Posts Tagged ‘Snell & Wilcox’

Thorsteinson Replaces Cross as CEO of Quantel and Snell

Analysis, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A, Broadcaster Financial Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 04 2015

Quantel and Snell announced that Tim Thorsteinson has replaced Ray Cross as CEO, effective immediately.news_Tim_Thorsteinson

According to the company, Thorsteinson “is the ideal individual to lead the next stage in the development of the combined Quantel and Snell.”

Cross, who had been CEO of both Quantel and Snell since March 2014, when it was announced that Quantel had acquired fellow UK-based broadcast technology vendor Snell, a deal that had been long-rumored in the industry, since the two companies already had a common parent, Lloyds Development Capital (LDC), the investment arm of Lloyds Bank.

Previously, Cross had been CEO of Quantel since December 2005.

At the time of the Quantel-Snell deal, the company said in a statement that the combined entity had revenue of more than $170 million and office in 16 locations around the globe, making it one of the larger vendors in the broadcast industry.  The company has not provided an update on its performance since that time.

It will be interesting to see what moves Thorsteinson, a longstanding broadcast industry executive, will make as CEO of Snell and Quantel, companies he has competed against in previous roles.

Thorsteinson is a well-known figure in the broadcast industry having headed-up several of the industry’s largest technology vendors over the past 15 years.

In January 2013, Thorsteinson was named CEO of Grass Valley, replacing Alain Andreoli, who had been appointed by private equity firm Francisco Partners following their 2010 acquisition of Grass Valley from Technicolor.

Just over a year later, Thorsteinson oversaw the $220m sale of Grass Valley to Belden Corporation, who combined it with Miranda, keeping the Grass Valley moniker for the enlarged entity.

Interestingly, Thorsteinson was also involved in the sale of Miranda to Belden.  In April 2012, he appointed a director of Miranda Technologies during the time that activist investor JEC Capital was agitating for a sale of that business.  Three months after Thorsteinson became a director of the company, Belden Corporation acquired Miranda for an enterprise value of $356m.

Thorsteinson was the President of Harris Corporation’s Broadcast Communications Division from 2006-2010.  He was appointed to this role following the $460m purchase by Harris of Leitch Technology Corporation, where Thorsteinson had been CEO since November 2003.

Prior to Leitch, Thorsteinson was CEO of Grass Valley Group, and oversaw the December 2001 sale of Grass Valley Group to Thomson Multimedia for $172m.

“We are delighted to have Tim Thorsteinson join Quantel to continue the company’s transformation. Tim has a proven track record of value creation, and his knowledge and experience are a great fit to grow the combined Quantel and Snell business into a major force in the rapidly changing broadcast industry,” said Chris Hurley, Managing Director Lloyds Development Capital and Quantel Board Director. “I would also like to thank Ray for all his hard work and achievements at Quantel over the past 10 years.”

“I’m very excited to be joining Quantel,” said Thorsteinson. “It is one of the larger independent businesses in our industry, with world class products and a rich history of innovation. I want to build on that tradition to create an organization 100% focused on helping our customers prosper in the media technology world.”

.

.

 

Related Content:

Press Release: Tim Thorsteinson becomes Quantel CEO

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Quantel Acquires Snell

Press Release: Quantel acquires Snell to create new force in media technology

Quantel – Snell FAQ

Belden Makes it Official – Combination of Grass Valley and Miranda to be Called Grass Valley

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Belden Completes Acquisition of Grass Valley, Will Invest $25 Million in Integration of Combined Business

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Belden Buys Grass Valley for $220 Million

Belden Closes Deal to Acquire Miranda

Thorsteinson Appointed to Miranda’s Board of Directors in Otherwise Uneventful AGM

Miranda Nominates Tim Thorsteinson as Director

Activist Shareholder Drama Continues at Miranda Technologies

Technicolor Receives a Binding Offer from Francisco Partners for Grass Valley Broadcast Business

Press Release: Tim Thorsteinson Named President of Harris Corporation’s Broadcast Communications Division

Press Release: Harris Corporation Completes Acquisition of Leitch Technology

WSJ Article: Thomson Multimedia to Buy Grass Valley for $172 Million

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Belden Buys Grass Valley for $220 Million

Belden’s Acquisition of Miranda to Close on or Before July 27, 2012

TVNewsCheck Article (9-29-2011): Tech One-on-One With Simon Derry — Snell Aims To Master the U.S. Market

