Posts Tagged ‘Dolby’

Dolby Reports Increase Revenue and Profit in Q1, But Cuts Guidance Due to Slowdown in PC Market

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Feb 03 2011

Dolby Labs reported that revenue for the first quarter or its fiscal year was $242.7m, an increase of 10% versus the same period a year ago, and an increase of 6% versus the previous quarter.

Net income in the quarter was $86.4m, an 25% increase compared to the first quarter of last year, and an increase of 33% versus the previous quarter.   The company said that its net income figure for the quarter was helped by various discrete tax items, primarily a one-time tax benefit resulting from the release of a deferred tax liability of $11m related to the amortization of an intangible from a prior acquisition.

Licensing revenue during the quarter was $188.2m, a 14% increase versus the first quarter of last year, and a 5% increase versus the previous quarter.  Product revenue in the quarter was $46m, down slightly from $47.7m a year ago, but up 14% versus the previous quarter.  The overall gross margin for the quarter was 88%. 

.

2011 Forecast Lowered

Dolby revised its guidance for the year saying it is now targeting fiscal 2011 revenue in the range of $930m to $970m.  Last quarter the company said it expected fiscal 2011 revenue to be in the range of $950m to $990m with total gross margin of approximately 88 percent on a GAAP basis. Company president and CEO Kevin Yeaman attributed the lowered forecast to a slowdown in the PC market.

.

.

You can read the full Dolby Q1 earnings release here.

A write-up of Dolby’s results from the previous quarter is here.

.

Ray Dolby to Retire From Board of Dolby Corporation

broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Dec 08 2010

Dolby Corporation today disclosed through an 8K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that company founder Ray Dolby will be retiring from the company’s board of directors.

The filing says that Dolby will not stand for reelection and retire from the Board, effective as of the date of the Company’s 2011 annual meeting of stockholders. 

Upon his retirement, Dolby will be appointed to the newly-created position of “Founder and Director Emeritus.” In this position, he will be entitled to attend meetings of the company’s board and its committees as an observer and to receive copies of the related meeting materials.

The company said that Dolby is not retiring because of a disagreement with the company on any matter relating to the company’s operations, policies or practices.

To fill the board vacancy created as a result of Ray Dolby’s planned retirement, the company’s board said that it will nominate Ray Dolby’s son, David Dolby, for election as a member of the Board at the Company’s 2011 annual meeting of stockholders. 

Immediately prior to David Dolby assuming the board position, he will resign as an employee of the company, and become a consultant to the board on technology strategy matters.  The company said that David Dolby’s annual compensation as a consultant to the board will be less than the annual compensation he received as an employee of the Company in fiscal 2010.

Dolby Reports Q4 and Full Year Results, Achieves Record Profitability for the Year

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcaster Financial Results, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 04 2010

Dolby Labs reported today that its revenue for the fourth quarter of its fiscal 2010 was $228.7m, an increase of 39% versus the 4th quarter of 2009.   Fourth quarter GAAP net income was $65m, an increase of 47% compared to the same period a year ago.

During the quarter, licensing revenues grew 29% to $178.4m, and product revenue doubled to $40.3m.

For the full fiscal year the company said that its revenue grew 28% to $922.7m, compared to $719.5m million for fiscal year 2009.  Fiscal year GAAP net income was $283.4 million, 17% higher than in fiscal 2009.

For the full year, licensing revenue grew by 19% to $594.7m, while product revenue jumped 88% to $180.4m.

Company president & CEO Kevin Yeaman said he was pleased with the results, saying.  “We finished the year with record revenue and profitability while continuing to extend our multi-channel formats to the online ecosystem.”

The company issued guidance for fiscal 2011, saying that it is targeting revenue of $950m to $990m with total gross margin of approximately 88 percent on a GAAP basis. 

.

You can read the full Dolby Q4 and FY 2010 press release here.

.

Value for Money Rankings of Broadcast Technology Vendors — The Top 30 Globally

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 27 2010

This is part of series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS).

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market.

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents.

.

Recently, posts which rank broadcast technology vendors include:

 . 

This post looks at how respondents ranked broadcast technology vendors for what is perhaps the most subjective driver we measured in the 2010 BBS — value for money.

.

For some respondents value for money might mean low price, for others it might mean superior price/performance, while for others it could mean peace of mind in mission critical environments, regardless of the price.

Whatever the definition of value, the combination of a poor economy over the past few years and customer budget constraints have made many broadcast professionals more value-conscious than ever.  As a result, broadcast technology vendors must respond by continually delivering more value for less money.  This drives innovation in the broadcast supply chain as vendors are forced to compete on multiple levels.

Respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “Value for Money” 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 by respondents to the survey. 

