Non-Linear Growth

A glimpse around the next corner; mind the curves.

Payments: A day on the inside

Earlier this week, I participated in a truly special event, the Lydian Roundtable. Lydian is a gathering of the best and brightest in the electronic payment industry and is hosted by my friends at Market Platform Dynamics, David Evans and Karen Webster. Every year, they bring together 50 to 100 key executives in the industry to discuss what is next in payments.

Lydian should not be mistaken for a conference. Rather, it is a discussion about what matters in the industry – today and in the future –  lead not by a conference organizer, but rather by the attendees. Everyone in attendance had participative responsibilities; speaking on a panel, giving a presentation on an issue, etc. For my part, Karen and David asked me to moderate a panel on Innovators in Payment. Doing the panel and in general interacting with the high-caliber of attendees was a real treat for me. And the best thing about the day is that I was one of only two VCs in attendance. Sorry fellow VCs but I’d much rather spend the day hanging out with industry folks.

As I absorbed the day, a couple of observations stuck out.

Mobile: When not if

There was near-perfect unanimity about mobile’s role in electronic payment; it will be big. But an equal level of unanimity that it was not clear when mobile would play a meaningful role. Personally, I attribute this to the incredible number of players that are required to collaborate in order to launch a true mobile payment platform and to tie it into the systems that matter at the point of sale. There is also that issue about five different players in the value chain each wanting 30% of the economics. The math just doesnt’ work. With there being no representatives from mobile carriers in the room, there was lots of dancing around the fact that the payments industry wants mobile to be another dumb pipe. No one would say it explicitly, but the intent was clear enough.

The Future: A payments operating system

Most of the innovation in payments is happening at the application layer of the value chain. Payments are increasingly being integrated into the workflow applications (software and web-based) that small businesses, retailers and people use to collect and move money. Innovation at the app layer helps everyone in the industry, even the infrastructure/network players, because it provides a new growth opportunity. Unfortunately, the industry is ill-equiped to serve the needs of nimble, fast-moving applications developers, given its legacy technology infrastructure base. The existing infrastructure is good at one thing; working efficiently at scale. What is required is a new paradigm where the network players continue to benefit from scale economies, but open up their services infrastructure to app developers who can create new value and transactions at the edge of the network. I like to think of this as a payments operating system. David Evans drew an analogy to what both Facebook and the iPhone have done for applications developers. While those analogies are imperfect, they are reflective of the application innovation and growth payment can experience if it exposes its services core to innovation. I just happen to be an investor in IP Commerce which is executing this exact opportunity. I was excited to hear the industry is aligned on the need.

Social Payments: What is in store

Everyone is talking about social media and its intersection with payments. The incredible early volume of micro-payment within social networking platforms like Facebook and in social-related applications like gaming is truly impressive. But relegating the intersection of payment and social media to these digital goods category would leave incredible opportunities untapped. Although Facebook was not present, everyone is wondering how their payment strategy will evolve, having hired 50+ hardcore payments people in recent months. Stay tuned.

A hearty thanks to David and Karen for organizing the Lydian Roundtable. I was  honored by the opportunity to participate.

Filed under: Conferences, Payments, , , , ,

The future is in services

Last week, I attended GigaOm’s Structure ’09 Conference: Put Cloud Computing to Work. It was worthwhile to attend and I intend to return next year. It was exciting to see how the services business model is being rapidly adopted by the technology-delivery value-chain.

In a talk titled The Cloud in Context, Russ Daniels, VP and CTO of Cloud Services Strategy at HP put it most succinctly, describing HP’s vision as:

“Everything is a Service”.

Full video of Daniels’ talk here. While the “everything is a service” mantra is almost certainly overreaching, it drives home an undeniable point; the action is in services. To make it fully, I think you have to start with the view from the customer’s perspective. What the customer wants is functionality that helps them achieve a business objective delivered at a total cost of ownership that is less than the value they can extract from the functionality. Issues of security and control aside for a moment, the customer is mercenary about this and will adopt the delivery method that gives them the functionality they want with the best ROI. Said another way, customers are becoming delivery-model agnostic.

It is no wonder then that the operating model through which value is delivered to customers (whether enterprise, smb or consumer) is turning away from products and toward services. It is well documented that in many cases, the services model has an ROI advantage over the product model. At a macro level, I tend to frame the transformation technology markets are undergoing as one where products are turning into services.

Products turning into services

Consider the transformation taking place in each of the following areas:

Value Proposition Product Delivery Model Services Delivery Model
Application level functionality Shrink-wrapped Software Software as a Service
Data storage Hardware Storage as a Service
Computing power/Processing Web Servers Computing as a Service

In each case, the value proposition – once delivered to the customer in the form of a one-time sale/license product – can now be accessed by the customer through a CapEx light service. Customers are dropping the CapEx and OpEx associated with managing IT infrastructure for pure OpEx in the form of services.

An Investors View

While technology plays a key role in enabling the trend toward services, the trend itself is not fundamentally about technology. Rather, the opportunity offered by the cloud is a more efficient operating model; the service operating model. This creates a new layer to the technology value chain; the services layer. Any time a new layer is added to a value chain, new investment opportunities are created and pre-existing layers of the value chain are at risk. From a venture investor’s point of view, this forces a rethinking of investment approaches.

An ecosystem play

The new investment opportunities in the cloud go way beyond the traditional IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS layers of the stack, although there are opportunities within each of those categories. Each of these layers will require its own support ecosystem to achieve its full potential. These are often referred to as enablers. Enablers are interesting investment opportunities, because they enable the investor to play the momentum of a category. For example, an investment in a SaaS enabler that provides billing, operating support and other capabilities to SaaS developers is a play on the success of SaaS as a category as opposed to any one SaaS operator. If the category you “enable” fails, like the mobile virtual network operator category, your enabler will fail, like the mobile virtual network enablers failed. But if the category you are enabling is successful, the rising tide is likely to lift your boat too, so long as you have a valuable service.

Existing value chain is threatened

The emergence of the service layer is facilitated by massive improvements in networking, computing, storage and software, including virtualization. What is ironic is that the emergence of the services layer threatens the very same product vendors that have facilitated its development. In the product oriented technology value chain, product vendors (software, storage, computing) sold to end users; enterprises, small businesses and consumers. In a services oriented value chain, these same product vendors sell to the service providers (IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS). For an investor there are two implications. The first is that those product companies just lost access to the end customer, replaced by the relationship between the service provider and the customer. The second implication is less obvious, but more threatening. The services business is a business of economies of scale. It requires a significant up-front investment in service delivery infrastructure, but has very low margin costs for each new customer added. The result is that sub-scale service operators can’t compete; and the big get bigger. This tends to restult in a concentrated service provider market, consolidating buying power, which squeezes margins of  the suppliers to the service providers. Those of us who have roots in the services sectors understand this phenomenon quite well. We have a saying at Meritage about the communications equipment space that I’ve grown fond of; “there are too many vendors and not enough customers”. This is one of the many reasons we don’t invest in communications equipment, but we love the communications services landscape.

The point is, if I were a product company focused on selling software, storage, or computing, I’d be frightened right now because my sales model is going to change dramatically over the coming ten years and not in my favor. The “On the Shoulders of Giants” panel at Structure really drove this message home. The panel, moderated by Jonathan Heiliger of Facebook, included ops leaders from Microsoft, MySpace, Google, Yahoo! And LinkedIn. These guys push their vendors hard. Heck, Google designs its own hardware and considers it a competitive advantage. Product vendors can expect more of the same treatment with the emergence of big cloud services operators like Amazon, Salesforce.com and others.

It is no wonder then that every major product vendor, from SAP to EMC is stuck in a seemingly bipolar tug of war between their legacy product businesses and their emerging attempts to run services platforms. Unfortunately, the key success factors for running a product-oriented company don’t translate well into a services environment.

Implications for Venture Capital

Participants in the technology supply chain aren’t the only ones struggling with the implications of the cloud’s emergence. The venture community is as well. It turns out that investing in services businesses demands a different skillset and philosophy than investing in product companies.

Because most services businesses go to market with a recurring revenue business model, the economics of the business are much harder to evaluate and the profitability is back-end loaded. In a prior post, I wrote about The economics of on-demand services, which includes an evaluation of unit factors like ARPU, churn, service delivery costs, etc. This is sufficiently more complicated than the economics of hardware; sell a unit, collect the revenue and lock in your gross margin on the sale.

The net result is that services businesses can be quite capital intensive, even if the market responds well to the service. It is more capital efficient than was the case when you had to build your own network to deliver a service (think cable), but still more capital intensive than product investing. As a result, investing in services is not for the faint of heart. Early indicators of success that are so prevalent in the product world are harder to come identify, except with an expert eye. It takes a tremendous amount of patience and in some cases stubborn conviction to be successful in services investing.

The opportunity for investors in the cloud is real, but only for those with an appropriate long-term company building philosophy and a level of comfort with the services business model.

Filed under: Cloud, Conferences, Themes, Venture Capital, , , , , , ,

Reactions from the Glue Conference

Last week I attended the Glue Conference here in Denver. As the name suggests, Glue is all about connecting things on the web; specifically, connecting infrastructure based services, to platform services through to applications and SaaS based services. Thematically, Glue is a rare targeted conference that fits well with my investment interests, which casually I describe as “all about platforms and services”. To have this conference in my “back-yard” was a real treat. First about the conference, I have to say that Eric Norlin, the conference coordinator did a great job with the agenda, which came off without a hitch. Eric made what is inherently a chaotic process look easy; no small feat. He had a big assist from the Foundry Group guys, and in particular Seth Levine. Great job to all!

A couple of key observations struck me after I’d had a chance to digest the two-day agenda and I wanted to share them here.

Bright Light on Services: For some time, I have believed that we were in the early stages of a major wave of service-based innovation. Certainly, there remains innovation in products and technologies that facilitate these services, but increasingly, services are where the action is. As if I needed further evidence, Glue offered it.  The amount of innovation going on in the loosely coupled web is staggering, all facilitated by cloud-based services delivery platforms.

“The Cloud” Remains Early: You know you are early in a market cycle when no-one can agree on the definition of the market. The cloud, its boundaries, remain amorphous and poorly defined. This is not to say that the opportunity isn’t real, it is simply to say that the market has yet to sort itself out with common language that has shared meaning. The same terms are used to describe varying concepts. Take the simple stack-based construct of a) infrastructure as a service, b) platform as a service and c) software as a service; where the lines of demarcation are between these layers of the stack remain fuzzy.

 One Size Does not Fit All: While one may be able to define the common architectural and infrastructure layers of the cloud with common language, applying them to specific business problems will take a much more flexible construct. The early innovation in the cloud seems to be in the social networking space where the use of APIs and cloud based service delivery platforms are comfortable to engineers. But I was amazed at how cavalier those with a focus on social were about applying cloud based principles to the enterprise space. I asked several people at the conference who would be accountable for quality of service, uptime, reliability, etc. to the the enterprise customer of small business owner in a loosley coupled application environment where multiple “services” were integrated into a single application environment (for example a third-party calendar application integrated into a CRM application. The answer I typically got was; “well the calendar is a small application so its no big deal if it goes down.” Really? Its as if I was speaking a different language. Krishnan Submaranian and I had the one thoughtful conversation I had at the conference on this topic. The topic of our conversation was “whose throat do you choke”, which he blogged on today. I couldn’t agree more with his post. Cloud and loosley coupled application developers will have to internalize these issues if they are to suceed in the enterprise and smb market.

 The Big Barriers: There are some big unresolved questions that I believe must be answered before one can expect massive customer adoption of cloud based computing platforms. The first category is around data portabilty and ownership. Who owns the data? How does the data get transported from one platform to another? Will the cloud platform vendors adopt open platform business practices? There was alot of discussion about standards as the “way to solve these issues”. I see it a bit differently, which is to say that until platform vendors adopt open business practices (as opposed to “standards” which are subject to interpretation), the cloud will hold itself back. Vendors will have to learn to differentiate their services on factors that are fundamentally valuable to customers, as opposed to holding customers hostage through data lock-in.

All in all, if you are intersted in the cloud and the loosley coupled, web, you really should attend Glue next year. I had a great couple of days, met some great people and learned alot. Most of all, I remain excited about the investment prospects in this area.

If you would like a more granular review of the two-day agenda, the guys at Cloud Ave. guys did a nice two-part piece which you can find here: Part 1; Part 2.

Filed under: Cloud, Conferences,

My Twitter Feed

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.