Channel players pick their champions
A new, improved voting process at this year's Channel Awards meant that channel voices really counted in several tightly fought contests. Simon Meredith profiles the winners in all categories
If the A-List gives us a profile of the key movers and shakers in the IT industry today, the Channel Awards shows us, year after year, which companies are leading the way in delivering the service and support that the channel needs.
This year’s judging process has involved, for the first time, a mix between reader voting and judging by industry experts. Remarkably, the judges and the readers agreed in most categories, although there were some very closely fought contests where the winners were no more than a handful of votes ahead of their rivals.
CRN editor Sara Driscoll hails the judging as a success. “This has been the best selection process for the awards so far. It gave everyone a chance to get involved. Readers, end-users and people from the industry have been able to make their voices heard and on top of that, we have had an objective overlay from the judges,” she says.
Having the judges cast the deciding votes was important, Driscoll added, as it ensured that the companies with the largest customer bases would not be able to simply railroad their way to the winners’ podium.
Nevertheless, some of the best-known and largest companies in the industry have, once again, won through. Fujitsu Siemens Computers (FSC) has picked up two key awards this year, demonstrating what a positive and consistent force it has become in a PC sector that saw a lot of dramatic changes in 2005. The main broadline distributors, Ingram Micro and Computer 2000, both won two awards as well, showing that, while their sector of the market might be experiencing a good deal of pain, it is still delivering in key areas. In the reseller categories, end-user customers and the industry as a whole have once again shown that they have tremendous respect for Equanet.
In spite of the improved judging procedure, some companies had clearly been trying a little too hard to win awards. Voting was made much easier this year to give everyone a chance to make their opinion count. However, votes for your own or a sister company were discounted, and so were all votes that came from hotmail and MSN-type email addresses. While some of these may have been genuine, the volume of votes arriving from such sources made it clear that some people were creating accounts to bump up the numbers. Also we traced cookies directly from PCs, so people could not vote more than once from a single machine.
In the end, this made little difference to the results, as it was quite clear in most categories which companies had the support of the channel. A bigger disappointment was that some vendors which really should have been in the running simply did not submit an entry and therefore could not be considered.
Unrecognised contribution
One of the judges, Bob Tarzey, service director at analyst Quocirca, says: “Of the companies that entered, the right ones won awards, but there is a lot of unrecognised contribution to the channel from companies that do not participate, notably, among vendors, IBM, Microsoft and Symantec.
“Microsoft has made great progress this year with security of it infrastructure products. IBM is driving managed services through the channel, and Symantec’s takeover of Veritas should increase the range of content security options available to the channel.”
Another of the judges, Mike Briercliffe, principal of Briercliffe Associates, says: “The absent vendors should be encouraged by their resellers and distributors to enter in the future.”
Driscoll says: “We did make strenuous efforts to get those vendors that are conspicuous by their absence to enter this year, but for one reason or another some have not. Those that entered deserved to be recognised, and are walking away with all the prizes this year.”
Some vendors may have felt they have not done enough this year to merit a listing. Others simply did not get their act together in time. Either way, it was clear from the lengthy consultations with key industry figures that took place at the start of this year that people in the channel felt that, to win an award, you should be required at least to put an entry forward.
Briercliffe notes that there were also many good VARs and specialist distributors out there that never think of entering. “Overall, the judges did the entries justice, but the entries didn’t really represent the whole market well enough,” he says.
However, he adds that some of this year’s winners have shown that by doing a good job for the channel and putting their case forward they can receive well-deserved recognition. “The BlackSpider result shows that if people tap into the channel they will get support, however small they are,” Briercliffe says.
In spite of some notable absences, there were a record number of entries for this year’s Channel Awards. There was also a record number of votes for the winners.
In the vendor categories the achievements of FSC were acknowledged by the judges and the company received tremendous support from the channel. Kingston Technology once again demonstrated the high regard in which the channel holds it by claiming the Components award.
One of the most strongly contested awards was in the Networking Vendor of the Year category. Companies with both voice and data legacies were competing for the prize, making it a tight contest. The fact that NetGear won through, narrowly ahead of Cisco on the overall vote, proved that the smaller players can beat off bigger rivals.
Keith Humphreys, consultant at analyst EuroLAN and one of the judges, says: “NetGear has done remarkably well over the past couple of years. From the time it was spun off from Nortel until it floated, it doubled its revenue, and it has doubled it again since then. NetGear also respects the channel, especially distribution, and deals directly with only one partner in the UK.”