Advent Venture and LDC close £72m broadcasting merger

Advent Venture Partners and LDC Complete Their Portfolios Merger – March 9, 2009

Video: Pro-Bel and Snell & Wilcox CEOs Discuss Merger (2009)

Press Release (11-6-2003): Chyron Sells Pro-Bel to LDC

Broadcast Magazine (2002): Snell Secures £22m from Advent

Press Release (2002) Advent Venture Partners invests GBP13m in Snell & Wilcox

Variety Article (7-14-2000): Carlton sells tech arm Quantel to LDC for £51 million 

 

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2015. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Quantel Acquires Snell

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 12 2014

Quantel has announced that it will acquire fellow UK-based broadcast technology vendor Snell.

The combined company will have revenue of more than $170 million and office in 16 locations around the globe, making it one of the larger vendors in the broadcast industry.

The enlarged company will be called Quantel and headquartered in Newbury UK, Quantel’s current HQ. According to an FAQ issued by the company, all existing products from Snell and Quantel will continue, and the Snell brand will remain.

Quantel CEO Ray Cross will lead the enlarged company.

Current Snell CEO Simon Derry will exit the business after acting helping to support the integration of the two companies for several months.

Paul Martin, Managing Director of the Snell TV Everywhere division and Rob Rowe, Managing Director of the Snell Live TV division will join the Quantel board, and Tim Banks, Snell Sales Director and Peter Fredericks, Snell Finance Director are also taking leading roles in the new combined organization.

 

UK-based Companies Have Little Product Overlap

Quantel and Snell are both based in the UK, and have a significant presence in many international markets.  Both companies are viewed as high-end players in the market, with good reputations for quality, reliability, and customer service.

Although the two companies have many common customers, they have virtually no overlapping product lines. Quantel focuses on post-production graphics and color grading systems, as well as enterprise-class networked editing systems, and media asset management.  Snell is known for production switchers, signal processing gear, playout automation, and channel-in-a-box products.

Both companies have UK-based R&D and manufacturing facilities, which will likely be rationalized over the course of time, resulting in significant cost savings for the combined entity. “We will be creating a new world-class facility at the company headquarters in Newbury to produce the complete Quantel and Snell product range and we look forward to the new ideas generated when the two R&D teams start to interact,” said Quantel CEO Ray Cross.

 

Common Parent Combines Broadcast Holdings

The combination of Quantel and Snell was long-rumored in the industry, since the two companies already had a common parent, Lloyds Development Capital (LDC), the investment arm of Lloyds Bank.

LDC has held a majority stake in both Quantel and Snell for a number of years, so a primary driver for the deal was likely the internal consolidation of LDC’s long-time holdings in the broadcast technology space, creating a larger, more efficient business, with greater operating leverage.

The complementary nature of the respective Quantel and Snell product portfolios should allow the enlarged company to continue serving the needs of customers, while realizing significant cost savings through the combination of R&D and manufacturing facilities, trade show booths, regional offices, etc.

This is similar to the approach outlined last month when Belden announced it will purchase Grass Valley for $220 million, and combined it with Miranda Technologies, which it already owns.  In 2012, Belden acquired Miranda for approximately $350 million.

Like Quantel and Snell, the combined Miranda and Grass Valley have limited product overlap and many common customers. Belden’s management has said it believes significant cost savings can be achieved by rationalizing duplicate functions within the combined company.

LDC acquired Quantel in July 2000, when it funded the company’s £51 million management buyout (MBO) from Carlton Communications.

In 2009, LDC created Snell when it funded the £72 million merger of Snell & Wilcox and Pro-Bel, in a deal supported by a £25 million package of senior debt and working capital facilities provided by The Royal Bank of Scotland and HSBC. After the merger, the combined company was renamed Snell.

LDC acquired Pro-Bel in 2003 when it funded an £11.2 million MBO from Chyron.

Prior to its merger with Pro-Bel, Snell & Wilcox was owned by Advent Ventures who had funded its £22 million management buy-out in 2002.

Both Quantel and Snell are private companies, so their individual revenue figures are not disclosed publicly.

A report published immediately after the merger of Pro-Bel and Snell & Wilcox in 2009  said Snell had revenue £80m and employed 450 staff; and in 2011 Snell CEO Simon Derry said in an interview that the company’s revenue was “greater than $130 million.”

According to its website, Quantel “employs around 300 people, and operates sales and support subsidiaries in the USA, Canada, Latin America, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Korea, Australia and throughout mainland Europe.”

.

.

 

Related Content:

Press Release: Quantel acquires Snell to create new force in media technology

Quantel – Snell FAQ

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Belden Buys Grass Valley for $220 Million

Belden’s Acquisition of Miranda to Close on or Before July 27, 2012

TVNewsCheck Article (9-29-2011): Tech One-on-One With Simon Derry — Snell Aims To Master the U.S. Market

Advent Venture and LDC close £72m broadcasting merger

Advent Venture Partners and LDC Complete Their Portfolios Merger – March 9, 2009

Video: Pro-Bel and Snell & Wilcox CEOs Discuss Merger (2009)

Press Release (11-6-2003): Chyron Sells Pro-Bel to LDC

Broadcast Magazine (2002): Snell Secures £22m from Advent

Press Release (2002) Advent Venture Partners invests GBP13m in Snell & Wilcox

Variety Article (7-14-2000): Carlton sells tech arm Quantel to LDC for £51 million 

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2014. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

More Broadcast Vendor M&A: The Carlyle Group Acquires The Foundry from Advent Venture Partners

Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 15 2011

The Carlyle Group announced that is has acquired a “significant majority stake” in The Foundry, a UK-based visual effects software specialist, from Advent Venture Partners. As part of the deal, The Foundry’s founders and management will retain a significant minority stake in the business.

Although terms of the transaction were not disclosed, an article in the Financial Times newspaper says that that The Foundry was estimated to be worth “more than £75m ($120m)”.  If this valuation is correct, Advent Venture Partners has made a tidy profit since backing a management buyout at The Foundry less than two years ago.  This is the third broadcast industry deal for Advent in the past couple of years.  The UK-based venture fund sold its majority in Snell & Wilcox to Lloyd’s Development Capital in 2009, and retained a minority interest in Snell.  In 2010 Advent invested in ingest and transcoding vendor AmberFin.

The Foundry has experienced strong growth since the Advent-funded management buyout in June 2009, driven by demand for its visual effects software.  Since that time, the company’s headcount has tripled to more than 100 staff, and its revenue has more than doubled to £14.9m ($23.8m).  Today, The Foundry has more than 4,000 customers including The Moving Picture Company (MPC), Prime Focus, Dreamworks, Industrial Light and Magic (ILM), Framestore, Cinesite, Double Negative and several other high-end facilities.

Carlyle, which funded the acquisition through its “Carlyle Europe Technology Partners (CETP) II” fund, has acquired and invested in 20 companies, supporting their growth, expansion and business transformation initiatives in the technology space.  Carlyle says it plans to will support The Foundry’s expansion and continue to invest in its specialized product offerings while diversifying into adjacent market areas.

.

.

Related Content:

Press release: The Carlyle Group to Acquire Visual Effects Software Developer The Foundry from Advent Venture Partners

Advent Ventures exits Snell & Wilcox in a merger worth £72million and retains stake in newly-created global force in broadcasting technology

AmberFin Closes Funding Round — Fourth Transcoding-Related Transaction in Past Few Months

.

.

How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Reliability

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Dec 07 2009

This is the fourth in a series of posts that discusses how a global sample of more than 325 systems integrators (SIs) who participated in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* ranked broadcast technology vendors in a variety of measures. For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

In an era when many broadcasters are shedding technology positions, SIs have become an extremely important part of the technology value chain.  Broadcasters now routinely outsource their project work to SIs, who are called in for their expertise and experience.  Thus the relationship that vendors have with their SI partners is very important to their business. 

Previously I have looked at How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Great Customer Service; and How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Innovation; and How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Vendors for Quality.  This post looks at how the global sample of systems integrators ranked vendors for reliability.

This is the third time I have written about how broadcast technology vendors have been ranked for reliability.  Previous posts include Reliability Rankings for Broadcast Technology Vendors, which looks at how the overall market ranks vendors for reliability, broken down by geography; and How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Reliability.

The chart below shows the responses from more than 325 SIs.  It is broken out by geography to show the responses of the global sample of all SIs who participated in the study, as well as the responses of SIs in EMEA and the Americas.  Due to a small sample size, SI rankings for Asia-Pacific have not been included as a separate column.  For the sake of comparison, I have also included in this chart 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?

Reliability -- by Systems Integrators

 

As always these findings are extremely interesting.  Here are a few quick observations about this table:

 

* There are 9 vendors on this list (out of 25 studied), the same number as in the innovation rankings.  This makes innovation and reliability the least varied and most concentrated of the metrics in this series of posts about perceptions of systems integrators. 

 

 * The complete list of vendors in this table (in alphabetical order), and how many times they appear is as follows: Evertz (2), EVS (4), Harris (1), Miranda (1), Omneon (2), Snell & Wilcox (5),  Sony (5), Thomson / Grass Valley (3), Utah Scientific (2)

 

* As always, there are some interesting differences in the rankings of vendors by SIs versus the rankings by other organization types such as broadcasters, and even the overall market. 

 

* Out of the 9 vendors in this table, only Snell & Wilcox and Sony made the top 5 list for reliability in all five categories (the overall market, the global sample of all broadcasters, and the three SI categories).

 

* EVS appears four times in this table.  The company made the top 5 list for reliability for all categories except systems integrators in the Americas.

 

* Utah Scientific and Omneon each appear twice in this table – in the Global SI and EMEA SI lists.  However, neither company is listed in the top 5 reliability for the overall market or the sample of all broadcasters. Interestingly, these results for Utah and Omneon go against the geographic bias exhibited for other metrics.  Both Utah and Omneon are based in the Americas, but neither company makes the top 5 reliability list for SIs in the Americas.  Instead, both companies are listed in the global SI and EMEA SI categories.

 

* One company that does make the top 5 reliability list for SIs in the Americas is Thomson / Grass Valley, which also appears in the top 5 reliability list for the overall market and the sample of all broadcasters.

 

* Other companies that make the top 5 reliability list for SIs in their home territories are EVS and Snell & Wilcox (EMEA) and Miranda and Evertz (Americas).

 

* Harris appears in the global sample of all respondents, but not in any of the SI samples.

 

* Appearing two times in this table, Evertz makes the list for the global sample of all broadcasters as well as SIs in the Americas.

 

* Miranda makes one appearance in this table – in the SI list for the Americas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 * The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest 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 “league tables” 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 mentio

How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for “Great Customer Service”

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 30 2009

This is the third in a series of posts that discusses how a global sample of more than 325 systems integrators (SIs) who participated in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* ranked broadcast technology vendors in a variety of measures. For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

In an era when many broadcasters are shedding technology positions, SIs have become an extremely important part of the technology value chain.  Broadcasters now routinely outsource their project work to SIs, who are called in for their expertise and experience.  Thus the relationship that vendors have with their SI partners is very important to their business. 

Previously I have looked at How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Innovation; and How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Vendors for Quality.  This post looks at how the global sample of systems integrators ranked vendors for “great customer service.”

This is fourth time I have written about how broadcast technology vendors are perceived by the market for their customer service.  Previous posts on the subject include A Ranking of Broadcast Technology Vendors for “Great Customer Service”, which breaks out overall rankings by geography; and How broadcasters of different sizes rank technology vendors for great customer service. 

I have also touched on how the perception of customer service can be extremely varied in different regions.  I highlighted one such case in an article called Brand Schizophrenia? Regional/customer variations in perception of broadcast vendor brands.  

Customer service is a very important measure, and in many cases it is one of the key determining factors in purchase decisions. I would imagine that this is particularly true for systems integrators who must work simultaneously with many vendors while striving to complete a project on time and on budget.  

Yet from my research I’ve found that the customer service offerings of broadcast technology vendors is also something that is perceived by the market as not being as strong as other metrics such as innovation, reliability and quality. 

Indeed as I wrote in a previous post “respondents were harder on this metric [customer service] than any other… it’s worth noting that on an overall basis, respondents to the BBS were much stingier with their “grades” in this category compared to all the others.  Many companies received very high scores for metrics like “overall opinion,” “innovation,” “reliability” etc., but no company was ranked “off the charts” in terms of the perception of “great customer service.”

So having said all that, how did systems integrators rank broadcast technology vendors for “great customer service?”

The chart below shows the responses from more than 325 SIs.  It is broken out by geography to show the responses of the global sample of all SIs who participated in the study, as well as the responses of SIs in EMEA and the Americas.  Due to a small sample size, SI rankings for Asia-Pacific have not been included as a separate column.  For the sake of comparison, I have also included in this chart 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 Systems Integrators

 

As always these findings are extremely interesting.  Here are a few observations about this table:

 

* There are 11 vendors on this list (out of 25 studied); meaning that great customer service is the most varied and least concentrated of any metric in this series of posts about perceptions of systems integrators. 

 

* This lack of vendor concentration is similar to customer service findings in other categories.  For example, the customer service rankings of the overall market and that of broadcasters broken down by size (both mentioned above) both show a similar profile.

 

* Out of the 11 vendors in this table, no vendor made the top 5 list for great customer service in all categories. 

 

* However, both Omneon and Snell & Wilcox did achieve this in all three systems integrator categories.

 

* The complete list of vendors in this table (in alphabetical order), and how many times they appear is as follows: Axon (3), Evertz (3), EVS (2), Harris (1), Miranda (1), Omneon (3), Pebble Beach (2), Snell & Wilcox (4), Sony (2), Sundance (1), Thomson / Grass Valley

 

* As with many other findings, there are interesting regional variations in the way vendors are perceived for great customer service

 

* 4 out of 5 in the EMEA SI list are European based – Axon, Network, Pebble Beach and Snell & Wilcox

 

* Likewise, the Americas SI list is dominated by North American players.  In the Americas SI list, 4 out of the 5 vendors are based in the region — Evertz, Harris, Miranda and Omneon.

 

* There are also some interesting differences in the rankings of vendors by SIs versus the rankings by other organization types such as broadcasters, and even the overall market.

 

* There are two pure-play automation players in the global SI list for great customer service.  This is a first for me — no pure-play automation vendors have appeared in any ranking I have published so far (global sample, broadcaster by geography sample and broadcaster by or size sample).  So what is it about SIs that result in two of their top five spots for great customer service are pure-play automation vendors?

 

* EVS, Sony and Thomson / Grass Valley all make the top 5 great customer service list for the global sample of all respondent and the all broadcasters.  However, none of these companies makes any of the SI lists.

 

* Axon appears three times.  The company makes the top 5 list for great customer service for all broadcasters, all systems integrators and EMEA systems integrators.  Like EVS, Axon is a company that has done very well in the various customer service posts I have written.  Although the company is relatively small when compared to some of the others on this list, it is clearly caught the attention of the market by making customer service a priority.

 

* Like Axon, Evertz also appears on this list three times, but in only one of the SI categories – the Americas.  This is consistent with other findings about Evertz in that they seem to do best in the Americas market.

 

* Another strong regional player is Miranda, who does well with SIs in the company’s home region.  The same is true of Harris, which appears once in this chart – in the SI list for the Americas.

 

* Like Miranda and Harris, Network (now Nevion) appears once in this table – in EMEA SI list only, another example of a local vendor doing well in their home region.

 

* EVS, which appeared in the top 5 list for great customer service for all geographies in a previous post, appears in the first two columns of this chart (global sample and all broadcasters).  However the company is absent from all three systems integrator categories

 

* Although they did not make the top 5 great customer service list for all respondents or all broadcasters, Omneon appears in all three categories of this list for systems integrators. The only other vendor to appear in the top 5 list for all three categories of systems integrators was Snell & Wilcox.

 

* Two companies appear in two of the SI categories – Axon and Pebble Beach. Both companies are based in EMEA, and they each appear in the top 5 for all SIs and SIs in EMEA.

 

As per my previous findings on this subject, the SI rankings for “great customer service” are extremely interesting.  There are strong regional variations and both small and large vendors have made the above table in one or more places.    

I continue to be convinced that despite the strong showings by some vendors, broadcast technology buyers generally perceive customer service as a weakness in the industry.  Therefore, as I said in a previous post, “it’s clear to me that there is a real opportunity for vendors to step up to the plate and differentiate themselves on the basis of great customer service.  Whoever does this will be rewarded by their customers with increased loyalty.”

 

 

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest 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 “league tables” 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.

How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Quality

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 23 2009

This is the second in a series of posts that discusses how a global sample of more than 325 systems integrators (SIs) who participated in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* ranked broadcast technology vendors in a variety of measures. For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

In an era when many broadcasters are shedding technology positions, SIs have become an extremely important part of the technology value chain.  Broadcasters now routinely outsource their project work to SIs, who are called in for their expertise and experience.  Thus the relationship that vendors have with their SI partners is very important to their business. 

Last week I posted an article about how How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Innovation, and today I am going to look at how this influential group ranked vendors for quality.

Quality is an important ranking, and I have looked previously at quality ranking of broadcast technology vendors, including how broadcasters of different sizes rank vendors for quality.

The chart below shows the responses from more than 325 SIs.  It is broken out by geography to show the responses of the global sample of SIs as well as the responses of SIs in EMEA and the Americas.  Due to a small sample size, SI rankings for Asia-Pacific have not been included.  For the sake of comparison, I have also included in this chart 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 [Quality] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market?

 

 

Quality -- by Systems Integrators

 Some thoughts and observations about these findings:

 

* There are 10 vendors in this chart, making this metric slightly more varied than innovation, where there were 9 vendors. 

 

* As with how SIs ranked vendors for innovation, only Snell & Wilcox and Sony appear in all five categories, meaning that these vendors made the top 5 quality list for all respondents, all broadcasters and all SIs.

 

* Other vendors (in alphabetical order) making an appearance in this chart are: Axon (1), Evertz (2), EVS (3), Harris (2), Miranda (1), Sundance (1), Thomson / Grass Valley (2)

 

* It’s interesting to note that the five vendors in the top 5 quality ranking of the global sample of all respondents is identical to the sample of all respondents (regardless of company type or location)  is identical, but the view of the SIs is different than broadcasters. 

 

* There are a total of 8 vendors in the three categories of SI rankings in the above table, 5 of which do not appear in the top 5 quality rankings of the global sample or broadcasters.

 

 * Harris and Thomson / Grass Valley appear in the top 5 quality rankings for the global sample of all respondents and for all broadcasters globally.  However neither company made the top 5 list for any of the systems integrator categories.

 

* Conversely, Evertz, Omneon, Sundance, Axon and Miranda make the top 5 quality list for at least one of the SI categories, but do appear in the top 5 quality lists for the global sample or the sample of all broadcasters.

 

* Like almost all other metrics that I’ve studied, there are also some interesting geographic variations in these results.

 

* Netherlands-based Axon appears once in this chart, in the EMEA SI list. 

 

* Like Axon, Miranda makes one appearance in this chart – in the Americas SIs list. 

 

* Evertz appears on 2 of the 3 SI lists – All SIs and Americas SIs – but the company does make the top 5 quality list for the global sample of all respondents or for the sample of all broadcasters.

 

* EVS appears three times in the above chart – in the global list of all respondents, all broadcasters and SI list in EMEA.

 

* Sundance makes one appearance in this chart – in the top 5 quality list for SIs globally.  Interestingly, this is the second time that a pure-play automation vendor made the list for SIs but not other categories. Pebble Beach appeared twice on the list of how SIs rank broadcast technology vendors for innovation

 

 

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest 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 “league tables” 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.

How Systems Integrators Rank Broadcast Technology Vendors for Innovation

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 17 2009

This is the first in a series of posts looking at how a global sample of more than 325 systems integrators (SIs) who participated in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* ranked broadcast technology vendors in a variety of measures. For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

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.

In previous posts, I have looked how the global sample of BBS respondents ranked broadcast technology vendors for innovation.  I have also looked at how broadcasters of different sizes rank vendors for innovation.

This post looks at the opinions of a different, but very influential type of broadcast technology buyer – systems integrators (SIs).  In an era when many broadcasters are shedding technology positions, SIs have become an extremely important part of the technology value chain.  Broadcasters now routinely outsource their project work to SIs, who are called in for their expertise and experience.  Thus the relationship that vendors have with their SI partners is very important to their business.

So how do systems integrators rank broadcast technology vendors for innovation?

The chart below shows the responses from more than 325 SIs.  It is broken out by geography to show the responses of the global sample of SIs as well as the responses of SIs in EMEA and the Americas.  Due to a small sample size, SI rankings for Asia-Pacific have not been included.  For the sake of comparison, I have also included in this chart 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 [Innovation] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market?

  Innovation -- by Systems Integrators

 

 Some thoughts and observations about these findings:

* There are total of nine vendors in this chart.  Of those nine, only Snell & Wilcox and Sony appear in all columns, meaning that these vendors made the top 5 innovation list for all respondents, all broadcasters and all SIs.

 

* Other vendors (in alphabetical order) making an appearance in this chart are: Evertz (3), EVS (2), Harris (1), Miranda (4), Omenon (2), Pebble Beach (2) and Thomson / Grass Valley (1)

 

* Although some of the brands that broadcasters ranked in the top 5 for innovation also appeared in the top 5 innovation list for SIs, there are some brands that appear in the top 5 rankings of one group but not the other

 

* EVS makes the top 5 innovation list for the global sample of all respondents as well as for all broadcasters globally.  However, the company is absent from all categories in the top 5 innovation ranking of SIs

 

* The reverse is true for Omneon and Pebble Beach.  Neither company make the top 5 innovation list for the global sample or the broadcaster sample. However, both companies do make the top 5 innovation list for systems integrators globally and in EMEA.

 

* Miranda did not make the top 5 innovation list for the global sample of all respondents, but the company appears in the top 5 innovation list for all broadcasters and SIs globally and regionally.  Overall, Miranda is listed four times in this chart, appearing in the top 5 innovation list for all categories except the global sample of all respondents.

 

* Thomson / Grass Valley is the opposite of Miranda.  The company makes the top 5 innovation list for the global sample of all respondents, but does not appear in the top 5 innovation list of either broadcasters or SIs.

 

* Like Thomson / Grass Valley, Harris appears once in the chart.  The company makes the top 5 innovation ranking for SIs in the Americas, but not for any other category.

 

* Evertz appears in the top 5 innovation list for the global sample, and the sample of all broadcasters.  While Evertz does not make the top 5 innovation list for all systems integrators, it is included in the top 5 innovation list for SIs in the Americas.

 

* In addition to differences in rankings between broadcasters and SIs, there are also some regional variations in the SI rankings. 

 

* As mentioned above, the single appearance of Harris is in the list of SIs in the Americas

 

* Evertz also has a strong showing in the Americas.  It appears in the top 5 innovation ranking for SIs in the Americas, but not for those in EMEA.  Evertz is also absent from the top 5 innovation list of the global sample of SIs. 

 

* Pebble Beach, which appears twice in this chart, appears in the top 5 innovation list for SIs in EMEA and also for SIs globally, but the company does not appear on the top 5 innovation list for SIs in the Americas.

 

  

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest 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 “league tables” 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.

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Vendors for Quality

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 09 2009

This is the fourth 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, reliability and great customer service. Today I am going to look at how this group ranked vendors for “quality.” 

The table below shows the top 5 brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for quality, as ranked by broadcasters, broken down by organization size.  For the sake of comparison, I have also provided the global ranking (responses of all 4,000+ respondents from all organization types) as well as the ranking for all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).

 

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 [Quality] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

 

   Quality by broadcaster by org size

Once again this chart makes for very interesting reading.  Here are a few quick thoughts on these findings:

 

* There are a total of 8 vendors in this list.  This makes quality the most concentrated and least varied of the metrics I’ve explored

 

* When you compare the four metrics I studied (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service) broken down by broadcasters of different sizes, a total of 11 vendors made the list for “innovation;” 9 vendors made the list for “reliability;” and 12 vendors made the list for “great customer service.”

 

* What makes the appearance of these vendors interesting is where they appear in the charts (what size of broadcaster), and in which other metrics were they also ranked highly by broadcasters of different sizes.

 

* All the vendors in this chart are large and / or well established.  This was not necessarily the case with the other metrics where there was a much broader range of vendors listed.

 

* Two of these eight vendors in the top 5 quality rankings – EVS and Sony – appear in all six categories in the chart above.  These two vendors appear very consistently in the top five rankings for all the attributes I have broken out by organizational size. 

 

* The other vendors appeared in to top five rankings for quality as follows (in alphabetical order): Evertz (2), Harris (4), Omneon (2), Quantel (1), Snell & Wilcox (4), and Thomson GVG (5). 

 

* Thomson / Grass Valley makes an appearance somewhere in the top five of all the metrics in this series of posts (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service).  In the case of quality they appear in all categories except one — the mid-sized broadcasters with 501-1,000 employees.

 

* Harris makes the top five quality list for the global sample (all respondents, regardless of company type), and the sample of all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).  When the broadcast sample is broken down by size, Harris appears twice – in the 50-100 employee category and 501-1,000 employee categories. In addition to quality, Harris appears in the top five rankings in two of the other three categories, reliability and great customer service, but not innovation.

 

* Omneon appears in the top five quality list for the two categories of mid sized broadcasters (101-500 and 501-1000 employees).  Like Harris, Omneon appears in three of the four metrics covered in this series of posts.  In addition to quality, Omneon appears in the top five ranking for both innovation and reliability (both in the 501-1000 employee category), but are absent from the top five rankings for great customer service.

 

* Evertz in appears in the top five quality list for small (50-100 employees) and medium (101-500 employees) broadcasters, but not in the lists of larger broadcasters.  This is fairly consistent with the other findings about Evertz.  The company makes an appearance somewhere in top 5 list for all the metrics (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service), but it seems that Evertz typically appeals to the small and mid-sized broadcasters.  The exception is “great customer service” where Evertz made the top 5 list in the 501-1,000 employee category.  However the company did not make the top 5 list for large broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) in any category.

 

* The opposite is true of Snell & Wilcox.  S&W made an appearance in the top 5 list of each metric, but only in the large broadcaster categories (501-1,000 employees and 1,001-10,000 employees). 

 

* Another vendor to appear in the top five for only the largest broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) is Quantel.  In addition to this appearance for quality, Quantel also made the top five ranking for innovation among the largest broadcasters (1,000-10,000 employees).

 

* Finally, it’s worth pointing out that Axon is similar to S&W and Quantel.  Although Axon does not appear in the top 5 list for quality, the company shows a similar pattern to S&W and Quantel because for all categories where Axon does make an appearance (in the reliability and great customer service charts), it was only in the large broadcaster categories.

 

 

 

 

 

* 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.

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.

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Reliability of Broadcast Technology Vendors

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 26 2009

Ordinarily when I write about how broadcast technology vendors were ranked in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS),* I show the opinions of the all 4,000+ of BBS respondents, broken down globally and regionally in order to highlight geographic variation in opinions.

A few weeks ago I did something different and posted an article about how one type of customer– broadcasters – ranked broadcast technology vendors in one category – innovation.  I received strong feedback about this post and many people asked me to show other data broken down this way.  I’m happy to oblige and I’ll be doing this over the next couple of posts.

Today I am going to look at how broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors on reliability.  For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

The table below shows the top 5 brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for reliability, as ranked by broadcasters, broken down by organization size.  For the sake of comparison, I have also provided the global ranking (responses of all 4,000+ respondents from all organization types).

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 [Reliability] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

 

 Reliability by broadcaster by org size

 

 

 

 

 

As with the previously published results for innovation, these results are interesting because of the variation of what brands appear where.  Here are a few quick observations these results:

* There are total of 9 vendors on this list, versus a total of 11 on the previously published for innovation.  Thus it appears that there is slightly more agreement among broadcasters for reliability than innovation.

* Apart from Sony and EVS, here is the breakdown of how often other vendors made the top five, including the global sample, (in alphabetical order): Axon (2), Evertz (2), Harris (3), Miranda (1), Omneon (2), Snell & Wilcox (4), Thomson / Grass Valley (4)

 * There is interesting variation between the global ranking and the broadcaster rankings.  For example, Evertz is not listed in the top 5 for reliability for the global sample, but does make the top five reliability list for all broadcasters.  Harris conversely makes to top 5 list for the global sample, but not the overall broadcaster list (however it does appear in two of the organization size breakdowns).

* Harris and Thomson / Grass Valley each make the top 5 list for the smallest (51-100 employees) and largest (1,001-10,000 employees) broadcasters, but both are absent in the top 5 list of mid-sized broadcasters (101 – 1,000 employees). 

* The opposite is true for Axon and Omneon.  Neither company made the top 5 reliability list for the for the smallest and largest broadcasters, but they do appear in the top 5 reliability lists for broadcasters with 101-500 and 501-1,000 employees).

* Snell & Wilcox makes the top reliability 5 lists for larger broadcasters (501-10,000 employees), but is absent from the lists of small and mid-size broadcasters (50 – 500 employees).

* Miranda and Evertz, two direct competitors, appear in different places in the size breakdown, with Miranda appearing in the top 5 for broadcasters with 51-100 employees and Evertz making the list for broadcasters with 101-500 employees (Evertz made the overall top 5 list, Miranda did not).

 

 

 

 

* 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: