Posts Tagged ‘Vizrt’

ChyronHego Taken Private by PE Firm, Delisted from NASDAQ

Annual Results, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A, Quarterly Results, SEC Filings | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 09 2015

ChyronHego LogoVector Capital has completed the previously announced $120m deal to acquire ChyronHego and take it private.

Under the terms of the deal, ChyronHego stockholders will receive $2.82 per share in cash, and ChyronHego common stock has ceased trading on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange.

According the definitive proxy statement, the purchase of ChyronHego will be funded by a combination of equity and debt financing.

Equity financing will be provided by Vector Capital and its affiliates, who have committed to pay approximately $49.3m towards the acquisition, and related expenses.

Debt financing is being provided by Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Apollo Investment Corporation (Apollo) in the form of a $50m senior secured five-year term loan, which is expected have interest of “either (i) the Eurodollar Base Rate plus 5.625% (subject to a 1.0% floor with respect to the Eurodollar Base Rate), or (ii) at the Adjusted Base Rate (defined as the highest of (w) 2.75% of (x) the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate and (y) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50%) plus 3.875%.”

Separately, SVB and Apollo have also providing a $7m senior secured revolving credit facility that has the same terms as the senior five-year term loan. ChyronHego will use the revolving credit facility for working capital and capital expenditures and other general corporate purposes.

In its last quarter as a public company (Q3 2014), ChyronHego posted a net loss of $2.6m on revenue of $14m.

During the first nine months of 2014, ChryronHego posted a net loss of $2.8m on revenue of $43.3m.

For the trailing twelve months (TTM) ended September 30, 2014, ChyronHego had revenue of $58m, comprised of $27.2m of product revenue and $30.8m of service revenue.

In a securities filing, ChyronHego said it ended 2014 with approximately $5.4m in cash and equivalents; and projected that its revenue for the full year 2014 would be $59m.

“We are delighted to be working with Vector Capital,” said Johan Apel, President and Chief Executive at ChyronHego. “As a private company, ChyronHego will be ideally positioned to reinforce the company’s leadership in news, sports and live production solutions. The Vector team has a strong track record of success in acquiring and operating innovative technology companies, and our partnership with them will enable us to reach new levels of scale, technological capabilities and customer service.”

David Fishman, Managing Director at Vector Capital, who will join ChyronHego’s Board of Directors, said: “We believe that as a private company with Vector’s financial support ChyronHego will be well positioned to capitalize on the significant opportunities in broadcast graphics creation, play-out and real time data visualization. Over time, we are confident the company will be well positioned to capitalize on the exciting trends in the sports, news and live television markets.”

“We welcome ChyronHego to the Vector family,” said Nick Lukens, Vice President at Vector. “We are very excited to roll up our sleeves and get to work with the talented team at ChyronHego. Through our partnership with management, we are committed to strengthening and expanding ChyronHego’s market leading product and service capabilities.”

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Vector Capital Completes Acquisition of ChyronHego

Certificate of Merger

ChyronHego Makes Revealing Disclosures About “Going-Private” Transaction

Broadcast Vendor M&A: ChyronHego to be Taken Private by Vector Capital in $114 Million Deal

ChyronHego 8-K: Additional Disclosures Regarding Vector Transactions

ChyronHego: Definitive Proxy Statement on Vector Take-Private Transaction

ChyronHego Investor Presentation March 2014

ChyronHego Investor FAQ and Introduction to Vector Capital

Agreement and Plan of Merger: ChyronHego Corporation, Vector CH Holdings (Cayman), L.P., And CH Merger Sub, Inc.

ChyronHego SEC Filing: Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement with Vector Capital

ChyronHego One Year Stock Price Chart

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Vizrt to be Taken Private in $374 Million All-Cash Deal

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2015. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

ChyronHego Makes Revealing Disclosures About “Going-Private” Transaction

Analysis, Annual Results, Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Feb 27 2015

ChyronHego_Logo

In November 2014 broadcast graphics specialist ChyronHego entered into a definitive agreement to be taken private by Vector Capital in an all-cash deal that valued ChyronHego at an equity value of approximately $114m, or $2.82 per share.

Shortly thereafter, six lawsuits challenging the proposed acquisition of the company were filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, which were subsequently consolidated into a single case.

The consolidated case alleges that the company’s directors “breached their fiduciary obligations in connection with their approval of the Merger Agreement by entering into a transaction that is coercive and constitutes an unfair and inequitable subversion of shareholders’ rights, and that the entity defendants aided and abetted those breaches.”

ChyronHego and Vector Capital recently entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with respect to a proposed settlement of case, and agreed to provide more information relating to the proposed deal to take ChyronHego private.

According to a recent filing with securities regulators, ChyronHego has now disclosed additional information regarding the proposed deal, including the following:

  • Beginning in November 2013, ChyronHego’s board authorized ChyronHego’s President and Chief Executive Officer Johan Apel to explore ChyronHego’s strategic alternatives

 

  • ChyronHego and Vector Capital entered into a confidentiality agreement in February 2014

 

  • Discussions on the potential of ChryonHego’s management rolling over equity as part of the transaction did not occur with certain other interested parties.

 

  • During a Special Committee (consisting of Independent ChyronHego Directors) meeting in July 2014, the Company’s bankers were informed “Mr. Apel was not happy being the Chief Executive Officer of a publicly traded company.”

 

  • During the “go-shop period,” ChyronHego executives met with two interested parties, neither of which decided to make an offer

 

  • Additional information was provided on the valuation metrics used in the Company’s analysis of the purchase price offered by Vector.

 

 

Excerpts from ChyronHego Definitive Proxy Statement

The broader proxy statement is a lengthy read covering the historical events leading to the proposed transaction, ChyronHego’s rationale for entering the transaction, and additional information on the perspective of the board and management.

Several excerpts are worth highlighting:

  • Since November 2014, ChyronHego’s investment bankers contacted 85 potential buyers: 20 strategic buyers and 65 private equity buyers. Only nine potential buyers entered into confidentiality agreements to review more detailed materials.  None submitted bids for ChyronHego

 

  • In considering the merger, ChyronHego’s board noted the “significant increase in competition in competition in the broadcast graphics creation, playout and real-time data visualization industry over the past two years, which had led in some instances to pricing pressure and discounting on ChyronHego’s products and services, and consistent competition for clients and customers with other companies, such as Vizrt, that were increasingly well-capitalized.”