Alistair Edwards, senior analyst at Canalys, who was also on the judges’ panel, says it was NetGear’s “simple programmes and a highly motivated channel” that won the award for the company. But he also believes wider recognition is n eeded in this category. “There are players on the list who are not really on the same level,” he says. Some consideration of weighting may be made next year. There may also be a need for the categories to provide further recognition of vendors’ different specialisations.
Hard fight for software
The software category attracted a healthy spread of votes for contenders on the short list: Computer Associates (CA), McAfee, Novell, FrontRange and Swyx. CA just pipped its security specialist rival McAfee to the post, and the judges acknowledged the efforts of both companies.
“CA won on reader votes despite having alienated the channel in the past and strong competition from rising channel star, McAfee,” says Humphreys. Tarzey says that CA deserved its victory, but he was surprised not to see competition from another major player. “Given that CA already brings storage and security together – which Symantec is just starting to do – and has had offerings for the channel for more than a year, perhaps this underlines the merit of CA getting the software award,” he says.
The Security category was also very close, and it was clear that a good deal of canvassing for votes had taken place here. In the end Check Point came out on top when reader and judges votes were combined, with Sophos running an extremely close second. The judges felt this was a fair result that rewards a company which has consistently delivered for the channel.
In the Storage category, Hewlett-Packard (HP) narrowly beat EMC to the award. While HP has had its problems with the channel this year, the quality of its storage solutions and the opportunities they deliver to resellers cannot be denied. HP was well supported by the channel.
The Specialist Product category was the broadest of all and therefore the most open contest. The reader voting reflected this with three firms, Belkin, Kingston and VMWare, all receiving good support. Belkin would perhaps not be considered as a specialist by some in the channel, but Driscoll defends the overall decision. “Belkin entered as a specialist, was put forward by the judges on the strength of its entry and reputation in the market and received strong support from the channel. They are worthy winners. Kingston, VMWare and all the other short-listed firms also should be very proud of their achievements,” she says.
In the Services category, there was good support for all the vendors, but BlackSpider won by a considerable distance on both the reader and judges votes. The company is clearly giving value to the reseller community and getting the recognition it deserves.
All the judges acknowledged that for distributors it as been a tough year. Even so, voting was strong in all the categories, hitting record numbers, although some of the effort made was perhaps just a little too enthusiastic, says Driscoll. “It was clear that some companies were trying to drive their numbers up by getting their staff to vote for them or by using home email addresses. This is not in the spirit of the awards. We made sure that only the votes we were certain were genuine were counted,” she says.
The final list of winners saw not only the broadliners Ingram Micro and Computer 2000 picking up awards, but the efforts of smaller players such as Micro Peripherals and Midwich also being recognised. In the Security distribution category, Unipalm came out on top once again, although resellers also turned out in force to vote for Sphinx which very nearly overhauled its rival in this contest.
CMS Peripherals attracted a very impressive number of reader votes in the Storage category although it was a close run competition with Hammer.
In the Specialist category, there was another fierce battle for supremacy, with much debate among the judges and very close voting from readers. Smaller distributors such as Box Technologies and Widget UK put in very creditable efforts and received decent support from partners.
Difficult comparison
It was a similar story in most of the reseller categories, the Specialist award in particular being a very close-run affair. All the companies short-listed for this award and for the Project category have reason to hold their heads high, says Driscoll. “The voting was very close in both the Specialist and Services categories. The problem is that the companies in these categories are all so different that it is very difficult to make a comparison. In the end, though, I believe the combination of readers’ and judges’ votes has given us very fair results,” she says.
With Equanet and PC World Business (PCWB) taking the Corporate and SME Reseller awards respectively, and Equanet winning the overall Reseller of the Year crown once again, the Dixons Stores Group dominated the reseller categories. “These wins show how well Dixons Group is making the transition from a commodity white goods retailer,” says Humphreys.
Briercliffe agrees it is a presence that the channel will have to get used to. “Dixons being so well represented in the finals is a sign of the times. It is hard to come to terms with the fact that a high-street retailer is one of the biggest channel players,” he says.
Finally, the Editor’s Choice awards, selected by Driscoll and the CRN editorial team, were acknowledged as deserving winners by the judging panel. Humphreys says the Cisco’s Integrated Services Routers were a great choice as they have delivered so much business to the channel. He points out that they are on course to generate $1bn worth of sales this year for the vendor and its channel partners worldwide.
Ian Snadden, director channel and SME sales at FSC, who won the Personality of the Year award, can also takes a lot of the credit for the fact that FSC claimed the Systems Vendor of the Year and overall Vendor of the Year awards, says Briercliffe. “It shows how well Ian has positioned the company. He’s a great example of a true channel man,” he says.