Posts Tagged ‘Nvision’

Miranda Reports Record Q4 and Full Year 2010 Results, Forecasts Continued Growth

broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Feb 24 2011

Miranda Technologies said today it achieved record revenue for the fourth quarter and full year 2010, driven by a strong international sales performance, and helped by the contribution from recently acquired automated playout provider OmniBus Systems.

Revenue for the fourth quarter was a record C$44.9, up 26% versus the same period a year ago, and up 19% versus the previous quarter. OmniBus, which was acquired in September of 2010, contributed C$6m during the quarter.   Excluding OmniBus, Q4 revenue grew 9% versus the same period a year ago.

Q4 net income was C$3.8m, up 82% from Q4 2009 but down 42% from the previous quarter when the company was helped by a C$1.3m reduction in income taxes as well as a one-time tax credit of C$2.4m.  OmniBus recorded a net loss of $0.2m during the quarter. Excluding OmniBus, Q4 net income was up 92%.

Gross margins for the quarter were 60%, up seven percentage points versus the same quarter a year ago, and exceeding the high-end of the guidance the company issue during a recent investor presentation. The company attributed its strong margin performance to improved pricing, product and customer mix, including the sale of higher margin solutions associated with OmniBus, along with operational efficiencies.  Miranda says it expects gross margins to continue to be at the high-end of its targeted range of 55% – 59%.

EBITDA was C$8.1m for the quarter, up 57% over Q4 2009. EBITDA as a percentage of sales was 18%, up three percent versus the same period a year ago.

Q4 Revenues increased in all geographies versus the previous year, with Canada, the United States and Other Countries, growing 596%, 24% and 14%, respectively. Canada, the United States and Other Countries generated 7%, 38% and 55% of quarterly sales respectively.

.

For the full year 2010, the company posted net income of C$12.2m (up 122% versus FY 2009), on record revenue of C$143.7m (up 9% versus FY 2009), with OmniBus contributing C$7.9m since it was acquired.

Excluding OmniBus, 2010 was C$135.7m, up 3% over 2009, while net income was up 122%.

On a geographic basis, full year 2010 sales from the international region increased 15% over 2009 to C$78.3m, while sales to the United States were down 3%, coming in at C$55.5m.

On the company’s conference call with equity analysts, Miranda president and CEO Strath Goodship said that the broadcast market improved during 2010 and that the company was able to capitalize on this.  He said that US broadcast market is experiencing steady recovery and that Q4 2010 was “reasonably good” in the US, but not back to 2008 levels.  However, he said that emerging markets had returned to 2008 levels, and that he expects 2011 to be a “pretty good” year.

Goodship mentioned several key product areas as revenue drivers, including the launch of the Nvision hybrid router, which has said was a big success in the market.  He also reported that infrastructure sales continued to be strong as customers worldwide continue to upgrade to HDTV operations.

Not surprisingly, Goodship spent time during the call discussing the acquisition of OmniBus, stating that the purchase of the automated playout provider was one of the company’s “most pivotal moves to date” and that it has increased Miranda’s addressable market by 40%.  Goodship says that the OmniBus integration program is progressing rapidly.  Subsequently company CFO Mario Settino said that the company has not yet fully realized the synergies of the mergers but that plans are in place to do this later in the year.

When asked by an analyst about growth at OmniBus, Goodship said that while the unit’s overall revenue growth was relatively flat, the iTX product line had experienced “dramatic growth.” 

Commenting on the potential for continued revenue growth at Miranda, Goodship said that the company believes it can continue to grow faster than the market.

.

.

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

Information on Miranda’s previous quarter performance is here.

A recent press release about Miranda’s progress with the OmniBus integration is here.

Miranda buys OmniBus story is here.

Miranda’s Most Recent Investor Presentation is here.

.

.

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Technology Vendors for “Great Customer Service”

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 02 2009

This is the third in a series of articles about findings from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* that shows how a global sample of more than 1,000 broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors on a variety of metricsFor information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

 

Previously I’ve discussed how broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors for innovation and reliability. Today I am going to look at how this group ranked vendors “great customer service.” 

But first it’s worth noting that “Great customer service” is something that I wrote about in a previous article.  That post talked about how broadcast technology vendors were ranked for “great customer service” by all types of buyers (including broadcasters, systems integrators, post production facilities, government etc), and broke out the data on a geographic basis, regardless of the size of the respondent’s organization. 

For a quick recap, here’s the chart from the previous post that shows the regional breakdown of the global sample. 

Please note that in all cases, these brands are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order of their ranking in the study

  

Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Great Customer Service] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

Customer Service -- all respondents by geography

The above chart is shown here only for the purpose of comparison, and I am not going to be discussing it here.  However, I did put together some thoughts and analysis on these findings, and you can find them in the previous post.

 

 

Now let’s move on and look at the same question, but from a different perspective by taking the responses of just one customer type – broadcasters — and breaking the data out by the size of the respondent’s organization.

The chart below shows the responses from more than 1,000 broadcasters and is broken down by size of organization.  For the sake of comparison, I have also included the rankings of all respondents (regardless for organization type, geography etc), and all broadcasters (regardless of size or geography), in the first and second columns respectively.

 

Please note that in all cases, these brands are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order of their ranking in the study

Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Great Customer Service] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

Customer Service by broadcaster by org size

When I first saw this chart I found it very interesting.  Here are some thoughts on these findings:

* There are 12 vendors in this chart, making customer service the most varied and least concentrated of all the factors I have explored.  Keep in mind that there were only 25 vendors in the entire study, so to find almost half of them in a single chart about one metric is significant.  This is an area of the broadcast market that does not appear to have clear global leaders, and as I mentioned in my previous post about customer service: “there is a real opportunity for vendors to step up to the plate and differentiate themselves on the basis of great customer service.” 

* However, not one of these 12 vendors makes the top five list for great customer service in all six categories.  Evertz came the closest with 5 appearances.  Both Sony and EVS made the top 5 list in all categories in the previous post (all respondents broken down by geography).

* Here’s how many times each company appears in the chart above: Axon (2), Evertz (5), EVS (4), Florical (1), Harris (3), Miranda (1), Network (now Nevion) (1), Nvision (now Miranda) (1), Ross Video (1), Snell & Wilcox (now Snell) (3), Sony (4), Thomson / Grass Valley (2), Utah Scientific (2)

* There’s an interesting mix of companies in this chart, including some that are very large and some that are not so large.  This reinforces the point I made above about there being an opportunity for vendors to differentiate themselves with customer service, and it also shows that customer service is not about size.

* Five different companies appear one time in this chart – Florical, Miranda, Network, Nvision and Ross – and they do so in a variety of different categories.  Miranda appears in the 50-100 employee list; Florical and Network (now Nevion) appear in the 101-500 employee list; Nvision (now part of Miranda) appears in the 501-1,000 employee list; and Ross appears in the 1,001-10,000 employee list.

* Despite their difference in size and product ranges Utah Scientific and Harris appear in the same categories –broadcasters with 51-100 and 101-500 employees.

* As mentioned above, Miranda appears only in the smallest category (51-100 employees), but Nvision, which was acquired by Miranda is also in the 501-1000 employee category.  When Miranda announced their Q3 results last week, said that said that they are moving the manufacturing of Nvision products from Grass Valley to Montreal, but that they are leaving some specialist positions in California.  Obviously this makes financial sense for them, and it will be interesting what impact it will have on the perception of their customer service.

* Does size matter? Some of the industry’s largest vendors did best with the smallest customers; while some of the industry’s smaller vendors (like Axon) did best with the largest customers.

* Axon, which appears twice on this chart makes the top five list for “all broadcasters” (regardless of size or geography) and also for the large broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees)

* Along with Axon, Ross Video which appears once on the above chart also makes the top 5 list for the largest broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees)

* Thomson / Grass Valley, one of the broadcast industry’s largest vendors, makes the top 5 customer service list for the overall market and for the smallest broadcasters (50-100 employees), but is absent from the top-five list for other broadcasters.

* Harris, another of the broadcast industry’s largest players made the top five customer service list for all broadcasters as well as for the small and medium (50-500 employees) broadcasters.

* EVS, Snell & Wilcox and Sony each appear in the top 5 lists of medium (501-1,000 employees) and large (1,000-10,000 employees) broadcasters.  All three companies also makes the top five customer service list for the overall market.  However only two of them (EVS and Sony) make the top 5 customer service list for all broadcasters.

* As mentioned above, Evertz make the most appearances in this chart (5).  In addition the of global sample, Evertz makes the top 5 customer service list for all broadcasters as well as for small and medium sized broadcasters (50-1,000 employees).   

 

 

 

 

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest ever and most comprehensive studies of broadcast technology vendor brands and industry trends.  The BBS provides insight into market trends and the perceptions of leading broadcast industry vendor brands by practitioners across the world.  It also delivers vendor brand ranking in a variety of product categories; all of which can be segmented by geography and customer type.

 

  ** Respondents to the BBS were asked to rank their opinion of twenty-five broadcast technology vendor brands in a variety of categories including awareness; overall opinion; change of opinion; recommendation; and a variety of brand attributes and brand drivers such as innovation, reliability, quality and great customer service.  The responses were then aggregated into a series of industry “league tables” that rank each broadcast technology vendor brand against the metrics mentioned above.

%d bloggers like this: