Ask brands why they moved their product data and the answer is rarely that a PIM vendor failed them. Far more often the old system was never a PIM: a spreadsheet, a homegrown database, a legacy catalog tool or fields in the ERP, stretched until it could not keep up with retailers, channels or brands. Pressure builds for years, and an event — most often an ecommerce or ERP replatform — turns it into a project. When they do choose a platform, Salsify is the destination named most, with Akeneo, Stibo Systems and Syndigo each chosen by a few. Moves between two PIM vendors happen, and the reasons are mostly price and fit. The companion reads are what PIM buyers wish they'd known, where the ratings live, and what buyers actually pay for a PIM.
The pressure that builds
These frustrations build for a year or more before anything forces a decision. On their own they rarely start a project; they make the case for one.
The spreadsheet, homegrown tool or ERP was outgrown
The pressure buyers raise most is a system that was never built to be a PIM. One buyer says “somebody decided it was a good idea to build their own kind of PIM, and it's been a nightmare. So we're migrating to an actual PIM,” and another: “We used to have our own managed platform as our PIM system, but we couldn't even get it done.” Legacy catalog tools age the same way — one buyer calls theirs “well beyond point of surviving” — and teams still on spreadsheets describe product data handled by hand: “I've got a lot of people right now that are working with retailers that again, are getting like, here's an Excel sheet of products.”
Named in this context: Salsify · Akeneo · Stibo Systems
Retailers want data the current setup cannot send
Each retailer ingests product content its own way, and the gaps add up. One buyer says its platform “doesn't syndicate across all of the channels that we sell.” Another reports limitations with Syndigo in its setup, saying “Syndigo doesn't offer categorization or the possibility to have different product titles for different retailers.” The accounts show how retailer-specific requirements expose gaps in the capabilities or configurations a brand relies on. Several brands end up running two syndication platforms alongside one source of product data — complementary distribution rather than a duplicate PIM: “most retail brands operating in the e-commerce space that want to do content syndication at scale are forced to use a combination of Salsify and Syndigo together,” one says.
Named in this context: Syndigo · Salsify · Contentserv
The cost outruns what the tool does
Price comes up on both sides of the market. “The cost is out running its utility almost to the point that we are having internal conversations on building it ourselves to replace them,” says one Akeneo customer. For a Salsify customer, “every year pricing is just a miserable conversation,” and buyers describe the leading platform's pricing power as a reason to look around: “once you're in it, they know that it's hard to leave it once you're in it.” One company moved from inRiver to Contentserv “for cost savings.”
Named in this context: Salsify · Akeneo · inRiver · Contentserv
Product data is split across brands and markets
Companies that grew by adding brands, markets or subsidiaries often grew a PIM per unit. One buyer says that “right now our different subsidiaries have their own PIM and pay separate fees”; another that “different markets had different vendors for our Product Information Management, our PIMs.” Consolidating them is a reason to choose a new platform for everyone rather than extend any one of the old ones.
Named in this context: Salsify · Stibo Systems · Akeneo
The event that fires the decision
These are the events buyers can date. Each turns a tolerated problem into a project, and most arrive from outside the product-data team.
An ecommerce or ERP replatform reopens product data
The replatform is the trigger buyers describe most, by a wide margin. Moving the storefront or the ERP means rebuilding the feeds into it, and product data comes up for review with them: “We're migrating off of our e-commerce platform to an integrated CMS, PIM, e-commerce platform that integrates directly with our ERP,” one buyer says, and another, after moving its brands to Shopify, needs “a vendor that would be able to help enhance our product data from the PIM level.”
Named in this context: Shopify · Salsify · Microsoft Dynamics 365
An acquisition, a renewal or new leadership
Buying another company puts two sets of product data side by side: “We bought another company, and so that gave us the opportunity to then revisit our whole PIM system,” one buyer says. Taking on new retailers and channels does the same thing more gradually. Some buyers build the review into the contract — “we have a three-year contract, and at the end of the second year, we look at other solutions to see if it makes sense or not” — and new leaders reset priorities: one product-data project changed course when “we got new leaders and they decided no, we're going to focus on online first.” A change of ownership, such as a move to private equity, puts the stack under review too.
Named in this context: Salsify · Syndigo
Where they go
Salsify is the destination named most often among companies that have moved or selected a new PIM, and it also appears on active shortlists. Akeneo, Stibo Systems and Syndigo are each selected by a smaller number of companies — Syndigo winning one evaluation for “its ability to manage product hierarchies” — and Catsy, Contentserv, Censhare and inRiver by one each. The handful of moves between two PIM vendors run in several directions: one company left Salsify for Catsy, one left inRiver for Contentserv, and one is moving from Syndigo to Salsify while others evaluate the same move. The ratings for each platform are on what PIM buyers wish they'd known.
Due for a stack physical?
Book mine →The stories behind the switches
The counter-current: why many stay
Many buyers who complain about their PIM keep it. Switching is the reason most give: one company that ran past evaluations concluded that “the lift it would take to get ourselves moved over and our team trained up, there was way too much risk in it for very little gain.” Others are mid-project — “we're in the middle of this whole big integration, so we're probably gonna have to renew” — or kept in place by retailers that require a particular syndication platform. And some stay because the tool works for the people who use it: “There's no other PIM that I ever want to use because it's designed for business users,” one Salsify customer says.
What this means if you're weighing a switch
In these interviews the decision to move product data is usually about outgrowing a system that was never a PIM, and the timing is usually set by a replatform elsewhere in the stack. Between two PIM vendors, price and fit drive the few moves buyers describe, while switching risk and retailer requirements keep many in place. Our recommendations, not practices buyers describe: if an ecommerce or ERP replatform is coming, decide what happens to product data as part of it rather than after; list the retailers and channels you syndicate to and check each against a candidate before signing; if you run multiple PIMs or syndication platforms, separate duplicated product-data management from channel-specific distribution needs, then weigh the cost and value of each system; and if price is the reason to move, weigh it against the integrations and retraining a move would take.
Common questions
Why do companies switch PIM systems?
In these interviews most moves are not from one PIM to another. They start from spreadsheets, a homegrown tool, a legacy system or product data kept in the ERP, which the company has outgrown. The pressures that build are manual work, retailer requirements the current setup cannot meet, cost, and product data split across brands or subsidiaries. The trigger is most often an ecommerce or ERP replatform, followed by acquisitions, new retail partners, renewals and new leadership.
Which PIM do companies switch to?
Salsify is the destination named most often among companies in these interviews that have moved or selected a new PIM, and it also appears on active shortlists. Akeneo, Stibo Systems and Syndigo are each selected by a few companies, and Catsy, Contentserv, Censhare and inRiver by one each. Moves between two PIM vendors are the minority; most companies are replacing spreadsheets or a homegrown system.
Should you replace Syndigo with Salsify?
Buyers in these interviews go both ways. A few Syndigo customers are moving to or evaluating Salsify, for reasons such as per-retailer flexibility, while other companies chose or shortlisted Syndigo in the same period. Several brands run both, because different retailers ingest product data differently. Which fits depends on the retailers you sell through and how much per-retailer customization you need.
When is the right time to replace a PIM?
Buyers in these interviews most often revisit their PIM when they replatform their ecommerce site or ERP, when they acquire another company, when they add retail partners, or as a renewal approaches. Treating a planned replatform as the moment to review product data, rather than a separate project later, is our recommendation, not a practice buyers describe.
Why do companies stay with a PIM they complain about?
Because switching is risky and expensive. Buyers describe the time to move and retrain teams, the integrations a PIM is tied into, being in the middle of a larger project, and retailers that require a particular syndication platform. Others stay because, despite the complaints, the tool works for their business users.
A physical for your tech stack
Peer-powered: built from hundreds of verified buyer interviews, and fitted to the tools you already run. You get a shortlist for your stack and your next steps.
Book my stack physicalFree · no password · your answers are anonymized before they inform research like this.