you agree. And yes, you have indeed demonstrated that you can be offensive in more than one way (whatever the hell that means).


    To which I'll respond - nope, you've failed to convince me. But you can take it up with him, because I stand by both my original moderation and my subsequent comment.

    If you can't figure out how making a direct comparison between the word 'Welsh' and the word 'Paki' is offensive, then I've got nothing more to say to you.

  12. uk086242
    Thumb Down

    Sarah Bee

    Fair enough. Last time I read The Register in that case.

    Please can you facilitate in the removal of my account / login details, or send me the details of how to do so via the email address that I have registered.

  13. Flugal
    Paris Hilton

    @ anybody I've offended

    Unlike Carol Thatcher, I would like to offer an unreserved apology for any offence caused. I was careful to add another word between "Welsh" and "c*nt", but I fear you're right - the word Welsh still came across as pejorative, even though it was certainly not meant as such.

    I do think it was a bit of a leap of imagination to compare Welsh with the P word or the N word, but given (upon re-reading) my poor gramatical construction I can see how this leap was easily made, and you are quite right that I would not have replaced the word Welsh with P... or N... (because those words are almost always offensive and I am vehemently anti-racist) or even Asian/Pakistani or black if they had belonged to those ethnic groups.

    Right, enough apologising (it seems somewhat narcisitic)...he was the total c*nt, entirely irrespective of ethnicity, and I never got an apology from him.

    Paris - because she's more careful about what she inserts.

  14. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: Sarah Bee

    No problem, if that's how you really feel. I'll take the toys you've dropped to Oxfam.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Ah, Sage...

    ...the company whose software can simultaneously bring a strong man and a strong computer to their knees. We made the mistake of buying a few seats of Act! - it added minutes to boot times, was horrifically complicated, and so difficult to use that we ended up switching to a roll-our-own database in a hosted wiki.

    Granted, we're a tiny company and in a low-volume business, so maybe if you have 14,400 employees it's different. But that still doesn't explain why the software was such an unholy resource hog.

  16. M Neligan

    Bore da!


    Excellent scrap - thanks. We could play a game deciding what words one could/could not substitute for "welsh" in the comment. Personally, were I a Taff (some of my best friends are Welsh), I would strongly object to the lower-case "w". Apart from the you-will-fry-in-hell N- and P- words, you would not get away with "Jewish" or "dyke" or "Paddy" but "Christian", "British/Brit" and "French/Frog" would (probably) pass unnoticed. Words are weird.

    And he probably doesn't mean it about the toys.

  17. Norfolk Enchants Paris

    Offending people

    Not that this is what we are meant to be discussing, Paki is (presumably) an offensive term to Pakistanis, whereas Welshman is the proper name for one from Wales.

    Taffy would probably be the equivalent for a Welshman, so uk08blahblah should have mentioned his stupid Taffy manager. Much better.

    Well done again Sarah Bee. Play on.

  18. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: Bore da!

    What's wrong with 'Jewish' all of a sudden? I think you meant 'Red Sea pedestrian'.

  19. ishmael

    @sarah bee, re: jewish.

    There's nothing wrong with "Jewish". nothing at all, right up until you conflate it with "c*nt". "Jewish c*nt" is pretty racist, isn't it?

    and so is "welsh c*nt", imo.

  20. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: @sarah bee, re: jewish.

    Let's just agree everything derogatory ever said about anyone is 'racist' and leave it at that, eh? It would simplify the righteous/misguided outrage process no end.

  21. This post has been deleted by its author

  22. ishmael

    Re: @sarah bee, re: jewish.

    "Let's just agree everything derogatory ever said about anyone is 'racist' and leave it at that, eh? It would simplify the righteous/misguided outrage process no end."

    well that would be silly, wouldn't it? however if it helps you to think about things that way, good for you.

  23. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: @sarah bee, re: jewish.

    I was being ironic, you div.

    You really should try harder to distinguish (I was trying to say) between what is truly racist and what isn't really racist. You only dilute the concept if you don't and that makes things worse for everyone.

    But since you didn't get that originally, I think it may be better to end our discussion here, don't you?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021