Posts Tagged ‘Harmonic’

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

.

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

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

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 31 2011

Harmonic announced that its net revenue for the third quarter of 2011 was $138.9m, up from $104.8m in the third quarter of 2010.

Including a $26.6m contribution from Omneon, which Harmonic acquired last year, the company’s revenue was up 7% versus the same period a year ago, and up 4% when compared to the previous quarter.

The results, which were above the $134.7m expected by equity analysts and at the top end of Harmonic’s previously issued earnings guidance of $130m-$140m, sent the company’s share up by more than 10% on the day after their release.

GAAP net income for the quarter was $3.5m, compared to net loss of $400,000 in the third quarter of 2010, and net income of $400,000 last quarter. On a non-GAAP basis, net income for the quarter was $12.7m, compared to non-GAAP income of $9.m for the same period of 2010, and non-GAAP net income of $10.5m last quarter.

GAAP gross margins in the quarter were 46%, up from 45% last year, and flat with the previous quarter. Operating margins were 3%, up from 2% last year and up from 1% last quarter.

On a non-GAAP basis, gross margins were 51% for the quarter, compared to 49% last year and 51% last quarter. Non-GAAP operating margins were 12%, compared to 12% last year and 13% last quarter.

 .

Omneon Revenue

Revenue from Omneon product sales were $26.6m during the quarter, an increase of 2.3% versus the same quarter a year ago, and an increase of 4% increase versus the previous quarter.  Omneon’s service revenue was not disclosed by the company, but Harmonic management has indicated previously that Omneon’s service revenues are approximately 15% of its product sales.

On the company’s conference call with equity analysts, Harmonic CEO Patrick Harshman said “While Omneon acquisition has been a very successful catalyst of [our] strong overall growth with leading broadcasters and media companies, growth of our Production and Playout products from Omneon is progressing more modestly than anticipated. Production Playout product revenue was up 2% from the third quarter of 2010 and 5% from last quarter. However, we have made good progress and our new media storage products in particular are performing quite well.”

 .

Business Outlook

Harmonic say it expects is net revenue for the 4th quarter of 2011 to be in the range of $135m to $145m for the fourth quarter of 2011.

.

“During the third quarter, we were pleased to see our domestic business rebound, up 24% from the previous quarter,” said Harshman.  “For the first nine months of 2011, our video processing revenue grew 23% from the same period last year. During the third quarter, we built on this momentum by introducing powerful new video products that will enable our global customers to move forward on a range of new Internet, multiscreen and traditional video services. We remain focused on further capitalizing on our broad technological and market leadership and profitably growing our business.”

.

.

 

Related Content:

Press Release: Harmonic Announces Third Quarter 2011 Results

Harmonic Q3 2100 Analyst Conference Call Transcript

Harmonic Q3 2011 Presentation to Analysts

Previous Quarter: Harmonic Q2 2011 Revenues Falls Short of Estimates

Previous Year: Harmonic Announces Q3 2011 Results, Provides Detailed Omneon Update and Q4 Guidance

.

.

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 »

Thoughts on the Grass Valley – PubliTronic Deal, Including Press Conference Slides

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 13 2011

Yesterday, Grass Valley announced that it has acquired Dutch Channel-in-a-Box (CiaB) vendor PubliTronic via an online press conference.  This in an interesting move for a number of reasons, and Grass Valley did a good job of explaining its rationalize for the transaction.

During the presentation Grass Valley showed a slide deck that outlined its reasons for buying PubliTronic, provided an overview of the CiaB market opportunity and laid out its strategic objectives for this space.

Grass Valley says the broadcast market is changing more rapidly than ever, and that it is working to position itself as the “trusted transformation expert,” which can provide the appropriate mix of hardware, software and services to broadcast customers facing unprecedented change.

Grass Valley says it wants to become “the premier video technology solutions company.” This plan includes software, services, differentiated products, moving “down market” where opportunities are greater, and moving into emerging markets where there is higher growth.

The company sees integrated playout as a prime example of a fast growing, but currently underserved market. During the press conference GV said that the CiaB space is one of the fastest growing areas of the broadcast market, and that the acquisition of PubliTronic will help it go after this space, while better serving the needs of its customers.

It will be interesting to see how Grass Valley executes on this deal and deploys the PubliTronic products (now rebranded as Grass Valley K2 Edge).

There’s no doubt that Grass Valley is one of the premier brands in the broadcast industry, but many of their products such as switchers, servers and routers are hardware based and used in live production and studio applications.

Conversely, the CiaB market is all about software, and some traditionally hardware-focused companies have had a difficult time making the transition to a more software-centric approach. Of course Grass Valley’s video servers are widely deployed in the playout space, and the company undoubtedly has extensive technical expertise in this area, so maybe the transition will be smooth.

While the purchase of a 32-person playout software company is not a “bet the company” move for Grass Valley, it’s still critically important for the company to get this acquisition right.  New CEO Alain Andreoli, made it clear at IBC that he (and new GV owner Francisco Partners) sees software and services as core to the company’s future success.  The PubliTronic deal is a significant step in this direction.

There’s no doubt that the PubliTronic product offering is very capable.  However, Grass Valley is far from alone in going after the CiaB market.  Miranda, Snell, Evertz, Playbox and VSN are all vying for leadership in this space, and there are rumors that both Harris and Harmonic (Omneon) will be throwing their respective hats into this ring before NAB 2012. Expect to be hearing a lot about integrated playout / CiaB over the next six months.

At the end of the press conference Grass Valley CEO Alain Andreoli said that this deal shows that Franscisco Partners is committed to building a new Grass Valley and that it’s putting its money where its mouth is in order to do so.  It’s going to be very interesting to watch
how this shakes out over the next year or two.

The slides from the Grass Valley – PubliTronic announcement press conference (or at least most of them) are shown below.  They are worth reading as they do a good job of explaining the market dynamics, Grass Valley’s strategy, and the PubliTronic product offering.

 

 

 

 


.

.

Related Content:

More Broadcast Vendor M&A: Grass Valley Buys PubliTronic, Enters Integrated Playout / Channel-in-a-Box Market

Press Release: Grass Valley Extends Leadership in IT-based Playout Solutions with Acquisition of Integrated Playout Solutions Provider PubliTronic

Press Release: Grass Valley Announces New K2 Edge Automated, Multichannel, Integrated Playout Solution

Announcement Coming From Grass Valley

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

.

.

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

More Broadcast Vendor M&A: Grass Valley Buys PubliTronic, Enters Integrated Playout / Channel-in-a-Box Market

broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 12 2011

Grass Valley announced today that it has purchased PubliTronic, a Netherlands-based broadcast technology supplier.  Terms of the acquisition were not disclosed.

PubliTronic provides integrated playout or channel-in-box (CiaB) solutions for broadcast playout applications.  According to Grass Valley executives, CiaB solutions have been deployed by approximately 5% of the market today and represent “one of the fastest growing segments in broadcasting, [and is] expected to increase significantly over the next three years.”

PubliTronic’s CiaB product provides an integrated playout package featuring a video server, media management, automation, broadcast graphics and other master control functionality.  PubliTronic’s products will be incorporated into the Grass Valley product line-up and will be re-branded as the Grass Valley K2 Edge.

The acquisition of the PubliTronic product line complements the existing Grass Valley server product business and puts Grass Valley into the automated playout business, which is shaping up to be one of the next battlegrounds in the broadcast technology business.  It was certainly one of the most important trends at the recent IBC 2011 trade show.

With the purchase of PubliTronic, Grass Valley joins the growing list of broadcast vendors who are making major bets in this area.  In addition to Miranda, Evertz, Snell, Grass Valley, PlayBox and VSN; who are now all vying for leadership in this segment, I’ve heard rumors that other firms including both Harris and Harmonic (Omneon) could launch CiaB products by NAB 2012, making this both a hot topic and a very crowded space.

With most CiaB systems providing similar functionality, it will be important for Grass Valley to differentiate itself from its competition.  In a statement, the company sought to do this, saying: “What this acquisition brings to customers is much more than a simple “channel-in-a-box” solution. Our next-generation K2 Edge™ server is a sophisticated and very powerful multichannel, integrated, automated playout system that delivers benefits to our customers from day one.”

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Grass Valley Extends Leadership in IT-based Playout Solutions with Acquisition of Integrated Playout Solutions Provider PubliTronic

Press Release: Grass Valley Announces New K2 Edge Automated, Multichannel, Integrated Playout Solution

Announcement Coming From Grass Valley

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

.

 

 .

 

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 »

Harmonic Q2 Revenues Falls Short of Estimates

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 28 2011

Harmonic announced that its net revenue for the second quarter of 2011 was $134m, up from $95.5m in the second quarter of 2010. Including the contribution from Omenon, which was acquired in September 2011, the company’s revenue was up 5% versus the same period a year ago.

GAAP net income for the quarter was $400,000, compared to net income of $4.4m for the second quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP net income for the quarter was $10.5m, compared to non-GAAP income of $9.1m for the same period of 2010

The results were below both the consensus of equity analysts, who were expecting revenue of $139.4m, and Harmonic’s own previously issued earnings guidance of $137m-$141m.  The company attributed the revenue shortfall to lower than expected sales into the US cable TV segment, the timing of revenue on large encoding projects in the US market, revenue recognition, and an unfavorable margin mix.

On the company’s earnings conference call with equity analysts, Harmonic CEO Patrick Harshman directly addressed the revenue shortfall, saying: “I want to be clear that we’re not satisfied with the financial results of this quarter. Having said that though the delta between our previous guidance and the final result is modest, and while our near-term outlook has been affected by the marketplace issues, our strategic direction remains very much on track and our medium-to-longer-term growth outlook remains positive. I also want to be clear that once we confirmed we did not reach our revenue goals, we accelerated the process of determining and communicating to our revenue, earnings, and importantly updated outlook for the remainder of the year.”

On a GAAP basis, gross margins in the quarter were 46%, and GAAP operating margins were 1%, compared to 48% and 4%, respectively, for the same period of 2010. Non-GAAP gross margins were 51% and non-GAAP operating margins were 11% for the second quarter of 2011, compared to 51% and 13%, respectively, for the same period of 2010.

Revenue from Omneon product sales in the quarter were $25.5m, an increase of 15.6% versus the previous quarter, but down 4.3% when compared to the same period a year ago. Harmonic does not break out service revenue from the Omneon business, but CFO Carolyn Aver, in response to questions from analysts on the earnings conference call, indicated that Omneon’s service revenues were approximately 15% of product sales.

Harshman said that the Omneon integration has gone well overall, but he acknowledged progress has been slower expected with respect to both cross-training and cross-selling. Harshman said that the company has already realized some important sales synergies and that as a result the combined company’s revenue in the broadcast segment has increased significantly,  and that he expect to continue to additional progress in this area through the second half of the year.

International sales represented 59% of revenue during the quarter, up 26% year-over-year on a pro forma basis. However, sales in the domestic market business declined 15% versus the same period a year ago.

 

1H 2011 Performance:

For the first six months of 2011, net revenue was $266.8, up from $180.4 million in the same period of 2010. GAAP net income for the first half of 2011 was $0.9m, compared to $9.8m, for the same period of 2010. Non-GAAP netcome for the first half of 2011 was $20.7m, compared to $15mfor the same period of 2010.

 

Updated Guidance:

Aver provided update revenue guidance, saying that while Harmonic “is very positive on mid-to-long-term opportunities, the short-term domestic market issues cause us to be more cautious for the remainder of the year. At this time, we expect revenue for the full year to be in the $540m to $550m range. We expect gross margin to be in the 50% to 52% range with the product and geographic mix continuing again to influence whether we’re on the high or low end of the range for gross margins. We expect expense management as well as seasonality to deliver a sequentially lower operating expenses in Q4 by as much as a couple of million dollars. We do continue to target a 14% to 16% annual operating margin goal. Although, given the Q2 results, we won’t achieve that goal for 2011.”

 

Related Content:

Press Release: Harmonic Announces Second Quarter 2011 Results

Harmonic Q2 2011 Earnings Call Transcript

Harmonic Q2 2011 Earnings Call Transcript

Press Release: Harmonic Announces First Quarter 2011 Results

 

Tags: , , , , ,
No Comments »

The 2011 Big Broadcast Survey – Now Available

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 10 2011

After many months of work, I am pleased to announce that the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) has been completed, and that reports from the study will be published soon.

If you’re not familiar with the BBS, it’s an annual demand-side study of the global broadcast industry. BBS reports help readers improve their strategic decision making, customer engagement, marketing strategy, product planning, and sales execution.

More than 8,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries participated in the 2011 BBS, making it by far the largest and most comprehensive market study of the broadcast industry.

Three types of reports are available:

  • The BBS Global Market Report is the broadcast industry’s first global demand-based study of the purchasing habits of technology buyers.  This report examines industry trends, major projects being planned, products being evaluated for purchase, current and future plant infrastructure and operational structure, broadcast technology budgets, and HD upgrade plans for a wide variety of products.

 

  • BBS Global Brand Reports are available for more than 100 broadcast technology vendors.  These reports provide deep insight into how each company is perceived by the market, along with comprehensive benchmarking of broadcast technology vendors on a wide variety of metrics, through a series of league table rankings

 

  • Twenty-six separate 2011 BBS Product Reports provide detailed vendor brand ranking for individual product categories. These reports enable users to benchmark their brand directly against specific competitors through a detailed understanding of the opinions of technology buyers who purchase, specify or use each product type.  

.

If you would like information about these reports and how they can help your business, please get in touch.

In addition to these paid-for reports, we will also be publishing highlights from the study on the Devoncroft website.  These articles will be posted on a semi-regular basis, so please check back often.   

You’ll also be seeing information from the 2011 BBS in a wide variety of other industry websites and trade magazines.

The tables below show the product categories and broadcast technology vendor brands covered in the 2011 BBS.

..

 Product Categories Covered in the 2011 BBS:

.

.

Broadcast Technology Brands Covered in the 2011 BBS:

.

.

 

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

Harmonic Announces Q4 and Full Year 2010 Results

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

Harmonic reported that its net revenue for the fourth quarter of 2010 was $138.2m. This includes a full quarters’ revenue from Omneon, which contributed $30.9m, but excluded $0.8 million of certain deferred revenue that would otherwise have been recognized by Omneon had the acquisition not occurred.

Excluding Omneon, Harmonic’s Q4 stand-alone net revenue was $107.3m, up 8% from the previous quarter and up 24% from the fourth quarter of 2009.  International sales represented 54% of the company’s revenue for the quarter. 

In order to help understand the impact of the Omneon acquisition on its performance, Harmonic CFO Carolyn Aver provided the following slide in the company’s presentation to equity analysts:

.

 

 .

On a GAAP basis the company reported a net loss of $13.7 million in the fourth quarter, compared to net income of $47 thousand, for the fourth quarter of 2009. GAAP gross margins in the quarter were 44%.

For the full year 2010, Harmonic’s stand-alone net revenue was $386.8m, up 21% from 2009.   The company attributed its growth to the continued global move to HDTV operations as well as year-end spending by some customers. GAAP net loss was for the full year was $4.3m, compared to a GAAP net loss of $24.1m in 2009.

The company provided forward looking guidance, saying that it expects revenue for the first quarter of 2011 to be in the range of $129m to $132m, with GAAP gross margins in the range of 45% to 47%. Analysts had been expecting revenue of about $128.4m.

 .

Strategic Imperatives for Future Growth

On the company’s earnings conference call with equity analysts, Harmonic president and CEO Patrick Harshman said that the with the acquisition of Omneon, the company was now positioned as a leading infrastructure company for video, and that it now has unique opportunities to grow.

Harshman went on to say that the company had identified four strategic imperatives for the future:

“First, we intend to leverage our increased scale, solution breadth and competitive strength to expand our brand and deepen our customer relationships in both developed markets, while also continuing to work aggressively to capture greater market share in emerging economy markets.

“Second, we intend to extend our leadership position in new applications in new customer verticals; namely, multi-screen, new internet media services and video production.

“Third, our objective is to continue to lead the market in technology innovation and deliver on the exciting pipeline of new products and solutions we have scheduled for release over the course of the year.

And finally, we intend to continue to enhance our operational execution.”

 .

Omneon Integration:

Company CFO Carolyn Aver said that the integration of Omneon was going well and that company had taken the following actions during the fourth quarter:

  • Integration of the Omneon operations organization
  • Moved the Omneon manufacturing lines to Harmonic’s contract manufacturer in Malaysia
  • Integrated the Omneon G&A team with Harmonic’s
  • Migrated Omneon’s ERP process to Harmonic’s Oracle system
  • Physically relocated Omneon staff into Harmonic’s offices in San Jose California and the UK

.

Aver said that these actions would likely result in synergy savings of around $10m during 2011.

Harshman provide an upbeat statement, saying “Moving into 2011, we expect broadcasters, media companies and video service providers around the globe to continue to invest in producing and delivering high value video programming and services. You can expect us to continue to introduce innovative new technologies that enable this dynamic video marketplace to proceed. We’re excited about our expanding opportunities for growth in 2011 and beyond.”

.

.

You can read the full Harmonic Q4 and full year 2011 earnings release here.

A copy of the Harmonic Q4 investor presentation is here.

A transcript of the company’s equity analyst conference call is here.

A write up of Harmonic’s Q3 2010 results are here.

.

.

 

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

Omneon President to Resign from Harmonic

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

Less than six months after the officially closing the deal to sell Omneon to Harmonic, Suresh Vasudevan has said he will resign from the company effective February 1, 2011. The news was disclosed via an 8K filing with the SEC.

Vasudevan was named president and CEO of Omneon in January 2009, replacing long-time Omneon CEO Joe Kennedy.  Following the sale to Harmonic in September 2010, Vasudevan was named President of Omneon at Harmonic.  Prior to the Omneon appointment, he worked for storage vendor NetApp for more than ten years, and worked at the management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Chicago.

As part of the same filing, Harmonic also announced that Mark Carrington, who had been serving as VP sales for Harmonic-branded products, will now be VP of worldwide sales, and responsible for the entire sales organization and the complete product line. Before the Omneon acquisition, Carrington was the VP service and support at Harmonic.

This is the latest in a series of normal integration-related changes at Harmonic following the purchase of Omneon.  The company previously announced that Omneon’s marketing chief Geoff Stedman has been named Harmonic’s VP for Omneon and corporate marketing; and that Ron Howe, who led the Omneon customer service organization was appointed Harmonic’s , VP for Service and Support.

.

You can read the full Harmonic 8K filing here.

.

.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
1 Comment »