People (say they) will spend more on clothes that actually fit

It’s a sore point for many shoppers, who are ready and eager to spend more on designer clothes if only they were available: 78% of respondents in a recent survey of plus-size shoppers said that they’d be willing to spend more money if designers offered more options, and 80% said they’d likely purchase an item from their favorite designer if that designer made plus sizes.

File under “if anything, more money. Plus, bonus: morals!”:

More and more designers and retailers seem to be waking up to that fact. The market for plus-size women’s clothing is over $20 billion, by some measures

Link

Choose your TAM wisely and remember to charge a high price, RethinkDB

[O]ur users clearly thought of us as an open-source developer tools company, because that’s what we really were. Which turned out to be very unfortunate, because the open-source developer tools market is one of the worst markets one could possibly end up in. Thousands of people used RethinkDB, often in business contexts, but most were willing to pay less for the lifetime of usage than the price of a single Starbucks coffee (which is to say, they weren’t willing to pay anything at all). Link

How big is the pie?

Any company selling developers tools needs to figure out the overall market size for what they’re selling. Developers, eager to work tools for themselves (typically, in their mid to late 20s developers work on at least one “framework” project) often fall prey to picking a market that has little to no money and, then, are dismayed when “there’s no money in it.”

What we’re looking for here is a market category and a way of finding how much money is being spent in it. As a business, you want grab as much as the money as possible. The first thing you want to do is make sure there’s enough money for you to care. If you’re operating in a market that has only $25m of total, global spend, it’s probably not worth your while, for example.

Defining your market category, too, is important to find out who your users and buyers are. But, let’s look at TAM-think: finding what the big pie of cash looks like, your Total Addressable Market.

The TAMs on the buffett

If you’re working on developer oriented tech, there are a few key TAMs:

Another interesting TAM for startups in the developer space is a combo one Gartner put out recently put together that shows public and private PaaS, along with “traditional” application platforms: $7.8bn in 2015. 451 has a similar TAM that combines public and private cloud at around $10bn in 2020.

I tried to come up with a public and private PaaS TAM – a very, very loose one – last year and sauntered up to something like $20 to $25bn over the next 5-10 years.

There are other TAMs, to be sure, but those are good ones to start with.

Bending a TAM to your will, and future price changes

In each case, you have to be very, very careful because of open source and public cloud. Open source means there’s less to sell upfront and, that, likely, you’ll have a hard time suddenly going from charging $0 to $1,000’s per unit (a unit is whatever a “seat” or “server” is: you need something to count by!). If you’re delivering your stuff over the public cloud, similar pricing problems arise: people expect it to be really cheap an are, in fact, shocked when it adds up to a high monthly bill.

But briefly: people expect infrastructure software to be free now-a-days. (Not so much applications, which have held onto the notion that they should be paid for: buy the low prices in the app store depress their unit prices too.)

In both cases (open source and public cloud delivery), you’re likely talking a drastically lower unit price. If you don’t increase the overall volume of sales, you’ll whack down your TAM right quick.

So, you have to be really, really careful when using backward looking TAMs to judge what your TAM is. Part of the innovation you’re expected to be doing is in pricing, likely making it cheaper.

The effect is that your marketshare, based on “yesterday’s TAMs,” will look shocking. For example, Gartner pegged the collective revenue of NoSQL vendors (Basho, Couchbase, Datastax, MarkLogic, and MongoDB) at $364M in 2015: 1% of the overall TAM of $35.9bn! Meanwhile, the top three Hadoop vendors clocked in at $323.2M and AWS’s DB estimate was $833.6M.

Pair legacy TAMs with your own bottoms-up TAM

In my experience, the most helpful way for figuring out (really, recomputing TAMs in “real time) is to look at the revenue that vendors in that space are having and then to understand what software they’re replacing. That is, in addition to taking analyst TAMs into perspective, you should come up with your own, bottoms-up model and explain how it works.

If you’re doing IT-lead innovation, using existing (if not “legacy”!) TAMs is a bad idea. You’ll likely end up over-estimating your growth and, worse, which category of software you are and who the buyers are. Study your users and your buyers and start modeling from there, not pivot tables from the north east.

The other angle here is that if you’re “revolutionizing” a market category, it means you’re redefining it. This means there will be no TAM for many years. For example, there was no “IaaS” TAM for a long time, at some point, there was no “Java app server TAM.” In such cases, creating your own TAMs are much more useful.

Finally, once you’ve figured out how big (or small!) your pie of money is, adjust your prices accordingly. More than likely you’ll find that you’ll need to charge a higher price than you think is polite…if you want to build a sustainable, revenue-driven business rather than just a good aggregation startup to be acquired by a larger company…who’ll be left to sort out how to make money.

Oracle acquiring Apiary, API design for the $660m (in 2020) API market

As for Oracle, the enterprise software vendor wants to use Apiary’s technology set to make its existing API Integration Cloud more robust. Oracle’s API product focuses primarily on services that help companies monetize and analyze APIs. Apiary provides more of a front-end platform for designing, creating and governing APIs. From Natalie Gagliordi f at ZDnet

From CrunchBase:

  • $8.55M in funding, over three rounds
  • Founded April, 2011.

Apigee was acquired, by Google, last year for $625m. Of course, they were public with (let’s hazard a guess) many, many more customers and revenue: $92.03m in FY2016, to be exact.

Back in September 2015, Carl Lehmann at 451 Research said they had 33 employees (up from 22 in Dec 2014) and estimated their revenue at $2-3m. Carl says, now, it’s “likely below $5m in annual revenue.”

What Apiary does

Apiary’s promise is to be quick and easy when it comes to managing the full life-cycle of API design. As their CEO, Jakub Nesetril, put it when I interviewed him in 2015:

It all starts with that first meeting when you’re thinking about building an API and you’re either kind of, you know, you’re inside meeting room ideating on a white board and then taking a photo of it and sending it to a co-worker, or summarizing it down into an email and sending it down to somebody else, saying hey, I just thought would could build something like this. That white board should be. And, if you do that it becomes, you know, we do a lot to try to make it super simple. We have a language that is like really, really simple for developers to write and we can write down a quick API in five minutes. It’s marked down, it’s like very organic, it’s very simple for developers.

What it creates for you, is creates this kind of common space, common language kind of when you talk about it that’s machine readable, human writable so it’s super simple but it’s also machine writable, and machine readable. The important aspect of it is that we take your white board, we take your … we build a language that we have API blue prints. It’s a… We take that API blueprint and we immediately create a API prototype, the moment you hit your first button. So, from day one when you’ve proposed your first API idea, your first resource you know, your first data structure. You have an API that’s sitting out there on the internet, somebody can query it and guess what, if they decide that the API is broken, that they would like to have a different resource, they would like to change the of a certain data structure, they would like add to it, whatever. They can go in, edit that out, click the save button and boom the API prototype is updated immediately.

Load in some enterprise governance and access controls, and you have something nice and useful. See him explaining more in this 2013 InfoQ interview.

Carl at 451 summarized the meat of what they do back in that 2015 report:

Apiary structures its API lifecycle management platform into five phases. The design phase includes the means to ensure API design consistency using a style guide, a collaborative editor and an approval process. The prototype phase includes productivity capabilities such as auto-generated code and a feedback loop for quality assurance. The implementation phase enables agile-inspired and test-driven development practices, helps deploy server code, and provides for framework integration. The delivery phase includes tools for automated documentation, offers code samples, guides the release of final client code, and offers SDKs. The feedback phase includes debugging, support and usage metrics.

The Money – grabbing part of the $3bn pie

Forrester threw out some API management market-sizing back in June of 2015 (there’s likely something more up-to-date behind their paywall):

We predict US companies alone will spend nearly $3 billion on API management over the next five years. Annual spend will quadruple by the end of the decade, from $140 million in 2014 to $660 million in 2020. International sales will take the global market over the billion dollar mark.

With Oracle’s foot-print in all of enterprise applications and IT (they own Java and share much of the JEE market with IBM), there’s likely some genuine synergies to be had. That is, Oracle could be in a position to boost Apiary sales way above what the tiny company could do on its own.

To be clear, as pointed out above, Apiary doesn’t do all that Apigee does. Apiary is just for the development/design time part of APIs, also providing documentation.

That’s helpful for sure, but I’d guess most of Forrester’s $3bn estimation is likely in actually running and managing APIs. And, in fact, it’s probably more realistic to put Apiary in the development tools/ALM TAM, which is probably in the low, single digit billions. That said, I’m guessing Forrester would put Apiary in their API management bucket; after all, it has “API” in it!

As more background, we talked about the API management market back back when the Apigee acquisition was announced both on Software Defined Talk and Pivotal Conversations.

Link

451: Container market to be $2.7B by 2020, from $762m in 2016

451-container-market-2017-01-09

451 Research estimated this week the application container segment reached a robust $762 million in 2016 and is forecast to grow at a 40-percent compound rate over the next four years to $2.7 billion.

And, on usage, from an April/May 2016 survey:

451 Research’s Voice of the Enterprise: Software-Defined Infrastructure Workloads and Key Projects survey conducted in April and May 2016 showed that of the roughly 25% of enterprises we surveyed who use containers, 34% were in broad implementation of production applications and 28% had begun initial implementation of production applications with containers.

I’m somewhat suspicious that there’s $762m in container software and services sales, but who knows, really?

I haven’t read through their entire cloud enabling technologies market sizing yet, from Dec 2016, (basically, private cloud software and services, any things used by *aaS vendors, not the actual public cloud services, which are another market) , which is more than just containers. That market is pegged at $23bn in 2016, going to $39bn in 2020:

2016 CET Market Monitor - Public Cloud vs. CET.png

More on 451’s blog.

Source: “Container Market Pegged at $2.7B by 2020”

AI market sizing: $39bn in growth in less than 3 years?!

The market — defined as A.I.-related hardware, software and services — will surge from $8 billion this year to $47 billion by 2020, predicts IDC, a research firm.

Uh…

Also, some coverage of Watson business models, including customized cocktail drugs, which I hear is a scary big business in the horizon.

And, there’s some IBM AI spreadsheeting you can fiddle around with:

Market-share:

IBM may have a chance to join that group. By 2020, IDC predicts, 60 percent of the A.I. applications will run on the platform of four companies: Amazon, Google, Microsoft and IBM.

Revenue:

UBS estimates that Watson may generate $500 million in revenue this year and could grow rapidly in the years ahead, possibly hitting nearly $6 billion by 2020 and almost $17 billion by 2022.

Having lived through The Great Cloud Forecasting era around the turn of the decade, my advice is: take all this with care, but enjoy the razzle-dazzle!

Source: IBM Is Counting on Its Bet on Watson, and Paying Big Money for It

China healthcare IT market to be $6.5bn by 2020

China’s overall healthcare IT solutions market reached a size of US$3.8 billion in 2015. Market size is expected to hit US$6.5 billion, with a CAGR of 11.1% in the 2015-2020 period.

That’s a lot of growth. See the full press release for some details on sub-markets.

Source: IDC: Healthcare Reform and 3rd Platform Technologies Drive Healthcare IT Solutions in China

OpenStack-related business models to exceed $4bn by 2019, 451 Research

New OpenStack market-sizing and -forecast from old pals at 451:

  • Al & Jay say $1.8bn in 2016, going to $5.4bn in 2020.
  • Public cloud dominates now, but is expected to switch – “[public cloud providers are] 49% of total OpenStack revenue in 2015. However, we expect OpenStack private cloud service provider revenue to exceed public cloud providers by 2019.”

How they bucket-ize:

451 Research’s Market Monitor focuses on 56 vendors that provide direct OpenStack offerings, including products, services and turnkey offerings around OpenStack deployment and management, different distributions of OpenStack, service providers and training services. Although we do consider some vendors with integrated hardware, systems and software offerings based on OpenStack, our market-sizing estimate does not include hardware-centric revenue, nor does it include revenue from indirect third-party vendors, such as those in storage or software-defined networking.

Source: OpenStack-related business models to exceed $4bn by 2019

Link: IDC: Federal government seeing cloud spending push

“In addition, the government plans to increase PaaS spending from $227.1 million in FY15 to $231.3 million [in FY16].”

We’re still in a phase where categorization causes weird slices of spend like this, but there you have it. More figures on “cloud” spending in the piece.

Source: IDC: Federal government seeing cloud spending push