Lawrence Hecht has some brief commentary on Gartner buying CEB for $2.6bn – Lawrence takes out the $700m in debt from the actual deal value of $3.3bn. I don’t really know CEB too well.
He also covered some recent analysis of the analyst industry, including the post I did on the topic and podcast at KEA on the idea with other analyst-types, both back in 2015.
All seethe official press release.
Here’s some share price performance, snipping out the time around the acquisition announcement (it goes up, of course):
This is a clever way of addressing a common question about analysts:
Frankly, as far as competitive information leaking — that assumes that the vendors actually shared anything worthwhile with the analysts in the first place! Half truths and hype are hardly competitive info, eh?
GigaOm Research to relaunch, using the same federation model and such.
Rebooting Gigaom Research
Some folks on my team asked for tips on briefing analysts. Here’s the presentation I put together for it in full on bullet-glory style! Like a good analyst, I showed up 10 minutes late to the call and went about 15 minutes over. Role-playing they calls it.
Check out the slides, and if you want to see a more general overview of working with analysts, see my talk from last year on dealing with analysts for startups, it’s recorded!
“The second-most-important category of business priority for 2015 and 2016 is technology related. This is the highest position we have ever seen for technology in this survey and it’s our firm belief that CEOs are more focused on this area than at any time since 1999,” said Mr. Raskino. “When we examine the subtext of the responses, the purpose of CEOs’ interest in technology becomes immediately obvious. Over half of the responses relate to revenue- and growth-related technology issues such as multichannel, e-commerce and m-commerce.”
They have some related free PDFs up as well.
Survey shows companies want to use IT to drive growth
The public PaaS Magic Quadrante is out. We’re not listed on there, as you can see. Most of our business is in “private PaaS,” a different category Gartner. On the other hand, many of those blue dots are run by Cloud Foundry, some even with Pivotal Cloud Foundry.
Check out the huge landscape, though. Fun!
Commentary on GigaOm shutting own from the analyst/research perspective:
We thought, what if we could provide a platform for some of these independents to reach a wider audience through a research service from Gigaom? We believed that if we could pay these independents to write reports on a freelance basis, they would get the exposure of being part of a ‘virtual analyst network’ at Gigaom and we would get to tap into their expertise without having to pay the high salaries that often come with such knowledge and backgrounds. Win-win.
Including pricing, an aspect of the analyst business that I think will is key, esp. for new ventures there
We made a decision to launch at what seemed to many a ridiculously low price of $79 per year. But because we were doing something that we believe had largely never been done before, we were trying to gain significant conversion of our readership — probably around 2–3 million monthly uniques at the time — to the research product. We thought if we could make the price so low, it would enable the ‘true fans’ of Gigaom to subscribe and support while providing immense value in the form of research.
Also, this on revenue estimates:
Over time, increasing the sales and marketing mix towards research did make sense. According to an interview made by Paul, he said that research made up 60% of the company’s revenue. In the same article, revenue were estimated to be $15 million, so that translates to about a $9 million research business.
Anyhow, if you like the inside baseball of analyzing the analysts, this one’s got some.
Well, this is a problem:
But Gigaom’s research business had actually become a significant drag on the company. While it had started out as a “pro” subscription business charging individuals as much as $299 a year, after a couple of pivots, the company’s research arm was now focused on creating custom whitepapers and other products, like Webinars, for corporate clients. While that group booked $8 million in business last year, it wasn’t profitable. That was partly due to high sales and product costs and but also because some of that $8 million never materialized as the company didn’t create the work it was supposed to.
As reported in one of the more in-depth pieces in GigaOm over at re/code.