WordPress - Web publishing software
Copyright 2011 by the contributors
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
This program incorporates work covered by the following copyright and
b2 is (c) 2001, 2002 Michel Valdrighi - email@example.com -
Wherever third party code has been used, credit has been given in the code's
b2 is released under the GPL
WordPress - Web publishing software
Copyright 2003-2010 by the contributors
WordPress is released under the GPL
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, June 1991
Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
The licenses for most software are designed to take away your
freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public
License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free
software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This
General Public License applies to most of the Free Software
Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to
using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by
the GNU Library General Public License instead.) You can apply it to
your programs, too.
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it
if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it
in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things.
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid
anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights.
These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you
distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and
(2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy,
distribute and/or modify the software.
Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain
that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free
software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we
want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so
that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free
program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the
program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any
patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains
a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below,
refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program"
means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law:
that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it,
either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in
the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you".
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of
running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program
is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the
Program (independent of having been made by running the Program).
Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.
June 29, 2011
Retail technology expert and Lucernex President, Joe Valeri (see Joe’s management summary here), discusses one takeaway from the recent joint NRTA / Lucernex survey on retailer FASB readiness.
We recently concluded a joint survey with the National Retail Tenants Association (NRTA) focused on the retailers’ perspective of the impact of the FASB changes and their readiness for those changes. One of the great things about collecting this much data at once is that many different dimensions can be explored. The finding that intrigued me the most was HOW retailers are planning to solve the problem and WHO they were involving in the resolution. This finding accentuated for me the vast advances the retail industry has made in both technology and process integration over the past 10 to 15 years.
As a general rule of thumb, most retailers made their first selection of a lease administration system anywhere from 10 to 15 years ago. During the selection process, a few key resources, typically the head of real estate and perhaps an accountant and lease administrator came together to evaluate a solution for THEIR singular need – retail lease administration and rent accounting.
Added to this mix is that for the past 7 to 10 years, other parts of the real estate and accounting groups have made their own selections of technology to solve their own individual needs for things like lease analysis, project management, capital or special projects, site selection, market analysis, facilities maintenance and facilities management. In most cases, these choices were made in a vacuum with a set of requirements meant to solve only their narrow needs.
What has developed, as a result, is a complicated mixture of disassociated systems (point solutions) held together by complex and fragile integrations (read: EXPENSIVE). Many retailers have found that making these selections in a vacuum and focusing on getting the cheapest product to meet a narrow set of requirements has ended up costing them FAR more money than they planned. Worse, they have not substantially improved the performance of their real estate; instead they merely automated old processes and solidified their functional silos.
Where has this led us? Ultimately I think retailers now are being much smarter and more calculating in their system selection. I am confident it’s due to lessons learned through a history of buying and implementing expensive point solution selections coupled with a maturing of the overall industry. Decision makers now understand the impact these selections have on their companies performance.
- 89% of respondents somewhat or totally agreed that they are “increasingly aware of the impact of real estate activities on the company’s key performance metrics”
- 56% also somewhat or totally agreed that new procedures were being identified to integrate procedures across multiple groups
- About half of respondents (with 22% abstaining) also said they have a task force in place to create a plan for new technology and process changes
- While 22% said Real Estate is running that task force, far more responses indicated their task forces included a combination of real estate, lease administration, accounting, finance and IT
Clearly, in replacing their legacy lease administration system, many retailers are not going to make a knee jerk point solution selection this time. Instead, as we have seen in recent sales opportunities, retailers are taking a broader look at their requirements and how they can integrate processes across the lifecycle of a store in ways that don’t just automate their processes but allow them to dramatically improve their store lifecycle management.
In the past two months we have been involved in sales processes with several retailers, each about to make a point solution selection. During the decision-making process, these companies realized they needed to be broader in their selection and look at a full lifecycle system. We will be announcing the first of these as a new client in the next few weeks, and we expect this trend to continue.
Lucernex’s has the ONLY Store Lifecycle Management (SLM) solution built from the top down FOR RETAILERS by RETAILERS. Before you jump to buy a point solution that does only one or two parts of the store lifecycle process, consider the massive savings and strategic advantage gained by implementing a SINGLE solution for market planning, site selection, project management, lease administration, retail rent accounting, lease analysis, capital project management and facilities management.
Lx Retail was purpose built for retail and is built on one platform with one database and one user interface – meaning low cost of maintenance over time and only one vendor to deal with.
Previous IWMS related Blogs
What is IWMS anyway?
IWMS? It’s Location! Location! Location!
The Power of Location Management
IWMS – Why so expensive?
IWMS in the “Cloud”
How Capital Project Management fits in an IWMS
What makes one IWMS easier to implement than another?
Why building real estate software in house is no longer financially feasible
Risks of upgrading Lease Administration Software alone or as part of an IWMS
What makes Store Lifecycle Management different from IWMS?