.

Value for Money – The Top 30 Globally, Alphabetical Order

.

There are a wide variety of vendors on this list, including large & small companies and those who produce audio & video products.  In order to better understand what drives the perception of value, we need to look at some of the factors behind these results.  These include the number of products produced by each vendor, the geographic location of the each vendor, and the types of product produced by the top 30 value companies.

 .

.

Number of products per vendor

When reviewing these results it’s important to understand how many products are produced by each vendor on this list.  This will help us to understand if whether reliability comes from small focused companies, or large multi-product vendors. 

The 2010 BBS evaluated 27 separate product categories.  In the previously published top 30 quality rankings, and top 30 reliability rankings, single product companies (those who were covered on only one product category in the 2010 BBS) completely dominated the rankings with about 2/3 of all positions.

A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor on the top 30 value list is shown below:

.

.

Just over half of the vendors in the top 30 value rankings produce a product in only one BBS category (out of 27 measured).  This is slightly less concentrated that other findings, such as reliability where there were 21 single product companies in the top 30.

In the case of value, there is a mix of large and small, and single and multi-product companies.  It’s worth pointing out here that much of this list is made up of the industry’s largest multi-product vendors.  For example Grass Valley (10 categories), Evertz and Miranda (5 categories each), Sony (4 categories), Ross Video (3 categories), Apple, Black Magic Design, Cisco, For-A, Harmonic, Ikegami, Panasonic, and JVC (2 categories each).

 .

.

Geographic Location

Another factor to consider is the geographic location of each company on the list.  By this measure, companies headquartered in the Americas are the clear value for money leaders, while companies based in the EMEA and Asia trail the pack. 

.

.

Keep in mind that when looking at geography, it’s important to remember that many of these firms are truly global, with offices all over the world, regardless of where they are headquartered.

.

.

Product Categories

Finally, let’s look at the product categories produced by the vendors who made the top 30 value list for the 2010 BBS.

.

.

Out of the 27 product categories covered in the 2010 BBS, 21 appear on this list. This is on par with other metrics. For comparison, there are 20 product categories in the top 30 reliability rankings and 23 product categories in the top 30 quality rankings.

Signal processing products lead the list of products produced by the top 30 value leaders.  This is a fiercely competitive market that is at the heart of the transition to HDTV operations, and customers look for both value and quality.  Cameras and audio consoles were close behind, while microphones, production switchers, routing switchers and video transport also made a strong showing.

 .

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that, unless otherwise specified, all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2010 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  

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 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Devoncroft Digest — July 30, 2010 – Earnings Season Continues, Grass Valley Finds a Buyer, More Broadcast Industry M&A, Harris Creates New Division, Elemental and Envivio Close Funding Rounds

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Devoncroft Digest, market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 30 2010

The Devoncroft Digest provides an overview of and insight into industry news items that I think might be interesting / important for readers and clients. 

Here are a few of the things that have caught my eye this week.

Earnings Season Continues

A number of broadcasters, TV platform operators and broadcast technology vendors announced their earnings this week. With one or two exceptions the results were generally positive.

.

 

Broadcast Technology Vendor Earnings

Harmonic posted strong Q2 results.  The company’s revenue was up 18% versus the same period last year, and up 13% versus the previous quarter.  More importantly, the company’s net income of the quarter was $4.4m vs. a loss of $7.9m during the same period last year.

On the company’s earnings conference call and slide presentation Harmonic executives also discussed the pending acquisition of video server company Omneon, and provided a bit more information on Omneon’s business.  Omneon recorded bookings of $57.8m during the first half of 2010, a 19% y/y increase.  For the full year, Omneon is expected to have revenues of $120-$125m, with (non-GAAP) gross margins of 57-57% and (non-GAAP) operating margins of 6-7%.

The market seemed to like what Harmonic had to say.  On the day after the earnings announcement, Harmonic shares were up by almost 17%.

.

Technicolor announced its results for the first half of 2010 this week, which saw revenues decline 18.5% versus the previous year.  The company achieved EBIT of €15m from “continuing operations,” but recorded an EBIT Loss of €109m from “discontinued operations.”  The company attributed this EBIT loss “mostly to Grass Valley,” which found a buyer this week after being for sale for more than a year (more on that below).  More information about Technicolor can be found in the slide presentation that the company used during its analyst earnings conference call. 

.

Belden issued strong numbers for Q2, beating the expectation of equity analysts.  Driven by strong results from the Americas (which were up 27% y/y), the company’s revenues rose 24% versus the same period a year ago, and 6% versus the previous quarter.    The company issued an upbeat forecast and raised its guidance for the future.

.

Audio (and now video) specialist Dolby Labs delivered strong results for its 3rd quarter.  The company’s revenues rose 34% versus the same period last year, and its net income increased by 25% versus Q3 2009.  Dolby which has been pushing aggressively into the 3D and Digital Cinema markets, recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $9.6 million in cost of revenue related to digital cinema systems provided under operating leases to exhibitors.

Separately, Dolby announced an additional $300m for its stock repurchase program, which has the objective of offsetting dilution from the company’s equity compensation programs.

.

Cable technology vendor ARRIS announced its preliminary Q2 Results.  The company’s revenues were up slightly, but its net income and gross margins were both down.  Investors were unhappy with these results and sent the company’s shares down sharply.

.

Leading set-top box vendor Pace announced strong results for the first half of 2010.  For the first six months of the year the company’s revenues rose by 21% and profit jumped by 46% versus the same period in 2009.  Separately, the company announced its intention to acquire 2Wire (see below).

.

.

Broadcaster & Platform Operator Earnings

European satellite operator Eutelsat announced this week that it achieved a record year, and that its revenue and EBITDA growth both exceeded 11% versus 2009.  The company’s earnings press release that it now delivers 3,662 broadcast TV Channels, and that the number of HDTV channels had grown by 80% during 2010.

.

Belo, one of the largest pure-play TV broadcasters in the US delivered strong results for its second quarter of 2010.  The company’s revenue for Q2 was up by 13% versus 2009, and its net income almost doubled.  Significantly the company’s revenue from the automobile sector was up by 51% and its digital (website) revenues grew by 14%. 

.

US cable operator Comcast reported that its revenues increased by 6.1% in its second quarter of 2010/  The company’s operating income and cash flow were both up, but it lost 256,000 basic video subscribers.  The company, which is currently seeking approval to purchase NBC-Universal, disclosed that it spent a total of $59m on the deal during the quarter

.

UK-based Virgin Media delivered strong results for its second quarter.  The company’s revenue, operating income and cash flow all increased. 

.

 .

Broadcast Industry M&A Continues

Multiple broadcast technology M&A deals were announced today:

  • Grass Valley is to be acquired by Francisco Partners, a private equity firm
  • Ross Video is buying Codan
  • Pace announced  proposed their acquisition of 2Wire

 

Francisco Partners has made a binding offer to buy 100% of the shares in Grass Valley

After more than a year on the block, and several rumored bids, Technicolor appears to have found a buyer for Grass Valley – a Private Equity firm called Francisco Partners.    According to Technicolor CFO Stephane Rougeot “This binding offer is a key step in the largest of the disposals we decided to make as part of the strategic refocus of our activity portfolio. This will clarify and solidify our financial profile. This is also positive news for Grass Valley Broadcast employees and customers who will benefit from the engagement of a new shareholder recognized as a leader in technology-based businesses.”

Francisco is buying all of Grass Valley, except for the transmission business, which is being retained by Technicolor.

Technicolor certainly did not get rich from this deal.  It paid $172m for Grass Valley in 2002, and then acquiring multiple companies (including Canopus for more than $100m) over the past few years, the company has now struck a deal with Francisco Partners which according to a Technicolor press release values Grass Valley at $100m.

After reviewing the structure of the deal, one industry insider told me that Grass Valley was sold at what one industry insider described to me a “fire sale.”  In fact it appears that no money will change hands, and that Technicolor will actually pay €20m to Grass Valley in order to fund “ongoing management of the activity.”

For its part, Francisco Partners will sign an $80m IOU, which carries capitalized interest of 5% per year.  This means that Francisco will not pay anything for Grass Valley for at least five years, and that Technicolor will make a large cash injection into the company to keep it going. 

Clearly Technicolor wanted to get rid of Grass Valley and its associated losses so it can focus on its now core business activities.  The only silver lining for Technicolor is that it has the right to “receive additional consideration from the buyer based on the potential future remuneration of the new owners of the disposed entity.”

Grass Valley announced the deal in a press release and a letter to customers.    The company has set up a deal-oriented website where information about the transaction has been published, and has also created an “Ask Jeff.” (as in Jeff Rosica, head of the Grass Valley Broadcast & Professional business) email address where questions about the deal can be sent directly to the company. According to Rosica, who was interviewed by industry website TVNewsCheck, it’s Business As Usual At Grass Valley.

Grass Valley is one of the industry’s great companies and I am sure that the people there are happy to finally have resolved their fate.  Let’s hope they can now focus on making great products – and of course money for their new owners.

.

Ross Video Acquires Codan

Ross Video, which is best known for its production switchers and newsroom automation systems, announced that has it entered into a letter of intent to buy 100% of the shares of Codan Broadcast Products Pty Ltd. The sale, subject only to the finalization of due diligence, is scheduled for completion on 31 August, 2010.  The deal will expand the Ross portfolio by adding Codan’s product range of routing switchers, signal processing and audio monitoring.  It also strengthens Ross Video’s foothold in the important Australian broadcast market. This is the second Ross acquisition in the past two years. In 2009 Ross purchased Dutch graphics firm Media Refinery.  

.

Pace to Acquire 2Wire

Leading set-top box vendor Pace plc announced its proposed $475m acquisition of 2Wire, a provider of residential gateways and associated software for the broadband service provider market.  According to the press release, 2Wire has established customer relationships in the tier one telco market, including AT&T, which has been a customer of 2Wire for 10 years and uses 2Wire solutions in its U-Verse platform.  2Wire is currently owned by a consortium including Alcatel-Lucent, AT&T, Telmex, and Oak Investment Partners.

Pace says that following the completion of the acquisition it will be the number one provider of telco residential gateway devices in the US and the number three globally.

 .

.

3D News – RealD Insiders Cash in on IPO

The Wall Street Journal reports that following on from their successful IPO, insiders at 3D firm RealD Insiders Made More Money in IPO than Company Did.  A skeptical Wall Street equity analyst is quoted in the article as saying that the only reason for the IPO was to generate liquidity for investors.

 .

.

Other Broadcast Technology Vendor News

Harris Creates New Division, Names Means GM

The changes continue at the broadcast communications division of Harris.  The company announced this week that it has created a new “Workflow, Infrastructure & Networking” (WIN) business unit, and named newly hired Doug Means as its General Manager.  According to the company’s press release, Means will lead the newly formed WIN business unit, which encompasses the Harris Broadcast infrastructure, networking, server, automation and asset management product portfolios. WIN was formed as part of an overall strategy to create scale, reduce organizational complexity and deliver more interoperable solutions to address the continually changing needs of Harris Broadcast customers.

.

 Ross Video Appoints Nigel Spratling to Marketing Role

Production switcher specialist Ross Video has appointed industry veteran Nigel Spratling to a marketing role at the company.  Spratling was most recently the CEO of Echolab, which was forced to liquidate earlier this year when its primary shareholder pulled the plug.  The fate of Echolab is still undetermined, but I have been hearing rumours that Blackmagic Designs is set to announce that they have acquired the company’s assets. 

 

.

Evertz Lands Big International Order

Canadian infrastructure vendor Evertz, which prides itself on not doing marketing, took the unusual step of issuing a short press release to announce the fact that the company has received orders in excess of C$7m from an unnamed international customer.   

.

Elemental Closes $7.5m Funding Round

Video transcoding firm Elemental Technologies, which uses GPU processing announced that it has closed a $7.5 funding round, bringing the total VC money raised by Elemental to more than $14 million.  The round was led by Steamboat Ventures, with Voyager Capital and General Catalyst Partners also participating.  Interestingly, according to an SEC document filed by Elemental earlier this year,  the company had provisioned to raise up to $9m.  The company says it intends to use the capital to expand its business in the United States and internationally.   Transcoding is a tough business as evidenced by the recent sale of Ripcode (who had raised considerable financing) to RBG.  Perhaps Elemental’s unique GPU-based approach will enable the company to thrive – it gets pretty good reviews from broadcasters according to an article about Pitch Blue which appeared in Broadcasting & Cable magazine this week.

 .

Envivio Raises $15m

GigaOm property NewTeeVee reported this week that Envivio, another player in the video encoding / transcoding space,  has secured $15m in additional funding and shaken up its management team. 

.

 .

Other Platform Operator News

Ascent Media Hires 3 New VPs

Ascent Media has appointed three new vice-presidents for its media and digital services operations in Burbank, CA. 

.

.

MobileTV News

The Wall Street Journal published an interesting article about the state of the mobileTV marketin the USA, which discusses Qualcomm’s Plans for FLO TV, the US broadcaster-backed Open Mobile Video Coalition and mobileTV operator MobiTV.  The WSJ’s finding?  The picture for mobile TV in the US is “fuzzy.”

 .

.

Other News

Broadcasting & Cable magazine’s Glen Dickson wrote an interesting article about the new HD file delivery platformsthat are being rolled out by Ascent Media and DG FastChannel. 

According to B&C, Pitch Blue, the new HD file delivery platform from Ascent Media and CBS is now delivering HD content to 1,350 US TV stations, while the new system from DG FastChannel has been deployed in 500 US TV stations.  The B&C article also highlights the need for transcoding systems in TV stations to convert these HD file to house formats.  As mentioned above, Elemental gets a good review from stations.    

 .

.

Market Research Note of the Week: Reliability Rankings of Broadcast Technology Vendors — The Top 30 Globally

Broadcast technology products are purchased by discerning customers for what are often mission-critical applications. Thus, the reliability of products is a paramount concern for buyers of these products.

To measure the rankings of the reliability of vendors, respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “reliability” on a 10-point scale, with 10 being best in the market and one being worst in the market. The top 30 ranked brands are shown in the graph for the global sample of all respondents. There are a wide variety of vendors on this list, including large and small companies and those who produce audio and video products.

When reviewing these results it’s important to understand how many products are produced by each vendor on this list. This will help us to understand if reliability comes from small, focused companies or large, multiproduct vendors.

The 2010 BBS evaluated 27 separate product categories. As with the previously published top 30 quality rankings, single-product companies (those who were covered on only one product category in the 2010 BBS) dominate the rankings for reliability.

To read the full article, including a breakdown and analysis of the findings, click here.

Reliability Rankings of Broadcast Technology Vendors — The Top 30 Globally

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 27 2010

This is part of series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS).

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market.

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents.

Recently, posts which rank broadcast technology vendors include:

 

.

Today let’s look at how respondents ranked broadcast technology vendors for reliability.

Broadcast technology products are purchased by discerning customers for what are often mission-critical applications.  Thus the reliability of products is a paramount concern for buyers of these products. 

To measure the rankings of the reliability of vendors, respondents were asked to rank broadcast technology vendor brands for “Reliability” 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 by respondents to the survey. 

.

Reliability – Top 30 Broadcast Technology Brands (Alpha Order)

There are a wide variety of vendors on this list, including large & small companies and those who produce audio and video products. 

  

.

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

When reviewing these results it’s important to understand how many products are produced by each vendor on this list.  This will help us to understand if whether reliability comes from small focused companies, or large multi-product vendors. 

 The 2010 BBS evaluated 27 separate product categories.  As with the previously published top 30 quality rankings, single product companies (those who were covered on only one product category in the 2010 BBS) dominate the rankings for reliability.

 A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor on the top 30 quality list is shown below:

With 21 out of 30 vendors on this list producing a product in only one BBS category (out of 27 measured) it’s clear that focused, specialized companies are regarded as reliability leaders in the eyes of the global broadcast market. 

Nevertheless it’s also worth pointing out that large companies can also be considered industry innovators. For example Grass Valley is covered in 10 product categories in the 2010 BBS and Snell is covered in 5 product categories. 

  

.

Geographic Location

Another factor to consider is the geographic location of each company on the list.  By this measure, companies headquartered in EMEA are the clear reliability leaders, while companies based in the Americas and Asia trail the pack. 

Keep in mind that when looking at geography, it’s important to remember that many of these firms are truly global, with offices all over the world, regardless of where they are headquartered.

  

.

Product Categories

Finally, let’s look at the product categories produced by the vendors who made the top 30 reliability list for the 2010 BBS.

Out of the 27 product categories covered in the 2010 BBS, 20 appear on this list; making reliability more concentrated than other metrics such as quality (which had entrants from 23 product categories).

Audio products lead the list of products produced by the top 30 reliability leaders, with audio consoles and microphones topping the rankings.  ENG cameras and studio cameras, along with audio monitors also make a strong showing.

.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that, unless otherwise specified, all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2010 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  

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 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Quality Rankings for Broadcast Technology Vendors — The Top 30 Globally

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 08 2010

This is the fourth in a series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS).

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market.

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents.

Recently, posts which rank broadcast technology vendors include:

 

In keeping with the theme of top 30 rankings, let’s now turn to 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.

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 by respondents to the survey. 

 

As with the top 30 innovation rankings published earlier, this list contains a broad mix of vendors table including both audio and video and audio companies. 

There are also interesting similarities and differences in terms of the types of products produced, geographic location and company size (something that is not measured in the BBS and won’t be discussed further here).  So let’s look a little deeper into these results.

 

.

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

One obvious question that should be asked when reviewing these results is how many products are produced by each vendor on this list.  This will help us to understand if whether quality comes from small focused companies, or large multi-product vendors.  

A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor on the top 30 quality list is shown below:

With 22 out of 30 vendors on this list producing a product in only one BBS category (out of 27 measured) it’s clear that focused, specialized companies are regarded as quality leaders in the eyes of the market. 

This finding reinforces a previous post called Purchasing Preferences of Broadcast Technology Buyers – “Best-of-Breed” or “One-Stop-Shop?, which shows that broadcast technology buyers overwhelmingly prefer to evaluate products from individual suppliers and create best-of-breed solutions.

Nevertheless it’s also worth pointing out that large companies can also be considered industry innovators. For example Grass Valley is covered in 10 product categories in the 2010 BBS and Avid is covered in 7 product categories. 

Please keep in mind that this is not an absolute measure of the products produced be each vendor.  In total, the 2010 BBS looked at 148 vendors in 27 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.

 

.

Geographic Location

Another factor to consider is the geographic location of each company on the list.  By this measure, companies headquartered in EMEA are the clear quality leaders, while companies based in the Americas and Asia trail the pack. 

In terms of individual countries, the Germany and the USA are tied with 11 companies each on the Top 30 Quality Rankings.  Japan, the UK, Finland and Belgium round out the rest of the countries where the quality leaders are headquartered.  Keep in mind that when looking at geography, it’s important to remember that many of these firms are truly global, with offices all over the world, regardless of where they are headquartered.

.

 

Product Categories

Finally, let’s look at the product categories produced by the vendors who made the top 30 quality list for the 2010 BBS.

Out of the 27 product categories covered in the 2010 BBS, 23 appear on this list; showing that quality is widespread across the broadcast industry.

Audio products lead the list of products produced by the top 30 quality leaders, with microphones, audio consoles and audio monitors topping the rankings.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that, unless otherwise specified, all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2010 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  

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 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Devoncroft Digest — June 27, 2010

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Devoncroft Digest | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 27 2010

Here’s a recap of some of the items that caught my eye over the past week or so.

Broadcast Technology Vendor News

Another M&A Deal — RGB Buys Ripcode

In a multi-platform, multi-format world, video transcoding is one of the technologies that everyone needs.  But transcoding is a tough business with fierce competition, and it’s considered by many to be a commodity product.  This makes it tough for pure-play transcoding vendors (which is why most of them will tell you that they focus on workflow optimization).  All of the above makes it an interesting market to watch, so I took note when I read that Ripcode has been purchased by RGB networks. I always thought Ripcode was a pretty interesting company.  They raised a lot of money for their platform and they had a different approach to others in the market.  It will be interesting to see how they perform as part of RGB. 

To read more about this, check out Dan Rayburn’a Business of Video Blog, which has complete coverage of the deal here.

 

Evertz Delivers Good Results for Q4 and Full Year

Evertz Technologies delivered pretty good results for their Q4 and full year, topping the expectations of equity analysts. 

Here are some highlights from the company’s earnings press release here.

Revenue for Q4 was C$75.3m, down 3% versus the same period a year ago, but up 14% over the previous quarter.

In terms of geographic split, sales in Q4 from the US and Canada decreased by 28% versus the same period last year, but this was partially offset by a 41% y/y increase in international revenue (which Evertz defines as markets outside of the US and Canada).  International revenue rose by 23% versus the previous quarter, while sales in the US and Canada decreased by 28%.

Revenue for the full year was C$286.5, a 9% y/y decline. 

Annual revenue from the US and Canada declined 26% versus last year, while international revenue was up by 24% over last year.

The company’s gross margins slipped a bit to 58% (versus 61% last year).  On the earnings conference call, the company attributed this to pricing pressures and the cost of international expansion.

Overall, this was a strong performance from Evertz.  The company’s international growth is particularly notable. 

.

Wegener Issues Preliminary Results

Wegener, which was delisted from the NASDAQ earlier this year, issued preliminary operating results for the third quarter ended May 28, 2010. Final results for the third quarter of fiscal 2010 will be released on July 12, 2010.

According to the company’s press release  preliminary operating results for the third quarter of fiscal 2010 were revenues of $2.1 million and a net loss of approximately $(487,000) or $(0.04) per share compared to revenues of $2.9 million and a net loss of $(883,000) or $(0.07) per share for the same period in fiscal 2009.

Company President & CEO Troy Woodbury said that “bookings performance in the third quarter was an improvement over the first and second quarters of fiscal 2010, but there is significant room for improvement.”

.

French Employees Protest Grass Valley Sale

TVB reports that nearly 200 Grass Valley employees at the company’s facility in Rennes France went on strike to protest the shutdown of production. Grass Valley, which has been for sale for what seems like forever, is one the broadcast industry’s most storied names. 

.

Dolby Opens R&D Center in China

Dolby Labs announced that it’s first “from the ground up” R&D facility outside of the US will be based in China.  In the company’s press release, Dolby VP Mahesh Sundaram said “China is strategically important to Dolby. The establishment of Dolby China’s R&E Center is an important milestone as part of our continued commitment to China and innovation.”  The facility will focus on sound technology.

.

Technicolor Opens New Lab in Palo Alto

Meanwhile, French technology provider Technicolor (formerly known as Thomson) has announced that it is planning a new lab in Palto Alto, CA.  The company says the new lab will focus on the personalization of digitally delivered content, and enhance the company’s research skills in content discovery.   The company also says it chose Palo Alto for its proximity to excellent universities and for the potential for interaction within the Silicon Valley technology ecosystem.

 

.

Broadcast Technology Vendor Confidence Beginning to Return

According to an article in TVB Europe, the IABM (the association which represents broadcast and media technology suppliers worldwide) has published the results of a new study about industry confidence.  The result — the worst of the recession appears to be over in the broadcast and media technology sector and vendors are feeling increasingly optimistic about the future.

The IABM says that 74% of vendors who participated in their poll are response anticipating better business next year than last, and that 47% of those surveyed are already reporting better order volumes than expected.  However the study also found that the industry is facing strong pricing pressure.

Disclosure: Devoncroft and the IABM partner on market intelligence.

.

.

Other Items of Interest:

TVB reports that the new PricewaterhouseCoopers 2010-14 Global Entertainment and Media Outlook predicts that advertising revenues remain fragile in nature and spending is unlikely to return to former levels, and that by 2014, the U.S. advertising spend is expected to still be 9 percent below its level in 2007.

.

NetApp Files 10K with SEC 

.

Following April Announcement, John Malone Formally Steps Down as DirecTV Chairman 

.

According to Dan Rayburn, here’s the “best article by far” about Google TV: “Google TV: everything you ever wanted to know” – Best article by far on the subject by Engadget. 

.

The Wall Street Journal reported that News Corp Want to Buy Rest of BSkyB, but that Sky is holding out for more money.

.

Harmonic was upgraded by Merrill Lynch, who say that the Omneon acquisition could be significantly accretive in 2011 

.

Cablevision bought Bresnan Communications for $1.4Bn

 

 

.

Market Research Note of the Week:

Innovation Rankings of Broadcast Technology Vendors – The Top 30 Globally

In keeping with the theme of top 30 rankings, let’s now turn to 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 strive to create techniques that will 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, more than 4,000 broadcast industry professionals 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. 

There’s a broad mix of vendors included in these ranking, including both audio and video and audio companies.  There are also interesting similarities and differences in terms of the types of products produced, geographic location and company size.  So let’s look a little deeper into these results….

To see the full results, included three ranking tables and analysis, please follow this link.

You can find other 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) here:

The Top 30 Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands by Overall Opinion, Ranked, Globally and Regionally

The Top 30 Broadcast Vendor Brands by Net Change in Brand Image.

Innovation Rankings for Broadcast Technology Vendors — The Top 30 Globally

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 16 2010

This is the third in a series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS). 

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market. 

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents. 

Recently, I discussed how respondents to the 2010 BBS ranked The Top 30 Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands by Overall Opinion, Ranked, Globally and Regionally, and followed up with a ranking of the Top 30 Broadcast Vendor Brands by Net Change in Brand Image

In keeping with the theme of top 30 rankings, let’s now turn to 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 strive to create techniques that will 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, more than 4,000 broadcast industry professionals 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 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 by respondents to the survey.   

Innovation — The top 30 broadcast technology brands, listed alphabetically (global sample of all respondents) 

There’s a broad mix of vendors included in the above table including both audio and video and audio companies.  There are also interesting similarities and differences in terms of the types of products produced, geographic location and company size (something that is not measured in the BBS and won’t be discussed further here)..  So let’s look a little deeper into these results. 

 

.

Number of products per vendor 

One obvious question that should be asked when reviewing these results is how many products are produced by each vendor on this list.  This will help us to understand if whether innovation comes from small focused companies, or large multi-product vendors.    

A breakdown of how many product categories are produced by each vendor on the top 30 innovation list is shown below: 

 

It’s interesting to note that vendors producing just one product 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.  

Nevertheless it’s also worth pointing out that large companies can also be considered industry innovators. For example Grass Valley is covered in 10 product categories in the 2010 BBS and Avid is covered in 7 product categories.  These are examples of large companies who have managed to remain instill innovation across their product lines. 

Please keep in mind that this is not an absolute measure of the products produced be each vendor.  In total, the 2010 BBS looked at 148 vendors in 27 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. 

 

.

Geographic Location 

Another factor to consider is the geographic location of each company on the list.  By this measure, companies headquartered in EMEA just edged out those based in North America on the top 20 innovation list, while companies based in Asia trailed the pack.  

 

This is not surprising since this broadly reflects where the companies on the overall list are based.  

In terms of individual countries, the USA leads the way with 10 companies on the list of the 30 top innovators, with Germany close behind with 6 vendors on the list. 

When looking at geography, it’s important to remember that many of these firms are truly global, with offices all over the world, regardless of where they are headquartered. 

 

.

Product Categories 

Finally, let’s look at the product categories produced by the vendors who made the top 30 innovation list for the 2010 BBS:

Out of the 27 product categories covered in the 2010 BBS, 23 appear on this list; showing that innovation is widespread across the broadcast industry.

Signal processing, studio cameras and video editing lead the list of products produced by the top 30 innovation leaders.

.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that, unless otherwise specified, all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2010 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  

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 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

The Top 30 Improving Vendor Brands in Broadcast Technology, Ranked Globally and Regionally

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 07 2010

This is the second in a series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS).

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market.

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents.

Recently, I discussed how respondents to the 2010 BBS ranked The Top 30 Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands by Overall Opinion, Ranked, Globally and Regionally

Appearing in the top 30 of an overall opinion poll is obviously a good place for any vendor to be, but this only scratches the surface of how the market views a brand. 

While indicative of the market’s view, these overall opinion rankings are presented as a snapshot in time.  They also provide a somewhat one-sided view of how brands are regarded because they take only positive perceptions into account.  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. 

One way to do this is to ask people who have an opinion of a brand, how their opinion of that brand has changed over time – i.e. has it improved, declined or stayed the same. 

When you do this, you can get some interesting results.  It turns out that some brands are more polarizing than others, with different respondents having very different opinions.  For example, here’s a chart from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey. 

 

Notice that in the above table, the company that was ranked #1 for “got better” also ranked #1 for got worse.

Given these results, it is perhaps more useful to calculate 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 out 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 survey.      

 

Question: Has your opinion of the following brands improved or declined over the past 2 years in relation to the broadcast technology products / services they provide?

Interestingly, a total of 65 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, demonstrating the strong variation in opinion change based on geographic segmentation of respondents.

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:

  • 3 brands appear four times, meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region. It is possible
  • 10 brands appear three times
  • 26 brands appear two times
  • 26 brands appear once, 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:

  • Barco, IBM, Ikegami

 

Brands appearing three times:

  • Avid, Chyron, For-A, JBL, JVC, Mackie, Motorola, Siemens, Telex, Yamaha

 

Brands appearing two times:

  • AKG, Audio-Technica, Axon, Dayang, Dolby, Echolab, Electro Voice, EMC, EVS, Fujitsu, Grass Valley, Harmonic, Harris, Klein + Hummel, Orad, Pesa, Pharos, Quantel, RTS Intercom Systems, SeaChange, Shure, Snell, Solid State Logic, Sundance, Tandberg / Ericsson, Tektronix

 

Brands appearing once:

  • Accenture, AMS-Neve, beyerdynamic, Dalet, Evertz, Focal, HP, KRK Systems, Leader Instrument, Marshall Electronics, Miranda, Net Insight, Neumann, Omneon, Omnibus, Pilat, Pixel Power, Quantum, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, S4M, Screen Service, Sintecmedia, Utah Scientific, Vizrt, Wheatstone

 

.

Analysis of overall opinion by region:

The table below shows the global and regional performance for each brand in the top 30 ranking of overall opinion. 

.

The frequency chart shows some interesting geographic variation in the data, which is highlighted below.

 

Only Global

Interestingly a the following 13 appear in the top 30 Net Change in Overall Opinion for the global sample, but not in any of the regions. 

  • Accenture, AMS-Neve, Focal, KRK Systems, Leader, Net Insight, Omnibus, Pilat Media, Pixel Power, Quantum, Sintecmedia Utah Scientific, Wheatstone

There a number of possible explanations for this.  For example these companies may have fared well in each of the regions, but not well enough to make the top 30.  However when all responses are aggregated, there positive data propels these brands to the top 30 on a global basis.  It is also possible that these brands scored well on a regional basis, but that the regional sample was insufficient to be included in the regional rankings.

 

All regions, but not global

Interestingly, for four brands the converse of the above also occurred – i.e. these brands made the top 30 list for Net Change of Overall Opinion in each of the three regions, but not in the global sample.

  • Avid, For-A, JBL, Yamaha

Again this is due to a variety of factors including the aggregate strength of certain brands, coupled with sample sizes.

 

Global + one region

Nine brands managed to achieve a top 30 ranking in the global Net Change in Overall Opinion league table, despite being in the top 30 of only one of the three geographic regions.

  • Dayang, Echolab, Electrovoice, Fujitsu, JVC, Motorola, Pesa, Quantel, Sundance

 

 

 

Regional Variation

The following 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:

 

Only EMEA

Beyerdynamic, Dalet, Neumann, S4M,

 

Only Asia

Evertz, HP, Miranda, Omneon, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, Screen Service

 

Only Americas

Marshall Eelctronics, Vizrt

.

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 2010 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.  

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 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.