 

  • The board had concerns on ChyronHego’s access to capital as a small, public company. “Members of the Board believed, based on their experience with the capital markets, that issuers with small market capitalizations and insignificant levels of coverage by investment analysts generally have a more difficult time raising meaningful amounts capital on terms that are not punitively dilutive to their shareholders.”

 

  • ChyronHego provided the following financial projections to Vector Capital:

 

ChyronHego Projections to Vector

 

  • Financing for the transaction will include a rollover of existing management shares in an aggregate value of $23.3 million, an equity contribution by Vector Capital of $49.3 million, a $50 million senior secured loan, and an up to $7 million of senior secured revolving credit loan.

 

 

Thoughts on Transaction

Taken together the disclosures outline a lengthy and thorough process run by ChyronHego’s board and management to seek a buyer or other strategic alternative for the company.

On the question of valuation, the market has spoken.  As a reference, the transaction values ChyronHego at 19.2X LTM (last twelve months) EBITDA and 1.8x LTM revenue. A review of the public disclosures referenced above offers sensible statements by the board and management on concerns of access to greater resources, competitive positioning, and disadvantages of remaining public.

However, shareholder frustration is understandable given the proposed take-private price per share is lower than the 52-week high stock price.

Moreover, the company had previously communicated growth levels and market sizing estimates inconsistent with observable data points in the broadcast technology sector.

For example, the chart below is from ChyronHego’s March 2014 investor presentation, which was still on the company’s website at the time of writing, implies that company believes its addressable market is more than $1 billion.

 

ChyronHego TAM Estimate from 3-14 Investor Presentation

 

On ChyronHego’s Q2 2014 earnings call, CEO Johan Apel confirmed management’s view that the total addressable market was approximately $1 billion, comprised of $250m of broadcast graphics products, and $750m of services. This reiterated estimates made by previous management about the company’s addressable market on its Q2 2008, Q4 2011, and Q2 2012 earnings calls.

However, it is reasonable to conclude ChyronHego was in the process of communicating updated expectations of growth and market sizing.  To their credit, management had already reversed ground and communicated the need to seek other approaches to generate increased in shareholder value.  This led to a series of M&A transactions responsible for substantial all of ChyronHego’s recent growth.

Shareholders will vote on the proposed take-private deal at a special meeting of the company, which is scheduled to be held on March 6, 2015.

In the third quarter of 2014, ChyronHego posted a net loss of $2.6m on revenue of $14m. During the first nine months of 2014, ChryronHego posted a net loss of $2.8m on revenue of $43.3m.  For the trailing twelve months (TTM) ended September 30, 2014, ChyronHego had revenue of $58m, comprised of $27.2m of product revenue and $30.8m of service revenue

Assuming the transaction closes, it will be interesting to track developments of ChyronHego with its new owners Vector Capital.

.

.

Related Content:

Broadcast Vendor M&A: ChyronHego to be Taken Private by Vector Capital in $114 Million Deal

ChyronHego 8-K: Additional Disclosures Regarding Vector Transactions

ChyronHego: Definitive Proxy Statement on Vector Take-Private Transaction

ChyronHego Investor Presentation March 2014

ChyronHego Investor FAQ and Introduction to Vector Capital

Agreement and Plan of Merger: ChyronHego Corporation, Vector CH Holdings (Cayman), L.P., And CH Merger Sub, Inc.

ChyronHego SEC Filing: Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement with Vector Capital

ChyronHego One Year Stock Price Chart

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Vizrt to be Taken Private in $374 Million All-Cash Deal

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2015. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

Vizrt Posts 16% Revenue Growth in 2014, Provides Update on Pending $374 Million “Going Private” Deal

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Feb 26 2015

Broadcast graphics MAM specialist Vizrt reported strong results for the fourth quarter and full year 2014.

The company also provided an update on the pending $374 million all-cash deal with Nordic Capital to take the company private.

For the fourth quarter of 2014 revenue was $36.2 million, an increase of 9% versus the fourth quarter in 2013, and an increase of 2.8% versus the preceding quarter, Q3 2014.

Gross margins for Q4 2014 were 71%, which compares favorably to the 69% margins recorded during Q4 2013 and is consistent with the 71% gross margins from the preceding quarter.

Operating expenses for the quarter were $17.9 million.  This represents a 9% increase when compared to the fourth quarter of 2013 and is flat versus the preceding quarter.

  • R&D expenses in the quarter were $5.5m (15.1% of revenue), down 1% versus the same period ago, and down 4% versus the previous quarter

 

  • Sales and marketing expenses in the quarter were $8.5m (23.6% of revenue), up 7% against the year earlier period and down 5% versus the Q3 2014

 

  • General and administrative expenses in the quarter were $3.8m (10.7% of revenue), up 31% versus the same period a year ago, and up 18% versus the preceding quarter

 

EBITDA was $7.8 million for the quarter, up 357% from $1.7 million during the fourth quarter of 2013, and up 9% from $7.2 million in the previous quarter.  The EBITDA margin for the quarter was 22% versus an EBITDA margin of 5% during the comparable quarter last year and 21% during the third quarter of 2014.

Net profit for the quarter was $4.5 million, compared to a net loss of $3.4 million last year, and down slightly versus last quarter’s net profit of $5.2 million.

 

Product line results for the Quarter:

  • Broadcast Graphics (BG) accounted for $30.8 million during the quarter (85% of total revenue versus 86.7% last quarter), an increase of 6% versus the same period ago, and an increase of 1% versus the previous quarter. The BG order backlog was $35.6 million, comparable to the size observed at the same time last year, and down 3.6% versus the previous quarter.

 

  • Media Asset Management (MAM) revenue in the quarter was $5.66 million (18% of total revenue versus 16% last quarter), up 5% versus the same period a year ago, and up 35% versus last quarter.   The MAM order backlog was $14.6 million, up 37% versus last year, and up 5% versus last quarter

 

Geographic Performance for the Quarter:

  • Revenue from EMEA was $17.1 million (47.2% of total revenue versus 47.5% last quarter), up 25% versus the same period last year and up 2% versus last quarter

 

  • Americas revenue was $8.9 million (24.8% of total revenue versus 27.6% last quarter), down 14% versus last year, and down 13% versus last quarter.

