Archive for the ‘broadcast industry technology trends’ Category

Harmonic Announces Results for Q4 and Full Year 2011

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Feb 01 2012

Harmonic announced that its net revenue for the fourth quarter of 2011 was $143.6m, an increase of 4% versus the same period last year, and an increase of 3% versus the previous quarter.

International revenue represented 57% of sales in the quarter.  Harmonic’s top 10 customers contributed 34% of total revenue in the quarter, and no single customer represented more than 10% of sales.

GAAP net income for the quarter was $4.3m, compared to a net loss of $13.7m during the same period last year, and net income of $3.5m last quarter.

On a non-GAAP basis, net income for the quarter was $14m, compared to non-GAAP income of $12.5m for the same period of 2010, and non-GAAP net income of $12.7m last quarter.

GAAP gross margins in the quarter were 47%, up from 44% last year, and up 1% versus the previous quarter. Operating margins were 5%, versus -2% last year, and 3% last quarter.

On a non-GAAP basis, gross margins were 51% for the quarter, comparable with both the same period a year ago and the previous quarter. Non-GAAP operating margins were 13%, comparable to last year, and up from 12% last quarter.

 

Full Year Results

For the full year 2011, GAAP net revenue was $549.3m, up from $423.3 million for 2010, Pro forma annual revenue, which includes revenue from Omneon and certain deferred revenue excluded in GAAP results for both years, was $551.4m for 2011, up 8% from $509m for 2010.

 

Business Outlook
Harmonic anticipates net revenue to be in the range of $132m to $142m for the first quarter of 2012, which the company say is historically its slowest of the year. GAAP gross margins and operating expenses for the first quarter of 2012 are expected to be in the range of 45% to 47% and $61 million to $63 million, respectively. Non-GAAP gross margins and operating expenses for the first quarter of 2012, which will exclude charges for stock-based compensation and the amortization of intangibles, are anticipated to be in the range of 50% to 52% and $55 million to $57 million, respectively.

 

“We delivered record revenue for the fourth quarter and the full year of 2011,” said Patrick Harshman, president and chief executive officer of Harmonic. “During the year, our growth was primarily driven by increased video processing wins across our expanding global customer base, with video processing revenue up 17% and international revenue up 14% on a pro forma basis. Our successful integration of Omneon also extended our business into new markets, driving significant growth in our broadcast and media revenue, up 17% on a pro forma basis.

 

“We move into 2012 with broad technological and market leadership, and proven expertise in enabling our global customers to produce and deliver compelling new high-definition, on-demand and Internet-based video services. We believe the global proliferation of video content and media outlets, along with increasing demand for higher quality video in every format delivered over bandwidth constrained networks, plays into our core strengths.”

 

 

 .

Related Content:

Press Release: Harmonic Announces Fourth Quarter and Year End 2011 Results

Harmonic Q4 2011 Analyst Conference Call Transcript

Harmonic Q4 and Full Year 2011 Presentation to Analysts

Previous Quarter: Harmonic Reports Strong Q3 2011 Results, Driven by Strong Performance in Americas

Previous Year: Harmonic Announces Q4 and Full Year 2010 Results

 

© Devoncroft Partners. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

.

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

SeaChange Announces More Than $5 Million in Annualized Cost Reductions

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jan 31 2012

SeaChange announced that it has taken actions in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2012 that it says will will result in more than $5m in annualized cost reductions.

These cost reductions come principally from headcount reductions related to streamlining operations and reducing the overall cost structure of the company. The Company will incur restructuring and severance charges in the fourth quarter reflecting these actions.

SeaChange CEO Raghu Rau commented, “As we realign our resources to focus on delivering on customer commitments, we have targeted operating cost reductions as well as some facility rationalization. It is important to note, however, that our commitment to research and development remains strong and we continue to invest heavily in innovative, next generation solutions that will provide significant competitive advantage to our customers.”

 

Related Content:

Press Release: SeaChange Announces More Than $5 Million in Annualized Cost Reductions

 

© Devoncroft Partners. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

Tags: ,
No Comments »

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 5 – The 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, technology trends, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 01 2011

This is the eighth in a series of articles about some of the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands.  More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries took part in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

. 

Each year, as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), we ask broadcast professionals worldwide to rank a variety of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  We use this information to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable each vendor to understand its position in the market relative to the the industry as a whole as well as their company’s direct competitors.

In previous articles we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table, the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table, and 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table.

.

This post follows on from the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, by focusing on one of the most important metrics for any technology company – quality.

In an industry that prides itself on the fidelity of its sound and images, the perception of quality is a very important metric for broadcast technology vendors.  Many vendors use quality as one of the key components of their market positioning, and customers often use technical performance and quality as a part of their procurement strategies.

To determine the market’s perception of the quality of broadcast technology vendors, respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “Quality” on a scale of 1-10 – with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

The top 30 ranked brands for overall opinion are shown below for the global sample of all respondents.

In all cases, these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study.

.

The 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

.

As with previously published rankings, this list contains a broad mix of vendors including large and small firms; single product and multi-product firms; global and regional players; and audio and video technology providers.

In order to better understand what drives the perception of quality in the broadcast technology industry, let’s look deeper at the vendors on this list, beginning with the type of products produced by each vendor.

 .

Frequency of Product Category – Audio Takes 4 of Top 7 Spots

What about the product categories themselves?  Are some product categories inherently perceived as having higher quality?  If so are these products judged differently than other types of products by customers who are evaluating them for purchase?

As shown in the chart below, there is a very broad range of product categories included in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table – vendors that make products in 23 of the 26 product categories that were covered in the study.

However, when one looks at the frequency of the product categories produced by these vendors, it’s immediately apparent that the top categories are audio products.

.

2011 BBS Quality League Table — Frequency of Product Categories:

 

.

The top two products categories for quality are both from the audio side of the business – microphones and audio consoles.  In fact, four of the top seven product categories in this ranking are audio related, with only highly complex video products — video editing, camera lenses and ENG cameras — being included in this group.  This is an interesting data point, especially when one considers that out of 26 product categories covered in the 2011 BBS, only five were in the audio space.

The other product categories that appear multiple times are clustered in the live production and studio environments, and include camera lenses, studio cameras, production switchers, production servers, test and measurement and video transport.  Interestingly these products tend to be high ticket items that are produced by the industry’s larger vendors.

Since the industry’s largest vendors tend to operate in the most product categories, let’s evaluate the number of times each vendor appears in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table to see if there is a correlation between size of vendor / product range and the market’s perception of quality.

.

2011 BBS Quality League Table — Number of 2011 BBS Product Categories per Brand:

When considering what drives the perception of quality, one question to consider is which type of vendor appears more often in the above ranking – those that are focused on a single type of product, or large multi-product vendors.

While our research does not evaluate each product produced by every vendor, we do put vendors into categories based on their product lines.  This gives a good representation of whether a particular vendor has a narrow or broad product-line-up.

The table below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories produced by each brand (as defined by the segmentation used in the 2011 BBS).

 

.

As shown above, the vast majority of the companies in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table provide products in just one of the product categories we measured as part of the study.

Please note that this is not a measure of company size, but rather a measure of how many product categories each of the above vendors was included in for the 2011 BBS. For example some of the “single product category companies” on the above list — such as Adobe, Dolby and Shure – are quite large.

Yet with 21 out of 30 vendors on this list producing a product in only one 2011 BBS category (out of 26 measured) it appears that that focused, specialized companies are regarded as quality leaders in the eyes of the market.  Nevertheless it’s also worth pointing out that large companies can also be considered industry innovators. For example, in the 2011 BBS study, Avid is covered in seven product categories, Snell is covered in five product categories, Sony is covered in four product categories and EVS appears three times.

To further illustrate this point, the chart below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories per vendor in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table.

.

Number of products per vendor – Single Product Companies Dominate Quality Rankings

A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table is shown below:

.

With more than two-thirds of the vendors in the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table producing a product in just one 2011 BBS product category, this table clearly suggests that focused companies who apply their efforts to specialist product areas are often able to generate a higher perception of quality in the eyes of the market.

Of course, companies are listed here based on how many 2011 BBS product categories they produce, which is not an absolute measure of the products produced be each vendor. There are some very large companies on the list above who appear in just one 2011 BBS category. In total, the 2011 BBS looked at 118 vendors in 26 separate product categories (based on the IABM’s industry model), but even so, it did not necessarily cover the entire product range of all vendors.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that all data in these charts is presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2011 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

 .

In order to get full value from this data, it is necessary to evaluate these results on a granular basis.  If you would like more information, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 .

.

This article is based on the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participating, the 2011 BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

.

Devoncroft Partners has published a variety of reports from 2011 BBS data.  For more information, please get in touch.

.

.

Related Content:

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 4 – the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 3 – the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010 Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 4 – the 2011 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 25 2011

This is the seventh in a series of articles about some of the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands.  More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries took part in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

.

Each year, as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), we ask broadcast professionals worldwide to rank a variety of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  We use this information to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable each vendors to understand its position in the market relative to their the industry as a whole as well as their direct competitors.

In previous articles we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table, and the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table.

This post looks at one of the most important metrics for any technology company – innovation.

The product side of the film & broadcast industry is driven by technology and innovation.  All vendors spend heavily on research and development in order to create advanced technologies that make their products stand out from the competition.  Thus innovation is a very  important component of the brand image and reputation of vendors in this space.

To find out which broadcast technology vendors are considered to be most highly regarded in terms of innovation, respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “Innovation” on a scale of 1-10 – with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.  The top 30 ranked brands for innovation are shown below for the global sample of all respondents.

Please note that these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study. 

 .

2011 BBS Innovation League Table:

.

There are a wide variety of companies on this list, including large and small firms; single product and multi-product firms; global and regional players; and audio and video technology providers.

Let’s look specifically at the how these companies and their products were ranked in the 2011 BBS, beginning with products and technology.

As shown in the chart below, these companies make products in 23 of the 26 product categories that we covered in the 2011 BBS.

The top products for brand leaders are split between audio and video – with microphones, signal processing and video transport each appearing five times.

 .

2011 BBS Innovation League Table — Frequency of Product Categories:

.

The 2011 BBS Innovation League Table is split fairly evenly between audio and video companies.  There’s also a healthy mix of hardware versus software products represented on this list.

Does company size play a role in innovation?  Larger companies offer more products and are consequently used in more places than their smaller counterparts.  But this does not necessarily translate into innovation.

As shown below, innovative products are produced by both small focused companies, as well as by larger multi-product vendors.

Let’s look at the number of product categories that each of these brands produces (as defined by the segmentation used in the 2011 BBS).

The table below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories produced by each brand.

 ..

2011 BBS Innovation League Table — Number of 2011 BBS Product Categories per Brand:

 

.

As shown in the table above, vendors producing products in only one 2011 BBS category account for more than half of the vendors in the top 30 innovation list.  This suggests that focused companies who apply their efforts to specialist product areas are often able to generate more innovation in the eyes of the market.

At the same time, larger companies are also represented on this list of the broadcast industry’s top innovators.  For example, Grass Valley is covered in 8 product categories in the 2011 BBS, while both Evertz and Snell are covered in five product categories.  These are examples of larger companies who have managed to instill innovation across their product lines.

Of course, companies are listed here based on how many 2011 BBS product categories they produce, which is not an absolute measure of the products produced be each vendor. There are some very large companies on the list above who appear in just one 2011 BBS category. In total, the 2011 BBS looked at 118 vendors in 26 separate product categories (based on the IABM’s industry model), but even so it did not necessarily cover the entire product range of all vendors.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2011 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

 .

In order to get full value from this data, it is necessary to evaluate these results on a granular basis.  If you would like more information, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 .

.

This article is based on the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participating, the 2011 BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

.

Devoncroft Partners has published a variety of reports from 2011 BBS data.  For more information, please get in touch.

.

.

 

Related Content:

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 3 – the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010

Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

IBC 2011 Trends: Cloud, Channel-in-a-Box, 3D

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Sep 30 2011

Note: This article was originally published last week by TVNewsCheck

Technology vendors at IBC answered the broadcasters’ call for efficiency in a variety of ways, including “cloud” oriented product offerings, highly integrated IT-based systems for broadcast playout, and the introduction of new versions of existing systems that are smaller and less featured, but more affordable to broadcasters with limited budgets.

Also on display at the annual tech show, which wrapped up a six-day run in Amsterdam last week and drew more than 50,000 professionals, were technologies aimed at making 3D production more affordable and compatible with standard 2D operations.

Many vendors were touting the advantages of deploying some type of cloud-based or service-oriented architecture (SOA) applications such as capturing, producing, processing and distributing video and audio as digital files.

Cloud services are drawing attention because broadcasters are being challenged to support an ever-increasing number of distribution platforms. The breadth and rapidly changing nature of the multi-screen environment makes it difficult for even large broadcasters to deploy the appropriate hardware and software solutions in an affordable and timely manner. Thus, broadcasters are now increasingly willing to contemplate outsourcing some of these functions to cloud-based technologies and services.

Many vendors at IBC demonstrated technologies to address some of the fundamental concerns that broadcasters have about cloud-based architectures, notably content security, access to content, collaboration, bandwidth and workflow continuity.

Avid, Chyron, Grass Valley, Panasonic, Sony, Quantel and Vizrt showed their own methods for deploying “media-friendly” SOAs that provide a common interface and pre-authorized access to a wide variety of production tools from every staff member’s desktop.

In addition, the Advanced Media Workflow Association, the European Broadcasting Union and SMPTE came together to develop a standard for configuring an SOA that would allow each manufacturer’s equipment to talk to each other. The effort stems from the vendors’ realization that — due to R&D cost efficiencies — their next-generation products will be predominantly software based and operate best in this type of networked environment.

SOAs also help broadcasters produce and distribute content much more efficiently and allow staff to collaborate even though they may be in separate locations.

Many of these IT-centric concepts are not new ideas, but are now becoming attractive to the video production and broadcasting communities, looking to do more with the same resources. Industry connectivity to Internet protocol (IP) infrastructures has matured and newer consumer-industry file transfer technologies — like IP, HDMI and Apple/Intel’s Thunderbolt — offer benefits for broadcasters that were not apparent before.

Another significant hub of IT-oriented activity at the IBC was in the area of IT-based playout or, as it is more commonly known, channel in a box. These systems offer the promise of dramatically reducing the cost of broadcast playout by enabling users to migrate to off-the-shelf IT hardware running software that integrates, automates and replaces much of the traditional broadcast master control infrastructure.

Technology in this area had matured significantly over the past 6-12 months, and is now are under serious consideration by a number of large and small broadcasters around the world. Miranda Technologies, which became the de facto leader in this emerging field when it acquired the OmniBus Systems’ iTX platform last year, showed the latest advances in its IT-based playout offerings.

Other notable players in this space include traditional broadcast suppliers such as Snell and Evertz, as well as smaller specialized players like Playbox and VSN. Significantly, other large technology vendors are rumored to be readying competing systems that will be introduced in time for the annual NAB Show in April 2012.

In addition to the increasing drive for increased efficiencies, many IBC attendees were gearing up for the high-profile sporting and political events of 2012. In some cases, that means 3D. While the technology has yet to even be considered by local broadcasters in the U.S., a variety of live sports production companies across Europe are already producing events like soccer and rugby in 3D or are anticipating that they will by the time of the Olympics in London.

The games will be the first in 3D, with many events, including the opening and closing ceremonies, produced in the format. Panasonic will be supplying large quantities of 3D cameras and other gear.

Avatar director and 3D pioneer James Cameron put in appearances at several places at the IBC, promoting his new company, The Cameron/Pace Group, and urging industry professionals to pursue and help develop new tools for producing 2D and 3D content simultaneously.

According to Cameron, it’s the only way to stimulate the market to develop much-need original 3D content, and, in turn, spur 3D TV set sales. Previously, the cost of producing 3D has been prohibitive for everyone but a fortunate few who are being sponsored by TV set manufacturers.

“We’re on a relentless path to grow the 3D business,” said Cameron, at the Grass Valley IBC press conference. “We’ve been in the 3D game for 12 years now. We are so excited about what’s happening right now [with 3D] but it’s a little bit daunting staying ahead of the rapid rate of technology change, so we have to have powerful alliances with people that are major players in broadcast who will be able to fulfill this future and supply the kind of quality 3D that people enjoy.”

At the same press conference, Cameron’s partner (and equally influential 3D pioneer) Vince Pace said, “It’s so critical to the industry that we integrate the solutions and come up with a very clean and determined business plan that makes sense to the industry to increase the amount of 3D productions. So, this business of saying we have fewer cameras or we don’t tell the whole story is going to go away.”

IBC attendance was up slightly this year (4%, according to the IBC, to 50,462), again signaling that broadcasters are spending money — on hardware and T&E. Unlike last year, there were several representatives of all the major U.S. TV networks.

.

.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 04 2011

This is the fifth in a series of articles about some of the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands.  More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries took part in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

 

Each year, as part of the Big  Broadcast Survey (BBS), we ask broadcast professionals worldwide to rank a variety of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  We use this information to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry league tables” enable each vendors to understand its position in the market relative to their the industry as a whole as well as their direct competitors.

In a previous article we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, which shows how our global sample of broadcast professionals ranked 118 broadcast vendor brands in terms of their overall opinion of these vendors.

While it’s great for a vendor to be named to the top 30 for overall opinion, these rankings may be seen as somewhat one-sided because they rely primarily on the positive opinions of respondents. In order to get a better understanding of how broadcast technology vendor brands are perceived, it is necessary to look at both the positive and negative opinions of brands, and to take into account how these opinions have changed over time.

To achieve this, we first determine whether a respondent has an opinion of a brand, and then ask them how their opinion of that brand has changed over time – i.e. has it improved, declined or stayed the same.

When compared to the previously published ranking of overall opinions of brands, this methodology provides a more comprehensive picture of how a brand is perceived because it shows both the positive and negative opinions of each brand.

Sometimes these results highlight some interesting perceptions about brands.  Take for example the chart below, which is from our 2009 study.

 

 

 

In this case the brand that was top for “got better” was also top for “got worse.”

Given these results, it is perhaps more useful to find the Net Change in Overall Opinion for each brand, which is calculated by using the following formula:

GB-GW/# of total respondents = Net Change in Brand Image

In other words, the percentage of respondents who said a brand “got worse” is subtracted from the percentage of respondents who said their opinion of a brand had “got better” (ignoring the “stayed the same” number).

This takes into account both the positive and negative perceptions of brands, along with how these opinions have changed over time.  It also presents a more balanced view of which brands are getting better and which are getting worse in the minds of market participants.

Because some brands are polarizing (as seen in the example above), it’s possible that a strong “got better” response might be cancelled ut by a strong “got worse” response.  As a result some companies who were rated in the top 30 on just the “got better” score were not included in the global or regional top 30 because their high “got worse” score dragged down their overall result.  At the same time, a few of the companies with high “got worse” scores still made the top 30 list because these negative scores were cancelled out by even higher “got better” scores.

In order to arrive at the Net Change in Overall Opinion, research participants were asked whether their opinion of various brands had “got better”, “got worse” or “stayed the same” over the past 2-3 years.

.

The results of this enquiry are shown below in two ways:

  • An overall industry “league table” that shows the 30 highest ranked vendors for the metric “Net Change of Overall Opinion.”  The data in this chart is broken out globally and regionally.

 

  • An analysis of the “frequency” of appearance in the “Net Change of Overall Opinion” league table.”

 

The top 30 ranked brands for Net Change of Overall Opinion are shown below for both the global sample of all respondents as well as for all respondents in each of the geographic regions.

 

In all cases, these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked by respondents to the study.

.

2011 BBS Net Chage in Overall Opinion League Table:

 

A total of 51 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, illustrating the geographic variation of opinion.

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:

 

  • 13 brands appear four times, meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region

 

  • 10 brands appear three times

 

  • 9 brands appear two times

 

  • 19 brands appear one time which demonstrates that some brands are strongest in one geographic area

 

 

Analysis of the data shows that are some clear market leaders on a global basis, while others are strong on a regional basis.

A breakdown of how many times each company appears in the ranking shows how many times each brand appears in the chart above.

 .

 

Brands appearing four times in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • Adobe, Aja Video, Apple, Blackmagic Design, Canon, Cisco, Genelec, Omneon, Panasonic, Riedel, Sennheiser, Sony, Tektronix

.

Brands appearing three times in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • Ateme,  Evertz, EVS, Harmonic, Net Insight, Rhozet, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, Shure, Vizrt

.

Brands appearing two times in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • AKG, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Ensemble,  Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Telestream, TVIPS, Wohler

.

 

Brands appearing once in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • AmberFin, Audio-Technica ,Avid, Fujinon, Grass Valley, Harris, Inlet Technologies, Linear, Linear Acoustic, Miranda, MSA Focus,
    Nevion, Playbox, PubliTronic, Schoeps, Screen Service, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Yamaha

..

.

 

Frequency Analysis of the Brands in the in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:  

In order to provide a better understanding of which brands were most highly ranked in each geography, the data has been provided in the
table below, which shows the global and regional performance for each brand in the top 30 ranking of overall opinion.

.
.

Frequency Analysis of Brands in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

 

 

This frequency analysis chart shows that there are some interesting geographic variations in the data. Here’s a closer look at how brands appeared by geography:

 

Appearing in the top 30 “overall opinion” ranking globally + one region

Eight brands managed to achieve a top 30 ranking in theglobal overall opinion league table, despite being in the top 30 of only one of the three geographic regions.

  • Digital Rapids, Ensemble, EVS, Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Net Insight, Telestream, T-VIPS

.

 

Appearing in the top 30 “overall opinion” ranking in one region

The following 18 brands did not make the top 30 in the global league table of overall opinion, but they did appear in the top 30 overall opinion ranking in one of the geographic regions:

  • AmberFin, Audio-Technica, Avid, Fujinon, Grass Valley, Inlet Technologies, Linear, Linear Acoustic, Miranda, MSA Focus, Nevion, Playbox, PubliTronic, Schoeps, Screen Service, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Yamaha

 .

 

Appearing in the top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in EMEA

  • AmberFin, Fujinon, Inlet Technologies, Linear Acoustic, Nevion, PubliTronic, Screen Service

 .

 

Appearing in the top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in Asia-Pacific

  • Avid, Grass Valey, Harris, Miranda, MSA Focus, Playbox, Schoeps, Yamaha

 .

 

Appearing in the top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in the Americas

  • Audio-Technica, Linear, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Wohler

.

.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2011 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

In order to get full value from this data, it is necessary to evaluate these results on a granular basis.  If you would like more information, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 .

.

 

This article is based on the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participating, the 2011 BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Devoncroft Partners has published a variety of reports from 2011 BBS data.  For more information, please get in touch.

.

 

Related Content:

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010

Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2011. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

More Broadcast Vendor M&A: Tektronix Acquires Veridae Systems

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 13 2011

Tektronix announced that it has acquired Vancouver Canada-based Veridae Systems, a privately-held supplier of on-chip validation and debug solutions. The terms of the transaction were not disclosed, but Tektronix did say that it would be establishing a new business unit in Vancouver, BC as part of the deal.

Founded in 2009 to commercialize research from the University of British Columbia, Veridae provides of ASIC/FPGA prototyping debugging, ASIC post silicon validation, and FPGA-based system product validation.

Veridae says its products are the first on the market to deliver a systematic “design for validation” approach, which enables its customers to debug problems in hours that previously required weeks, or even months to resolve.

“Veridae is solving an ever increasing challenge faced by our customers — debug and validation of their complex systems,” said, Amir Aghdaei, President of Tektronix. “The combination of Veridae and Tektronix solutions will provide significant cost saving to our customers while accelerating their time to market.”

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Tektronix Acquires Veridae Systems, Inc.

.

.

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

Yet Another NAB 2011 Trend – Broadcast Vendor M&A

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 05 2011

In the aftermath of what many vendors reported was a very successful NAB show, there appears to be an enhanced feeling of optimism in the broadcast industry, something that has been lacking for the past several years.

The global economy is seemingly healthier, the financial performance of both broadcasters and technology vendors has improved, and digital media is a hot topic across many industries as companies roll out plans to bring video and audio content to a growing number of platforms and devices.

Against this backdrop, one noticeable trend at the 2011 NAB show was increased speculation about broadcast vendor M&A and consolidation, fueled in part by investment bankers and private equity (PE) firms who were significantly more visible this year than in any NAB show in recent memory.

It is perhaps not surprising that there is an increased interest in industry M&A. Video and audio technologies have become strategic to many companies outside of the traditional broadcast business, so bankers and PE firms are looking to find companies that might add value to a larger enterprise or a portfolio of companies.

These factors have led to a flurry of recent broadcast industry M&A deals over the past year — and the pace of activity in this area appears to be accelerating. There have already been a large number of deals in 2011, including the Carlyle Group’s acquisition of The Foundry for a reported $120m, Cisco’s purchase of Inlet Technologies for $95m, Technicolor’s disposal of Grass Valley’s broadcast, transmission and head-end businesses in three separate transactions, DG Fastchannel’s acquisition of MIJO for $39.5m, and the ongoing buying spree of broadcast M&A champ Kit Digital, which has acquired more than a dozen companies, culminating in the $79.4m purchase of Ioko that was announced during the 2011 NAB show.

In addition to attracting the attention of investment bankers and PE firms, recent broadcast industry M&A activity (not to mention the healthy valuations achieved by some of the companies mentioned above), has not gone unnoticed by broadcast technology vendors. After weathering a punishing economic climate over the past two years, vendors of all sizes are now taking the time to consider their “strategic options.” Some are eager to sell their companies, while others see an opportunity to acquire other companies and consolidate their leadership position in the market.

Indeed, as shown below our most recent research of senior executives at broadcast technology vendors reveals that while about a third of companies intend to retain their private status, many others expect to be involved in some sort of strategic transaction within the next 2-3 years.

 

 

 

So what’s driving the interest in M&A activity, and what are the difference between the motivations of potential buyers and sellers?

Potential buyers are often looking for scale in the form of product lines and increased access to customers and markets. The motivations of sellers are perhaps more complex. They run the range from wanting to be part of a larger organization to the desire to cash out in a buoyant market.

Let’s examine each perspective.

 

Broadcast Industry M&A: Buyer Motivations

Expansion of a company’s product line is a key driver of M&A. Despite marketing messages to the contrary, no broadcast technology vendor truly offers a complete solution to all needs of broadcasters. Even the most comprehensive product ranges have gaps.

The question facing broadcast technology vendors is what to do about it. Broadcast technology vendors have several choices: funding internal product development, finding a complementary partner, or buying a ready-made solution through M&A. Each choice has positives and negatives associated with it.

We asked senior managers at broadcast technology vendors how they are thinking about filling in the gaps in their product portfolios. The results are shown in the chart below:

 

 

Vendors reported that internally funded product development is the most preferred approach to expanding their product ranges. Finding a complementary company to partner with is also a choice that many vendors are exploring.

Still, more than a quarter of vendors said they intend to use M&A to fill in the gaps in their product portfolios. We asked these vendors to share the motivations for wanting to acquire other companies. As shown below the top drivers for acquiring other companies comes down to a classic make or buy decision.

 

 

 

Senior executives at broadcast technology vendors listed their top two reasons for buying other companies as gaining new technical expertise and filling gaps in their product portfolio. These options apply equally to companies looking to acquire technology in their core markets, as well as those who want to buy their way into new markets.

Vendors also see M&A as a way to increase their market share. This is particularly true for vendors who have established a global sales and distribution, but have gaps in their products. This type of deal is typically a small “bolt-on” acquisition.

A less commonly cited driver is to increase economies of scale. By enlarging the scale of their operations, vendors can create savings through strategic synergies as well as through volume discounts on components and manufacturing services.

 

Broadcast Industry M&A: Seller Motivations

Senior managers of broadcast technology vendors who indicated that their company might be sold or merged over the next 2-3 years were asked for more information about why they feel this might be the case.

 

 

 

The top reasons cited by these managers for selling the company highlight both corporate and personal motivations are at play.

From a corporate point of view, managers want to access the greater resources of a larger company. This is equally valid for a small company selling to a larger company, and the merger of two small companies to create a new larger entity. These economies of scale can enable vendors to compete on a more equal footing with larger rivals.

Given that 70% of vendors who participated in our 2011 broadcast industry market study are privately held, it is not surprising that investor liquidity is also a strong motivator for selling the company to a larger entity. Whether the company is owned by the founders, a large number of shareholders, or venture capitalists, investors are always on the lookout to capitalize on their assets. And why not? Some of the vendors mentioned above were able to achieve a “strategic” valuation for their businesses, dramatically increasing the personal fortunes of company insiders.

Interestingly, just six percent of respondents cited difficulty continuing as a stand-alone entity as a reason to sell the company. This implies that if the price is not right, company owners may be happy to continue with the status-quo until a better offer comes along.

 

This article was originally published in the IABM Journal. It is based on the findings from the Devoncroft Partners’ 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), an annual study of global trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands in the broadcast industry. More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participated in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

Chyron Q1 Revenue Dips 4 Percent Due to Seasonality As It Gears Up for Growth in Second Half of 2011

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
May 05 2011

Broadcast graphics specialist Chyron reported that its revenue for the first quarter of 2011 was $6.58m, a decrease of 4% versus the same period a year ago, and a decrease of 6% versus the previous quarter.

Net loss for the quarter was $0.44m, an improvement on the $0.65m net loss for the first quarter of 2010, but slightly worse than the net loss of $0.33m during the previous quarter. Operating loss in the quarter was $0.89m, compared to an operating loss of $0.46m in the prior year’s first quarter.

Company president and CEO Michael Wellesley-Wesley attributed the lower results to the timing of large enterprise orders, and the cyclical nature of the first quarter when many broadcasters delay purchase decision in advance of the annual NAB trade show. “Our first quarter results were in the neighborhood of what we reported last year and reflect a seasonal cycle whereby Q1 is traditionally our weakest. Many broadcast capital spending plans are finalized in Q1 and there is a natural sales pause leading up to the National Association of Broadcasters (“NAB”) conference, which is the industry’s largest trade show and ‘the’ venue to debut new technology.”

Product revenue in the quarter was $5.04m, down 6% versus both last year and the previous quarter. Service revenue in the quarter was $1.54m, up 2% versus last year, but down 7% versus last quarter. Service revenue accounted for 23% of total revenue during the quarter.

On the company’s earnings conference call, Wellesley-Wesley highlighted some of the company’s recent commercial success, including Sinclair Broadcast Group’s purchase BlueNet for 13 news-producing station, and Norwegian public broadcaster, NRK’s purchase of BlueNet for its 12 regional news stations. Wellesley-Wesley called the NRK deal “particularly gratifying from a competitive standpoint.”

Gross profit margin was 70% for the first quarter of 2011, the same as for the first quarter of 2010. Operating expenses were $5.49m for the first quarter, up 4% versus last year, primarily due to increased spending in the sales and marketing areas.

Wellesley-Wesley said that Chyron had reorganized its sales operations in 2010 and is now in the process of adding more sales resources in the US and internationally. As a result, the company’s sales and marketing costs have risen 15%, and the CEO says that he expects these costs to continue to increase as the company positions itself to take advantage of what it believes will be an upswing in spending through 2012.

“We remain guardedly optimistic that the broadcast market will continue its recovery and that our expanded sales team will capitalize on this renewed growth in Q2 2011 and beyond,” said Wellesley-Wesley.

.

.

Related Content:

Press release: Chyron Reports Financial Results For The First Quarter 2011

Chyron Revenue Increases 8% in 2010 as Company Achieves Positive EBITDA on Smaller Losses. Separately, SVP and COO Kevin Prince Resigns

Previous year press release: Chyron Reports Financial Results For The First Quarter 2010

.

.

 

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

Harris Broadcast Communications Profitable in Q3 as Revenue Increases Nine Percent

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
May 03 2011

Harris Corporation announced its results for the third quarter of its fiscal year.

On an overall basis, the company’s revenue was $1.41Bn, an increase of 6% versus the same period a year ago.  However the company’s profit fell by almost 16%.

Harris Corporation’s full results are covered elsewhere.  This post looks specifically at the results of the company’s broadcast communications business.

This is the first quarter since Harris strategically realigned its business segments, and rolled the broadcast communications business into a newly created “Integrated Network Solutions” (ISN) business unit.

Now that Harris broadcast communications business is part of ISN, its performance in the sector is somewhat more opaque than in the past, with only top level numbers disclosed by the company.

Broadcast Communications revenue was $134.1m, an increase of 9% versus the same period a year ago, (when the company posted an operating loss of $5m on revenue of $123m), and an increase of 3% versus the previous quarter.

On the company’s conference call with equity analysts, Harris Corporation CEO Howard Lance called the performance of the broadcast business a “significant year-over-year improvement.” Lance went on to say that the Harris broadcast business turned a profit during the quarter and was still on track to achieve break even performance for the full year.

In guidance issued last quarter, Lance said that the Harris expects its broadcast division to break-even on full year revenue in region of $520m – $540m, a 7-11% revenue increase versus the actual results during the previous fiscal year.

Harris broadcast received several major orders during the quarter, including a $9m contract from a central-Asian broadcaster, and a digital-out-of-home / IPTV deal with Madison Square Garden in New York that will commence this summer and be completed in time for the 2013-13 season. The company also received orders during the quarter from Gray Television, Cox Broadcasting and CBS.

The Harris broadcast business accounted for 29% of the ISN division’s $463m revenue. The ISN business unit’s revenue increased 23% year-over-year, however most of this growth came via acquisition.  On an organic basis, ISN revenue was flat year-over-year.
.

.

Related Content:

Harris Press Release: Harris Corporation Reports Fiscal 2011 Third Quarter Results

Transcript of Harris Q3 conference call with equity analysts

Harris Says Broadcast Communications Business Improved Significantly in Q2

Harris Corporation Strategically Realigns Business Segments; Broadcast Communications Rolled into
New “Integrated Network Solutions” Unit

Harris Broadcast Business Making a Comeback Thanks to Improved Market Condition and New Opportunities in Digital-Out-of-Home

Harris Q3 2010 Results for Broadcast Communications Division

.

.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »