Atlassian revenue up 47% y/y

The enterprise collaboration software vendor said it earned 12 cents a share, three cents ahead of the consensus estimate. Revenue climbed 41.7% year over year to $193.8 million, also above the $185.8 million analysts had forecasted.

You know what they say: developers don’t pay for anything.

Someone either needs to acquire Atlassian, it has to start acquiring companies, or if the private cloud thing becomes cemented, they need to work with the public cloud three to build out the private cloud toolchain. IBM and CA are the traditional ALM/SDLC acquirers (with occasional raids by the Microsoft barbarians), but that doesn’t seem likely anymore? 

Here, maybe Oracle if they double down on appdev for their new PaaS: retaining their existing Java+Oracle DB empire, feeding it into PaaS? That’s a bit too ornate of a strategy for such as big asset as Atlassian, though.
There’s always PE for big bundling plays, but what would the PE exit strategy be?
Source: At Last! Atlassian Surges on Strong Earnings, Forecast

Oracle’s public cloud momentum

Oracle reports its PaaS and IaaS revenue together, which makes understanding its IaaS growth difficult. FY16 to FY17 revenue increased from $0.9bn to $1.4bn, equivalent to 60% YoY growth. The company claims to have added 14,000 IaaS and PaaS customers to OCI since its inception, almost all of them existing customers of its licensed software. Oracle’s overall revenue in 2016 was $37bn, so IaaS and PaaS still represent a small slice of the pie.

The report has, of course, more detail on the portfolio, e.g.:

A challenge Oracle faced from the beginning was its tardiness to the market. Sure, it could copy and perhaps improve upon existing public cloud offerings, but it would have to do it faster than the rest of the market. AWS, for example, has over 70 services, so there is a lot of ground to cover. Over the past year, Oracle has released 50 services and features – starting from bare-metal compute and storage, the company has added virtual machines, databases, database clustering, load balancers, audit capability, compliance, monitoring, logging, authentication and new images. From a single datacenter in Phoenix, it has expanded to Ashburn, Virginia, and Frankfurt; it is targeting London for early 2018 and APAC further down the line. It has also released and open-sourced a new serverless capability called Fn and a Docker-native platform called Fn Flow for composing serverless applications. The company hopes to distinguish its serverless offering by making it cloud-agnostic, although Java is first among equals in terms of supported languages. Oracle realizes that its capability isn’t as broad as AWS’s, but its rate of development shows it can achieve a lot in a short amount of time.

And:

In 451 Research’s Voice of the Enterprise: Hosting & Cloud Managed Services, Organizational Dynamics 2017 report, 44% of 515 respondents stated that they would pay a premium for an enhanced SLA on performance/uptime; 34% stated that they would pay a premium for enhanced customer support. The median premium for these enhancements was about 20%. Buyers see value in services way beyond just the basics. The challenge for Oracle is convincing customers that it offers the best capability for the best price – there are others in the market with stronger credentials and reputations. stronger credentials and reputations.

Source: Oracle stays the course on IaaS

ScienceLogic momentum

The company targets very large users, with 60% of its customers being MSPs, followed by enterprises at about 30%, and the rest coming from government agencies. It doesn’t report the number of direct customers, but its website boasts 47,000 organizations as users, many of them employing ScienceLogic via service providers. Average annual contract value for direct customers is $125,000.

Source: ScienceLogic targets new use case aimed at frustrated CMDB users

Canonical refocusing on IPO’ing, momentum in cloud-native – Highlights

Canonical Party

There’s a few stories out about Canonical, likely centered around some PR campaign that they’re seeking to IPO at some time, shifting the company around appropriately. Here’s some highlights from the recent spate of news around Canonical.

Testing the Red Hat Theory, competing for the cloud-native stack

Why care? Aside from Canonical just being interesting – they’ve been first and/or early to many cloud technologies and containers – there’d finally be another Red Hat if they were public.

Most of the open source thought-lords agree that “there can never be another Red Hat,” so, we’ll see if the Ubuntu folks can pull it off. Or, at the very least, how an pure open source company wangles it out otherwise.

That said, SUSE (part of HPE/Micro Focus) has built an interesting business around Linux, OpenStack, and related stuff. Ever since disentangling from Novell, SUSE has had impressive growth (usually something around 20 and 25% a year in revenue). All is which to, the Red Hat model actually is being used successfully by SUSE, which, arguably, just suffered from negative synergies (or, for those who don’t like big words, “shit the bed”) when it was owned by Novell.

As I’m perhaps too fond of contextualizing, it’s also good to remember that Red Hat is still “just” a $2.5bn company, by revenue. Revenue was $1.5bn in 2014, so, still, very impressive growth; but, that’s been a long, 24 year journey.

All these “Linux vendors,”like pretty much everyone else in the infrastructure software market, are battling for control over the new platform, that stack of cloud-y software that is defining “cloud-native,” using containers, and trying to enable the process/mindset/culture of DevOps. This is all in response to responding to enterprises’ growing desire to be more strategic with IT.

Canonical momentum

From Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols:

Shuttleworth said “in the last year, Ubuntu cloud growth had been 70 percent on the private cloud and 90 percent on the public cloud.” In particular, “Ubuntu has been gaining more customers on the big five public clouds.”

And:

Its OpenStack cloud division has been profitable, said Shuttleworth, since 2015

Al Sadowski has an extensive report on Canonical, mentioning:

[Canonical] now has more than 700 paying customers and sees a $1bn business for its OS, applications and IT operations software. Time will tell if this goal is realized.

And:

Canonical claims some 700 customers paying for its support services on top of Ubuntu and other offerings (double the 350 it had three years ago), and to have achieved more than $100m in bookings in its last financial year…. [Overall, it’s] not yet a profitable business (although its Ubuntu unit is). We estimate GAAP revenue of about $95m.

Strategy

On focusing the portfolio, shoring it up for better finances for an IPO:

we had to cut out those parts that couldn’t meet an investors’ needs. The immediate work is get all parts of the company profitable.

To that end, as Alexander J. Martin reports:

More than 80 workers at Ubuntu-maker Canonical are facing the chop as founder Mark Shuttleworth takes back the role of chief executive officer…. 31 or more staffers have already left the Linux distro biz ahead of Shuttleworth’s rise, with at least 26 others now on formal notice and uncertainty surrounding the remainder

Back to Al on the Job to Be done, building and supporting those new cloud-native platforms:

Rather than offering ways to support legacy applications, the company has placed bets on its Ubuntu operating system for cloud-native applications, OpenStack IaaS for infrastructure management, and Docker and Kubernetes container software.

And, it seems to be working:

Supporting public cloud providers has been a success story for Canonical – year-over-year revenue grew 91% in this area…. Per Canonical, 70% of the guest OS images on AWS and 80% of the Linux images on Microsoft Azure are Ubuntu. Its bare-metal offering, MaaS (Metal as a Service), is now used on 80,000 physical servers.

On OpenStack in particular:

Canonical claims to be building 4,000 OpenStack deployments a month at some 180 vendors…. It claims multiple seven-figure deals (through partners) for its BootStrap managed OpenStack-as-a-service offering, and that the average deal size for OpenStack is trending upward.

On IPO’ing

The Vaughan-Nichols piece outlines Shuttleworth’s IPO plans:

Still, there is “no timeline for the IPO.” First, Shuttleworth wants all parts of the slimmed down Canonical to be profitable. Then “we will take a round of investment.” After that, Canonical will go public.

However, Al’s report says:

It is not seeking additional funding at this time.

Probably both are true, and the answer as Shuttleworth says is “well, in a few years once we get the company to be profitable.

More

Reactions to Cloudera’s IPO, prospects – Notebook

There’s lots of opinions on Cloudera’s IPO today. Here’s some that I’ve collected in my notebook.

Not valued high enough?

Despite the share-price being up 20% at close, some negative commentary focuses on their valuation dropping from Intel’s funding round, e.g., from Brenon at 451:

The chipmaker paid up for the privilege, putting a ‘quadra unicorn’ valuation of $4.1bn on Cloudera. Altogether, Cloudera raised more than $1bn from private market investors, making the $225m raised from public market investors seem almost like lunch money.

And then there’s the small matter of valuation. In its debut, Cloudera is only worth about half of what Intel thought it was worth when it made its bet.

The counter-point goes a little something like this (as pointed out by Derrick Harris):

“Much has been made of the huge valuation of that Intel-led round, but that’s all misguided noise,” according to IPO Candy, a website founded by Kris Tuttle, the director of research at Soundview Technology Group. “Intel didn’t make the investment for a financial return so the valuation isn’t relevant.”

Back in 2014, Intel was still smarting from missing the shift to mobile computing and Big Data was a favorite as the next big thing. The Santa Clara chip giant’s bet was placed chasing a strategic return, not so much banking a direct return on investment.

You know, all of this is a little bit of ¯_(ツ)_/¯. As I recall, Facebook’s IPO was all wiggly-woggly. If Cloudera makes a lot of money, gets bought for a lot of money, etc., no one will care to remember, just like with Facebook. Success is the best deodorant.

Their business, finances

Also from 451, earlier this month, a profile of their business:

Cloudera is nearly one-third bigger than Hortonworks, recording $261m in sales in its most recent fiscal year compared with $184m for Hortonworks. Both are growing at roughly 50%.

Since 2008, the company has grown steadily. As of January 31, it reports more than 1,000 customers. However, Cloudera is currently emphasizing and banking its success on what it calls the Global 8,000, which are the largest enterprises worldwide. The company notes that its number of Global 8,000 customers increased from 255 as of January 31, 2015, to 381 as of January 31, 2016, and 495 as of January 31. For the year ended January 31, the Global 8,000 represented 73% of Cloudera’s total revenue, while a further 10% of total sales came from the public sector. The company reports 1,470 fulltime employees as of January 31, a slight increase from its headcount of 1,140 the prior year.

More from Katie Roof at TechCrunch:

Cloudera’s market cap is now about $2.3 billion, significantly less than the $4.1 billion valuation Intel gave in 2014. This increasingly common phenomenon is now nicknamed a “down round IPO.”

In an interview with TechCrunch, CEO Tom Riley insisted that this was not a problem for the company because of the “growth prospects ahead of us.” If it performs well in the stock market, it could ultimately achieve the $4 billion-plus value. Square, which went public in 2015 at half its private market valuation, has since seen its share prices more than double.

(Side-note: comparisons of companies, Square and Cloudera, that have nothing to do with each other except being “tech” – and Square is payment processing, not “pure tech,” at that! – drive me a bit crazy, as listeners know.)

And a quick revenue/spend write-up from her:

Cloudera’s revenue is growing, totaling $261 million for the fiscal year that ended in January. The company brought in $166 million at the same time last year.

Losses were $186.32 million, down from $203 million in the same period the year before.

And, according to Jonathan Vanian: “Cloudera spent $203 million on sales and marketing in its latest fiscal year, up 26% from the previous year.”

TAM

I don’t really follow this space well enough anymore to quickly figure out the TAM: I suspect Cloudera operates in several data and BI related ones.

Cloudera isn’t only Hadoop, but 451 put the Hadoop market at $1.3b in 2016, growing to $4.4b in 2020, with a CAGR of 38.3% between 2015 & 2020.

If you throw data warehousing, BI, analytics, and an injection of the mega-databases TAM together, you get a really big TAM, anyhow. Keep in mind though that one of the traps of (definitionally orthodox) disruptors in this space is lowering the TAM of their respective markets, a la Red Hat in operating systems. I don’t get the sense that Cloudera is on that game plan, but others in the market might be.

Buyers’ plans & needs

With respect to what people would do with Cloudera and others in this space (including Pivotal), here’s a good ranking of the information infrastructure priorities Gartner recently found in enterprises:

info plans survey

Also of public/private cloud interest from the summary of that survey: “Based on survey responses, plans for on-premises deployments for production uses of data will drop from today’s 45% to 14% in 2018.”

Looking forward

People in the tech industry care a great deal about IPO’s like this. We’re all curious what The Market’s read on valuation of enterprise IT business models is for our own benefit, and just a general sense of the health of the sector. There’s also usually people you know at the company, so “yay” for people you know.

One day isn’t long enough to tell anything, though, cf., in a completely different space, that Facebook debut weirdness. People got all excited about Cisco buying AppDynamics because that seemed to show some “healthy” signs that money valued this kind of software/SaaS.

At any rate, people still seem to love the Big Data and such. From Cloudera’s CEO, Tom Reilly: “We’re competing with IBM and Watson, so our customers seeing the strength of our finances allows us to do more.” Think of all the free marketing!

And, Mike Olson (original CEO) adds:

The ensuing years have been remarkable. Our company has grown with the market. The original technology has morphed almost beyond recognition, adding real-time, SQL, streaming, machine learning capabilities and more. That’s driven adoption among some of the very biggest enterprises on the planet. They’re running a huge variety of applications, solving a wide variety of critical business problems.

Our early bet has proven correct: Data is changing the world. In applications like fraud detection and prevention, securing networks against cyberattacks and optimizing fleet performance in logistics and trucking, we’re delivering value. We’re helping to address big social challenges, improving patient outcomes in healthcare and helping law enforcement find and shut down human trafficking networks.

Against that background, an IPO takes on a more appropriate scale. We started Cloudera because we believe that data makes things that are impossible today, possible tomorrow. There’s more data coming, and there are plenty of impossible things to work on. Our journey is only well begun.

I admittedly don’t know Cloudera’s business model too well, but my sense is that they align well with the “have something to sell” model that many open source companies in the enterprise space forget to put in place.

Michael Dell on Pivotal, 130% growth y/y

Pivotal had a pretty major milestone this last quarter, over a quarter-billion dollars in 2016 bookings, up 130 percent year-over-year. The momentum with Pivotal in terms of digital transformation is white hot. Pivotal is now engaged in a third of the Fortune 100, and I would say the strategy so far has been to only go after the tallest buildings in the city. The opportunity to take Pivotal Cloud Foundry into Fortune 2000 and beyond is enormous. That’s going to represent a big opportunity for partners.

From a a recent interview.

Omni-channel at Target: 14% of 2016 sales were “digital,” with 68% fulfilled in-store

In 2014, more than 93% of our transactions took place in stores, less than 7% digital. That season we had just started shipping from a small number of stores. In 2015, that same timeframe, digital sales reached almost 10% of our total sales. We more than doubled our ship-from store-capability to nearly 500 stores. We fulfilled 41% of all our digital orders inside of a store.

For 2016, just a few months ago, just last year, digital sales climbed to 14%, more than twice what we did two years earlier. We double ship-from-stores again, more than 1,000 stores. Our stores were fulfilling 68% of our digital orders. We finished December with record digital growth, including record-breaking days on both Thanksgiving and Cyber Monday.

Always nice to see multi-year numbers.

Link

The Economist on Amazon – Highlights

  • Video: “In 2017 Amazon is expected to spend $4.5bn on television and film content, roughly twice what HBO will spend. But it has a big payoff.”
  • Prime momentum: “Mr Nowak reckons the company had 72m Prime members last year, up by 32% from 2015.”
  • Cloud: “Last year AWS’s revenue reached $12bn, up by more than 150% since 2014.”
  • Anti-trust, in the US: “If competitors fail to halt Amazon’s whirl of activities, antitrust enforcers might yet do so instead. This does not seem an imminent threat. American antitrust authorities mainly consider a company’s effect on consumers and pricing, not broader market power. By that standard, Amazon has brought big benefits.”

Are investors too optimistic about Amazon?