 

  • APAC revenue was $10.1 million (27.9% of total revenue versus 23.2% last quarter), up 9% versus last year, and up 3% versus last quarter

 

Results for full year 2014:

The full year results were headlined by growth of 31% in EBITDA and 80% in cash flow from operations.

Vizrt’s 2014 revenue was $141.5 million, an increase of 16% versus the $122.4 million recorded during 2013.

Net profit for the 2014 was $15.5 million ($0.23 per share), which is considerably higher than the $3.6 million ($0.06 per share) net profit from 2013.  The attributed its improved profitability to a change in product mix, consistent financial prudence, and the acquisition of Mosart MediaLabs

Gross margins for 2014 were 70%, which was a slight improvement from the 68% margins from 2013.    EBITDA was $27.7m (20% operating margin) for the full year 2014, a significant year-over-year increase from the $15.5 million (13% operating margin) recorded during 2013.

Operating expenses for 2014 were $71.1 million, a 14% increase over the operating expense level of 2013.

  • R&D expenses for the full year were $22.5 million (31.6% of revenue), an increase of 18% versus 2013

 

  • Sales and marketing expenses for 2014 were $35.2 million (49.6% of revenue), up 9% against the sales and marketing expense from 2013

 

  • General and administrative expenses were $13.3 million (18.8% of revenue), up 23% versus the 2013 calendar year

 

The geographic breakdown of 2014 sales consisted of 26% from Americas, 48% from EMEA, and 26% from APAC.

Vizrt ended 2014 with 584 employees compared to 542 at the end of Q4 2013. 24 employees were added following the Mosart acquisition in Q1 2014.

 

 

Update on Pending Acquisition by Nordic Capital

Company management provided an update on its previously announced acquisition by Nordic Capital.  Final closing of the transaction remains subject to certain conditions including the decision of Israeli tax authorities regarding a tax withholding ruling. Vizrt believes the process will come to a positive conclusion in the next several weeks.  The acquisition was first announced on November 10, 2014 and approved by a majority of shareholders on December 18, 2014.

 

 

 

Business Outlook:

Martin Burkhalter, Vizrt’s CEO, stated: “Our strong performance continued in Q4, despite the fact that we did not see the discretional spending towards the year-end that we normally have witnessed in previous years. Our strong performance is also reflected in our solid backlog going forward. I am particular pleased with the improvement of MAM results and the MAM backlog which increased by 37% compared to the same time last year.”

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Vizrt Reports Q4 and 2014 Results

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Vizrt to be Taken Private in $374 Million All-Cash Deal

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2015. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

Broadcast Vendor M&A: ChyronHego to be Taken Private by Vector Capital in $114 Million Deal

Analysis, Broadcast Vendor M&A, Quarterly Results, SEC Filings | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 17 2014

Broadcast graphics specialist ChyronHego announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement with Vector Capital, under which an affiliate of Vector will acquire all of the outstanding shares of ChyronHego common stock for $2.82 per share in cash.

San Francisco-based Vector Capital is a private equity firm with experience in the digital media sector. Recent portfolio investments include Corel and Technicolor. To fund the ChyronHego deal, Vector has secured committed financing consisting of a combination of equity and debt.

This is the second recent take-private transaction of a broadcast graphics provider. Earlier this month. Vizrt announced that it will be taken private by Nordic Capital in a $374m all-cash deal.

The $2.82 per share purchase price represents a premium of approximately 18% over the company’s average closing share price for the six months ending on November 14, 2014, and a 4% premium over the company’s closing share price on November 14, 2014, the last day of trading before the announcement.

Based on the total number of shares outstanding in ChyronHego, the deal equates to an equity value of approximately $114m. After backing out the cash on the company’s most recently published financial statements, this represents an enterprise value of approximately $108m.  On a valuation multiple basis, this is approximately 1.8x trailing 12 month’s revenue.

According to a shareholder FAQ, ChyronHego’s management team will stay the same after the transaction closes. Johan Apel will continue as CEO, and Soren Kjellin will continue as CTO.

The contractual details of the ChyronHego – Vector Capital agreement are complex and worth a longer discussion. We are preparing an analysis of the deal, and we will post this later this week.

A very brief synopsis of certain deal points follow:

  • Technically, the deal is a merger rather than an acquisition. ChyronHego is being merged into an entity controlled by Vector Capital, in order to create a new corporate entity, which will also be owned and controlled by Vector Capital.

 

  • All major shareholders on the ChyronHego management team have agreed to re-invest approximately 50% of their holdings in ChyronHego into the new corporate entity, for which they will receive approximately 31% of the equity in the new entity

 

  • Interestingly the merger agreement includes a “go shop” provision whereby ChyronHego has seven weeks to find a buyer who will offer a higher price than Vector Capital’s offer of $2.82 per share. Given Vizrt’s valuation in the Nordic Capital deal, and the fact that shares of ChyronHego have traded above $3.00 several times during the past year, it is possible that ChyronHego will be able to find a better offer. However, the “go shop” provision includes termination fees that will triggered under specified circumstances such as the acceptance of a superior offer. The company says it does not intend to disclose developments with respect to the solicitation process unless and until a decision has been made in respect to any potential superior proposal. 

 

The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions and most notably the approval by holders of two-thirds of ChyronHego’s outstanding shares and the approval by holders of a majority of shares held by current ChyronHego’s stockholders who will not become stockholders in the going-forward entity.  The Company expects the transaction to close in the first quarter of fiscal 2015.

The company said that its  board of directors and a special committee of the board composed entirely of independent directors have unanimously approved the deal, and have recommend that ChyronHego’s stockholders approve the transaction

“We are very happy to announce this partnership with Vector Capital, an established global technology oriented private equity firm that is focused on building long-term value. Our management is convinced that this is the right opportunity at the right time for ChyronHego’s customers, employees and stockholders,” said Apel.

In the third quarter of 2014, ChyronHego posted a net loss of $2.6m on revenue of $14m. During the first nine months of 2014, ChryronHego posted a net loss of $2.8m on revenue of $43.3m.

.

.

Related Content:

ChyronHego Investor FAQ and Introduction to Vector Capital

Agreement and Plan of Merger: ChyronHego Corporation, Vector CH Holdings (Cayman), L.P., And CH Merger Sub, Inc.

ChyronHego SEC Filing: Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement with Vector Capital

ChyronHego One Year Stock Price Chart

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Vizrt to be Taken Private in $374 Million All-Cash Deal

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2014. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

Broadcast Vendor M&A: Vizrt to be Taken Private in $374 Million All-Cash Deal

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 10 2014

Broadcast graphics and MAM specialist Vizrt announced that it will be taken private in an all-cash deal that values the company at $374m.

The buyer is Nordic Capital, a leading Nordic PE firm with four active funds with over EUR 11 billion in total committed capital. Under the terms of the deal Vizrt will be merged with 24 October Holding AG, an entity indirectly controlled by Nordic Capital Fund VIII, and NOR Merger Sub Ltd.

The transaction values Vizrt at a 32% premium to the company’s closing share price November 7, 2014, the last trading day prior to the announcement of the deal, and a 35% premium to the company’s six months volume weighted average share price of the for the period ending on November 7, 2014.

“I and the management team are excited about the opportunities we all believe we have ahead of us,” said Vizrt CEO Martin Burkhalter. “Nordic Capital is very committed to support our growth strategy going forward. Being a privately owned company opens up for accelerated growth opportunities through, amongst others, future acquisitions that support our long-term strategy. The discussion management has held with Nordic Capital over the last few months gives us the necessary confidence that Nordic Capital will fully back-up our continuous efforts to stay ahead of the game by further strengthening our innovative capabilities.”

The deal is expected to close on or around January 31, 2015, provided all conditions for completion have been fulfilled.

Completion of the transaction is subject to the approval by a Shareholders Meeting of Vizrt by simple majority which is expected to be held on or about December 18 2014. Shareholders representing 51.5% of the total share capital of Vizrt have declared that they will vote in favor of the deal

“Our Board has undertaken a careful review of the terms and conditions of the Merger and is unanimous in its recommendation. We consider the cash based offer as fair and in the best interest of our shareholders. We believe that Nordic Capital, with its breadth of expertise and proven track record of developing companies, will be a strong owner of Vizrt.” stated Dag J. Opedal, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Vizrt.

The Company and Nordic Capital shall cooperate for a delisting of the Company’s shares from the Oslo Stock Exchange as soon as possible after the Merger becomes effective.

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Nordic Capital to pay NOK 37 in cash per VIZRT Ltd. Share

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2014. All rights reserved.

.

.

2014 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) Reports Now Available

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 15 2014

After months of data collection, analysis, and visualization, we have now completed work on the 2014 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS). Reports from this study have now been published and are available from Devoncroft Partners.

If you’re not familiar with the BBS, it’s the most comprehensive annual study of technology end-users in the global broadcast industry. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries participated in the 2014 BBS, making it once again the largest market study of the broadcast industry.

BBS reports have been designed to help readers improve their strategic decision-making, customer engagement, marketing strategy, product planning, and sales execution.  BBS reports are also used frequently for M&A-related activities by both buyers and sellers.

.

Three types of 2014 BBS reports are available:

  • 2014 BBS Global Brand Reports:  provides deep insight into how each more than 100 broadcast technology suppliers (see full list below) are perceived by market participants, along with comprehensive benchmarking of broadcast technology vendors on a wide variety of metrics.

 

  • 2014 BBS Product Reports:  provide detailed information from buyers, specifiers, and users of broadcast technology products in 31 separate categories (see full list below)

 

  • 2014 BBS Global Market Report: provides detailed information about industry trends, major projects being planned, products being evaluated for purchase, current and future plant infrastructure, broadcast technology CapEx budgets, and planned deployment of new technologies including 4K, Connected TV, and Social TV.

.

 

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 2014 BBS on the Devoncroft website.  These articles will be posted on a semi-regular basis, so please check back often.

To receive posts when they are published, just enter your email in the box in the upper right-hand corner of the page.

 

The tables below show the product categories and broadcast technology vendor brands covered in the 2014 BBS.

 

 Product Categories Covered in the 2014 BBS:

2014 BBS -- Product Categories Covered in the 2014 Big Broadcast Survey

 

 

Broadcast Technology Brands Covered in the 2014 BBS:

 

2014 BBS -- All Brands included in 2014 BBS

.

.© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2014. All Rights Reserved.

.

 

.

 

 

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 5 — the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 22 2013

This is the ninth in a series of articles about some of the findings from Devoncroft’s 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. 

 . 

This is the fifth post in a series of articles about how broadcast technology vendors were ranked and benchmarked on a variety of metrics by the respondents to the 2013 BBS.

Previous articles in this series described the 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2013 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2013 BBS Global Brand Opinion Leaders League Table, and the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table.

This article follows on from the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, by focusing on one of the most important metrics for any technology company – Quality.

 

2013 Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality Rankings

The broadcast prides itself on the fidelity of its sound and images, the perception of quality is a very important metric for broadcast technology vendors.

Many vendors use quality as one of the key components of their market positioning.  Likewise, many end-users include technical performance and quality as a part of their procurement strategies.

The table below shows the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table, which shows the top 30 ranked brands for “Quality” by 2013 BBS respondents.

An explanation of how these results were calculated can be found at the end of this article.

.
Please note that both audio and video brands are included in these rankings, and that the table below shown brands in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study. 

.

 

2013 BBS -- Quality League Table

.

This list contains a broad mix of vendors including large and small firms; single product and multi-product firms; global and regional players; and audio and video technology providers.

Given the diversity of the vendors in this list, it’s worth asking whether factors such as organization size, breadth of product range, geography, or technology impact the perception of quality.

Since the ultimate manifestation of quality is in the actual product delivered to end-users, it’s useful to understand what products are produced by the vendors on this list, and whether this has an impact on the perception of quality.

 

2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Quality Rankings by Frequency of Product Category

The table below shows the products produced by the vendors in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table, according the 2013 BBS segmentation.

.

2013 BBS -- Quality Rankings -- Frequency of Product Categories

 

.

Out of the thirty product categories in the 2013 BBS, a total of twenty are produced by the vendors in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table.

Product categories included in the 2013 BBS, that are NOT listed in this table include:

Broadcast Business Management Systems, Communication Links, Ingest / Transcoding / Streaming, Library & Storage Management, Near-line / Off-line, and Archival Storage, Playout / Transmission Servers, Production Servers, Workflow / Asset Management

 

The top three products in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table are audio products – Microphones, Audio Mixing Consoles, and Speakers.

This is an interesting data point. Although there are 30 product categories included in the 2013 BBS, only five are directly related to audio.  Yet, the top three product categories in the 2013 BBS Quality rankings are audio products. Why are audio brands so prevalent in these rankings?

One possibility is that for many people, audio is all about the quality and fidelity of the sound.  Thus quality is the ultimate metric for audio brands. Indeed, our research consistently shows that many pure-play audio companies have extremely high quality ratings.

Another thing to consider is that (as mentioned above in bold), the rankings posted on this website always contain both audio and video brands. Since there are fewer audio brands in the study, there may be a higher concentration of responses per brand on a relative basis when an audio professional responds to the survey.

Another issue is that the top 3 ranked product categories Microphones, Audio Mixing Consoles, and Speakers – are typically found in high-profile environments, and particularly in real-time or live environments where there are not always second chances to re-do a show, event, or recording.

Interestingly, the same can be said for many of the video-oriented products in the above chart.

Video products including cameras, production switchers, and video editing are typically found in live production or mission-critical studio applications. And the primary function of many test & measurement products, which are also produced by three of the brands in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table, is to measure quality and fidelity.

Many of these products tend to be high ticket items that are produced by the industry’s larger vendors. This begs the question of whether organization size plays a role in the perception of quality.  Larger companies often have a broader product offering, but does this translate into a higher perception of quality?

The table below examines the correlation between size of vendor / product range and the market’s perception of quality, by showing the number of product categories (as defined by the 2013 BBS segmentation) offered by each brand listed in this ranking.

.

2013 BBS -- Quality Rankings -- Frequency of Brands

.

Sure enough, the vendors at the top of this chart are larger vendors that provide multiple product lines.

Having said that, the majority of the vendors in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table are single product category companies (as defined by the 2013 BBS segmentation).

This shows that specialist vendors, whether large or small, who have expertise in a particular areas of technology are often able stand out from the rest of the market, including vendors who may be much larger.

 

Year-Over-Year Changes to the BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table

Twenty-four of vendors in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table were also listed in this ranking last year.

 

The following six companies are new entrants to the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table.  They are listed in this ranking in 2013, but they were not listed in 2012.

Blackmagic Design, Cisco, Leader Instruments, Riedel, RTS Intercom Systems, Yamaha

 

The following six brands were listed in the 2012 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Quality League Table, but are not listed in the 2013 rankings:

Clear-Com, Dolby, Isilon Systems/EMC, Mackie, Panasonic, Wheatstone

.

 

How These Results Were Calculated

Based on how they answered a series of screening questions in the 2013 BBS were answered, relevant brands were algorithmically determined for each research participant. Each 2013 BBS participant was then asked to rank a variety of relevant broadcast technology vendor brands for “Quality” on a scale of 1-10 — with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

Global response data from all BBS respondents was then aggregated and averaged in order to generate a global “Quality Score” for each brand based on these responses.

The brands with the top 30 scores for quality were then included in this ranking table. These brands were then sorted by alphabetical order to create the tables shown in this article.

The product table in this article was created by cross-referencing the top 30 ranking brands for global Quality Scores in the 2013 BBS with the product categories these brands produce, according to the 2013 BBS product segmentation.  The complete list of brands and product categories included in the 2013 BBS can be found here.

 

When reviewing this information, please note the following:

The inclusion of any brand in the tables in this article is dependent on available sample size.  The minimum sample size for inclusion in the tables shown herein is 30 respondents per cut of the data. Therefore it is possible that a highly regarded brand may have been excluded from any or all of the tables in this article due to insufficient sample size.

Both audio and video brands are included in the calculation of the rankings in this article, whereas these brands are typically separated in actual BBS reports. The inclusion of both audio and video brands may have a significant impact on the vendor brands included in these rankings.

All data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, NOT in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2013 BBS.

 

.

The information in this article is based on select findings from the 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. The BBS is published annually by Devoncroft Partners.

Unless otherwise specified, all data in this article measures the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2013 BBS, regardless of factors such as organization type, organization size, job title, purchasing and geographic location.  Please be aware that responses of individual organization types or geographic locations may be very different. Granular analysis of these results is available as part of various paid-for reports based on the 2013 BBS data set. For more information about this report, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

.

.

Related Content:

The 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) – overview of available reports, including covered brands and product categories

Largest Ever Study of Broadcast Market Reveals Most Important Industry Trends for 2013

Tracking the Evolution of Broadcast Industry Trends 2012 – 2013

Analyzing Where Money is Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry – The 2013 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Broadcast Technology Products Being Evaluated for Purchase in 2013 – 2014

Devoncroft Partners: 2013 Broadcast Industry Market Research Findings

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – The 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – The 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 3 — The 2013 BBS Global Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 4 – The 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2013. All Rights Reserved. Findings May Not Be Reproduced or Quoted Without Written Permission from Devoncroft Partners.

.

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 4 — the 2013 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
Aug 19 2013

This is the eighth in a series of articles about some of the findings from Devoncroft’s 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. 

 .

This is the fourth post in a series of articles about how broadcast technology vendors were ranked and benchmarked on a variety of metrics by the respondents to the 2013 BBS.

The first three posts in this series described the 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, the 2013 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table, and the 2013 BBS Global Brand Opinion Leaders League Table.

.

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

An explanation of how these results were calculated can be found at the end of this article.

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.

 

Please note that both audio and video brands are included in these rankings, and that the table below shown brands in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study. 

 

2013 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 2013 BBS, beginning with products and technology.

As shown in the chart below, these companies make products in 22 of the 30 product categories that we covered in the 2013 BBS.

.

 

2013 BBS -- Innovation Rankings -- Frequency of Product Categories

 

 

The top offerings provided by brands in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table are production switchers, pro audio products, and test and measurement.

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.

The chart below breaks down the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table by the number of product categories (as defined by the 2013 BBS segmentation) offered by each brand listed in this ranking.

 

2013 BBS -- Innovation Rankings -- Frequency of Brands.

.

What’s interesting about these rankings is that it includes the largest brands in the industry such as Cisco, Sony and Panasonic, alongside smaller (and relatively new) companies such as Elemental Technologies and Phabrix.

It’s also interesting to note that just under one-third of the companies listed in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, are pure-play audio vendors.

There are also quite a few software companies including Adobe, Autodesk, Elemental, Telestream, and Vizrt.

Another thing to note is that this ranking is once again dominated by companies that provide products in a single product category – 19 out of 30 brands in this list (up from 18 in 2012). 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. Sony and Snell provide products in the most categories in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, followed by Adobe, Blackmagic, and Panasonic.

Of course, companies are listed here based on how many 2013 BBS product categories they produce, which is not an absolute measure of the products offered be each vendor on this list. There are some very large companies on the list above who appear in just one 2013 BBS category.

.

Year-Over-Year Changes to BBS Innovation Rankings

The majority of vendors in the 2013 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table were also listed in this ranking last year.

 

The following new entrants to the BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table are listed in 2013 but were not listed last year:

Elemental Technologies, Leader, Telestream, Yamaha

 

The following brands were listed in the 2012 BBS Broadcast Technology Vendor Innovation League Table, but are not listed this year:

Angenieux, Mackie, Omneon, Salzbrenner Stagetec, T-VIPS

.

 

How These Results Were Calculated

2013 BBS participants were asked to provide their perception of the innovation of a variety of relevant broadcast technology vendor brands on a scale of 1-10 — with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

This data was then aggregated and averaged in order to generate the global score for each brand based on these responses.

The top 30 global brands for innovation were then sorted by alphabetical order to create the tables shown in this article.

 

When reviewing this information, please note the following:

The inclusion of any brand in the tables in this article is dependent on available sample size.  The minimum sample size for inclusion in the tables shown herein is 30 respondents per cut of the data. Therefore it is possible that a highly regarded brand may have been excluded from any or all of the tables in this article due to insufficient sample size.

Both audio and video brands are included herein, whereas these brands are typically separated in actual BBS reports.

All data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, NOT in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the 2013 BBS.

 

.

The information in this article is based on select findings from the 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. The BBS is published annually by Devoncroft Partners.

Unless otherwise specified, all data in this article measures the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2013 BBS, regardless of factors such as organization type, organization size, job title, purchasing and geographic location.  Please be aware that responses of individual organization types or geographic locations may be very different. Granular analysis of these results is available as part of various paid-for reports based on the 2013 BBS data set. For more information about this report, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 

 

.

.

Related Content:

The 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) – overview of available reports, including covered brands and product categories

Largest Ever Study of Broadcast Market Reveals Most Important Industry Trends for 2013

Tracking the Evolution of Broadcast Industry Trends 2012 – 2013

Analyzing Where Money is Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry – The 2013 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Broadcast Technology Products Being Evaluated for Purchase in 2013 – 2014

Devoncroft Partners: 2013 Broadcast Industry Market Research Findings

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – The 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – The 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 3 — The 2013 BBS Global Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

Previous Year: The 2012 BBS Innovation Leaders League Table

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2013. All Rights Reserved.

Findings May Not Be Reproduced or Quoted Without Written Permission from Devoncroft Partners.

.

.

Despite Continued Weakness in Europe, Vizrt Reports Growth and Improved Margins in Q2 2013

Broadcast technology vendor financials, Quarterly Results | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 13 2013

Vizrt reported that its revenue for the first quarter of 2013 was $31.7m, up 5% versus the same period a year ago, and up 17% versus the previous quarter.

Although the company says it continues to see softness in the European market, it had strong performances in both the Americas and APAC during the quarter.

“Considering the continued softness we experienced in our largest market, we are very pleased to have returned to growth,” said Vizrt CEO Martin Burkhalter. “Growth was driven by a strong performance for both the Americas and APAC. Growth was offset partially by continued weakness in Europe, which saw revenues decline by 9% compared to Q2 2012.

Gross margins for the second quarter of 2013 were 67%, up from 66% last year, and up from 65% last quarter.  In its earnings presentation, the company said it took a charge of $300,000 in the quarter for the amortization of intangible assets related to acquisitions.  Excluding these charges, gross margin for the quarter would have been 68%.

Vizrt management said it was able to improve its margins, despite challenging market conditions, because of the company’s “premium offering which helps customers realize their strategic objectives and add value by improving workflow efficiencies.”

Operating expenses for the quarter were $16.17m, up 1% versus last year, and up 4% versus the previous quarter. The company said it is continuing to focus on cost control, even as it increases its top

  • R&D expenses in the quarter were $4.8m (15% of revenue), up 3% versus the same period ago, and down 4% versus the previous quarter

 

  • Sales and marketing expenses in the quarter were $8.57m (27% of revenue), flat with the previous quarter and up 11% versus the previous quarter

 

  • General and administrative expenses in the quarter were $2.8m (9% of revenue), up 3% versus the same period a year ago, and up 1% versus the previous quarter.

 

EBITDA was $6.1m for the quarter, up 12 from $5.44m last year, and up 95% from $3.1m in the previous quarter.   The EBITDA margin for the quarter was 19% versus an EBITDA margin of 18% last year and 12% last quarter.

Net profit for the quarter was $3.6m, compared to a net loss of $3.75m last year, and up 204% versus last quarter’s net profit of $1.18m.

 

Product Line Results for the Quarter:

  • Broadcast Graphics (BG) accounted for $24.9m during the quarter (78% of total revenue versus 81% last quarter), an increase of 8% versus the same period ago, and an increase of 14% versus the previous quarter. The BG order backlog was $28.8m, up 9% versus last year, and up 7% versus the previous quarter.

 

  • Media Asset Management (MAM) revenue in the quarter was $5.66m (18% of total revenue versus 16% last quarter), up 5% versus the same period a year ago, and up 35% versus last quarter.   The MAM order backlog was $17.8m, down 1% versus last year, and down 1% versus last quarter

 

  • Online & Mobile (OLM) revenue in the quarter was $1.16m (3% of total revenue), down 32% versus last year, and up 33% versus last quarter.  The OLM order backlog was $3.7m, down 6% versus last year, and up 5% versus the previous quarter.

 

 

Geographic Performance for the Quarter:

Vizrt said it continued to experience weakness in the European market during the quarter, but that the Americas and APAC did well.

  • Revenue from EMEA was $13.6m (43% of total revenue versus 41% last quarter), down 9% versus the same period last year and up 22% versus last quarter

 

  • Americas revenue was $9.2m (29% of total revenue versus 35% last quarter), up 26% versus last year, and down 1% versus last quarter.

 

  • APAC revenue was $8.95 (28% of total revenue versus 24% last quarter), up 13% versus last year, and up 17% versus last quarter

 

The company ended the quarter with 590 employees, up from 582 last quarter, and $74.2m in cash, down 6% versus last quarter.

 

“We believe that the strategic nature of our product offering, in helping customers achieve financial and strategic objectives, puts our products in the “must have” premium category, which has allowed us to defend and grow margins,” said Burkhalter. “Both the 8% solid growth in BG and the 5% growth in MAM compared to Q2 2012 were driven by our global presence, and our ability to react to local economic trends, as witnessed in the Americas and APAC. The media landscape is very dynamic, and broadcasters need to invest in order to protect their competitive position.”

 

Results for first half of 2013

Vizrt’s revenue for the first six months of 2013 was $58.7m, down 5% versus the first half of 2012.

The net profit for the first half of the year was $4.8m, versus a loss of $2.2m for the first six months of 2012.

EBITDA for the first half of 2013 was $9.2m, down 16% versus the same period last year.  The EBITDA margin for the first half of 2013 was 16%, compared to 18% for the first half of 2012.

Gross margins for the first half of the year were 67%, down from 68% in H1 2012.

Operating expenses for the first six months of 2013 were $31.7m, down 4% versus the first six months of the previous year.

 

Business Outlook:

In its investor presnetaion, the company said “we believe that the European market will continue to be soft into H2 2013, but we anticipate this weakness to be more than offset by the relatively robust markets in APAC and the Americas, resulting in continued overall growth. We will continue to strengthen our technological and strategic leadership, while at the same time maintain our financial prudence and discipline.”

“For the coming months we foresee continuing weakness in the European market where broadcasters are investing on a strict “need to have” basis, said Burkhalter.” We anticipate this weakness to be more than offset by the relatively robust markets in APAC and the Americas. We believe that our global presence, and regionalized distribution and support capabilities will allow us to capitalize on these region specific opportunities, resulting in continued overall growth. We will continue to strengthen our technological and strategic leadership, while at the same time maintain our financial prudence and discipline.”

.

.

Related Content:

Press Release: Vizrt Reports H1 and Q2 2013 Results

Vizrt Q2 2013 Investor Presentation

Previous Quarter: Vizrt Q1 2013 Revenue Declines 15 Percent Due to Weakness in Europe

Previous Year: Vizrt Revenue Declines 6 Percent in Q2 2012 Due to Weakness in EMEA

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2013. All Rights Reserved.

.

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – The 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Brand Opinion League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 05 2013

This is the sixth in a series of articles about some of the findings from Devoncroft’s 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. 

 

Previous articles about the 2013 BBS discussed the most important broadcast industry trends, how the relative commercial importance of broadcast industry trends have changed over time, where money is currently being spent in the broadcast industry, broadcast technology products being evaluated for purchase in 2013 and 2014, and the 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table.

 

This is the second in a series of posts about how broadcast technology vendors were ranked and benchmarked on a variety of metrics by the respondents to the 2013 BBS.

The first post in this series described the 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, which shows how 2013 BBS respondents ranked broadcast vendor brands.

This post looks at how the global sample of broadcast professionals who participated in the 2013 BBS ranked their Net Change of Overall Opinion of the 151 broadcast technology vendors we covered in the study.

 

Net Change of Overall Opinion

While it’s good news for any vendor to achieve a good “overall opinion” ranking, this metric is somewhat one-sided because it relies solely 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. It is also necessary to take into account how these opinions have changed over time.

Once this information has been collected, we use it to create the Net Change of Overall Opinion Ranking, a metric that demonstrates which brands are perceived as getting better, and which are in decline, on an overall basis. Net Change in Overall Opinion provides a more balanced view each brand because it takes into account both the positive and negative perceptions of brands, along with how these opinions have changed over time.

An explanation of how these results were calculated can be found at the end of this article.

The complete list of vendor brands covered in the 2013 BBS is here.

 

The Net Change in Overall Opinion findings from the 2013 BBS 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 of each vendor 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.

When reading these results, please keep the following in mind.

 

Both audio and video brands are included in these rankings, and all response data shown herein is from the global sample of from all 2013 BBS participants, regardless of organization type, size, geographic location, or size of budget; and that actual results in the BBS Brand report may be different.

Please note that inclusion of any brand in any cut of the data shown the tables in this article is dependent on available sample size.  The minimum sample size for inclusion in these charts is 30 respondents per cut of the data. Therefore it is possible that a highly regarded brand was excluded from these findings based on sample size.

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


The 2013 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table:

2013 BBS -- 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion

 

 

A total of 53 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table (versus 59 in 2012 and 51 in 2011), illustrating the geographic variation of opinion. Analysis of these results shows that are some clear market leaders on a global basis, while others are strong on a regional basis.

It’s useful to understand how often each brand appears in the 2013 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table.

This is shown below, along with the equivalent data from both 2012 and 2011 for comparison.

 

Frequency of appearance of brands in the 2013 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table:

  • 10 brands appear four times (compared to 9 brands in 2012 and 13 brands in 2011), meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region

 

  • 13 brands appear three times (compared to 13 brands in 2012 and 10 brands in 2011)

 

  • 11 brands appear two times (compared to 11 brands in 2012 and 9 brands in 2011)

 

  • 19 brands appear one time (compared to 26 brands in 2102 and 19 brands in 2011).  This illustrates a fragmentation of opinion  about many brands based on geography

 .

 

Brands appearing four times in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:

 

  • 2013 BBS: Adobe, Aja Video, Autodesk, Blackmagic Design, Canon, Evertz, Panasonic, Riedel, Rohde & Schwarz, Sennheiser

 

  • 2012 BBS: Adobe, Avid, Blackmagic Design, Canon, Harmonic, Panasonic, Riedel, Sennheiser, Sony

 

  • 2011 BBS: Adobe, Aja Video, Apple, Blackmagic Design, Canon, Cisco, Genelec, Omneon, Panasonic, Riedel, Sennheiser, Sony, Tektronix

 

 

Brands appearing three times in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:

  • 2013 BBS: AmberFin, Angenieux, ateme, Cisco, Elemental Technologies, EVS, Harmonic, NewTek, Ross Video, Sony, Telestream, Vizrt, Wide Orbit

 

  • 2012 BBS: Aja Video, Apple, Autodesk, Digital Rapids, EVS, Front Porch Digital, NewTek, Omneon, Phabrix, Rhozet, Ross Video, Vizrt

 

  • 2011 BBS: Ateme,  Evertz, EVS, Harmonic, Net Insight, Rhozet, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, Shure, Vizrt

 

 

Brands appearing two times in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:

 

  • 2013 BBS: Adam, Ensemble, Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Net Insight, Neumann, Nevion, Phabrix, Screen Service, Snell, Solid State Logic

 

  • 2012 BBS: AmberFin, ateme, brightcove, Cisco, Gigawave, Net Insight, Rohde & Schwarz, Screen Service, Tektronix, Telecast, Wohler

 

  • 2011 BBS: AKG, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Ensemble,  Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Telestream, TVIPS, Wohler

 

 

Brands appearing once in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:

  • 2013 BBS: arvato / S4M, Avid, Axon, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Fujinon, Linear Acoustic, On-Air (Oasys), Ooyala, RTW, Shure, Soundcraft, Studer, Tektronix, Telecast, TVIPS, Wheatstone, Xen Data, Yamaha

 

  • 2012 BBS: Aspera, Axon, Calrec, Clear-Com, Dolby, Elemental Technologies, Ensemble, Envivio, Evertz, Genelec, Harris, Isilon Systems / EMC, Kaltura, Kit Digital, Lawo, Neumann, PubliTronic / Grass Valley, RTW, Schoeps, Shure, Snell, Telestream, Wheatstone, Wide Orbit, Wowza, Yamaha

 

  • 2011 BBS: 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 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table:  

In order to provide a better understanding of which brands were most highly ranked in each geographic region, 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.

.

2013 BBS -- 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion -- Frequency Analysis

 

 .

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 only in the global ranking of the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

Four brands achieved a top 30 ranking in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion league table, despite not being listed in the top 30 of any of the three geographic regions.  This may be a function of sample size.  As discussed above, there is a minimum sample size requirement for inclusion in each cut of the data presented in these chart, and the global ranking, by definition, has the largest overall sample.

  • Ensemble, On-Air Systems, Ooyala, Xen Data

 

Appearing only in one region of the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

The following  brands appear in one regional category of the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table, but do not appear in the global ranking:

  • Arvato/S4m, Avid, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Fujinon, Linear Acoustic, RTW, Shure, Soundcraft, Studer, Tektronix, Telecast, T-VIPS, Yamaha

 

Appearing only in the EMEA region in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

  • Arvato/S4m, Axon, RTW

.

Appearing only in the Asia-Pacific region in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

  • Avid, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Fujinon, Shure, Soundcraft, Studer, Tektronix, Yamaha

 

Appearing only in the Americas region in the 2013 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table

  • Telecast, T-VIPS, Wheatstone

.

 

How These Results Were Calculated

No company is perfect, and the brands we measured in the 2013 BBS are no different.  All brands in the 2013 BBS had both positive (got better) and negative (got worse) connotations associated with them.  There were also are significant percentage of respondents who said their opinion of a brand had “stayed the same.”

2013 BBS participants were asked to rank their opinion of broadcast technology vendor brands on a scale of 1-10 — with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

We then asked respondents whether their opinion of these brands has changed over the last few years – specifically whether they feel their opinion of each brand has “improved,” “declined” or “stayed the same.”

The Net Change in Overall Opinion for each brand was then calculated by subtracting the percentage of respondents who said a brand “got worse” from the percentage of respondents who said their opinion of a brand had “got better,” while ignoring the “stayed the same” responses.

This “change of opinion data” provides a more comprehensive view of how each brand is perceived by the market because it takes into account positive and negative perceptions.

 

 

Please note that inclusion of any brand in the tables in this article is dependent on available sample size.  The minimum sample size for inclusion in the tables shown herein is 30 respondents per cut of the data. Therefore it is possible that a highly regarded brand may have been excluded from any or all of the tables in this article due to insufficient sample size.

Also, 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 2013 BBS.

 

.

The information in this article is based on select findings from the 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands. Nearly 10,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries took part in the 2013 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever conducted in the broadcast industry. The BBS is published annually by Devoncroft Partners.

Unless otherwise specified, all data in this article measures the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2013 BBS, regardless of factors such as organization type, organization size, job title, purchasing and geographic location.  Please be aware that responses of individual organization types or geographic locations may be very different. Granular analysis of these results is available as part of various paid-for reports based on the 2013 BBS data set. For more information about this report, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

.

.

Related Content:

The 2013 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) – overview of available reports, including covered brands and product categories

Largest Ever Study of Broadcast Market Reveals Most Important Industry Trends for 2013

Tracking the Evolution of Broadcast Industry Trends 2012 – 2013

Analyzing Where Money is Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry – The 2013 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Broadcast Technology Products Being Evaluated for Purchase in 2013 – 2014

Devoncroft Partners: 2013 Broadcast Industry Market Research Findings

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – The 2013 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

Previous Year:  The 2012 BBS Net Change of Overall Brand Opinion League Table

.

© Devoncroft Partners. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

 

%d bloggers like this: