Software as a Service (SaaS)

Spin Ins – A Strategic Opportunity for Venture Capital and Large Software Companies?

May 16th, 2009 § 9 Comments

In my last blog entry, I asserted there has been a dearth of start-ups in the enterprise software market for at least the last 5 years. According to VentureSource, from a high of 506 enterprise-oriented software start-ups securing a Seed or Series A round in 2000, only 201 new enterprise-oriented software start-ups were funded in 2008 and the vast majority of those used a SaaS, PaaS, or IaaS business model. Very few traditional model enterprise-oriented software companies were funded at all, the notable exception being in enterprise search and analytics.

As a result, large software companies whose innovation/growth strategy has relied upon a steady stream of start-up company candidates to acquire may be faced with a shortage in the not-so-distant future. Consequently, companies that have traditionally relied upon their strategic software providers to deliver innovative new solutions to enable them to further optimize back office and front office operations will suffer.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Where have enterprise software start-ups gone? Why should we care? And, what can be done?

May 4th, 2009 § 7 Comments

While innovative enterprise software solutions are still needed, there is a dearth of funding for new enterprise-targeted software companies within the venture community. Why? Because enterprise IT - the target market for these solutions – and the incumbent enterprise IT software providers (e.g. Oracle, SAP, MS, IBM, etc.) have conspired to build a virtually impenetrable gauntlet for start-up software companies to overcome. If you – the start-up that is – are not part of a ‘blessed’ corporate architectural standard you will find selling your innovative enterprise software solution a very tough slog. You will bear the burden of extended sales cycles, high sales costs and increasingly smaller budgets already spoken for by the big brands. » Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Process Work v. Knowledge Work – The Emergence of Performance Management

March 29th, 2009 § 4 Comments

By now, those of you who’ve read my previous blogs realize I tend to only post something when I think I have something interesting to say. Unfortunately, the empirical data suggests that this doesn’t occur with great regularity! It’s my hope, though, since you’re investing your valuable time reading this that I am providing something useful to you.

With that, here are my latest thoughts that pertain to ‘process work’ and ‘knowledge’ work and why I think the software industry has done a reasonable job addressing the former and has until recently let down the latter. Let’s start out by defining the two terms.

I define ‘process work’ as those sets of predefined actions that a person must perform in order to accomplish a business task. These include things like: placing an order, posting a transaction to the general ledger, entering a customer’s contact information.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

The Capital Needed to Create a SaaS Company

December 30th, 2008 § 10 Comments

This is a follow on to my post on July 18th, 2008 titled “Does it Really Take $100M to Build a SaaS Business? Say it ain’t so, Joe!”. As part of some research I’ve been doing, I wanted to dig into the actual amount of capital it takes to make a successful SaaS company.

Wachovia Securities issued a report in May 2008 on the state of the SaaS market. On page 25, it shows amount of capital paid in prior to an IPO for 18 out of the 28 public SaaS companies. Here is that list below:

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Platform as a Service – PaaS: What’s Not to Like?

September 17th, 2008 § 2 Comments

Over the past year or so, PaaS – Platform as a Service - has emerged as a new and interesting strategy for Salesforce.com with Force.com and NetSuite with NS-BOS. The value proposition for developers is:

Object-oriented development environment for rapid prototyping and application development.
“Out-of-the-cloud’ integration with other applications developed on the platform
No need to invest in commodity operational infrastructure such as “ping, power, and pipe” and disaster recovery services which can be expensive to set up yet completely non-differentiating.

So, if you’re a SaaS application developer or investor, what’s not to like?

Well, first let’s talk about the SaaS business model.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Does it Really Take $100M to Build a SaaS Business? Say it ain’t so, Joe!

July 18th, 2008 § 3 Comments

Sarah Lacy, a reporter with BusinessWeek just issued this article about On Demand/SaaS businesses.

I had an opportunity to meet and get to know Sarah in 2004 because she did a long story about me and Siebel’s entrance into the OnDemand market. I have a lot of respect for her and her opinion. However, I take issue with a few of the conclusions one might reach by simply reading this article and taking it at face value.

On Demand or SaaS isn’t a panacea, it’s a business model. Companies won’t succeed simply because they are SaaS-based. You still have to build a compelling application that solves a real business problem that people will really use and pay money for. However, what the SaaS model has done is to give customers the ability to try a few seats and then “walk away” with relatively few sunk costs when a vendor fails to deliver real business value. Under the traditional enterprise model most customers needed months/years to do a pilot — which seldom gave them a complete picture - and once they committed they were committed forever because of the psychological and financial investment. So big projects like Oracle, PeopleSoft, Siebel, etc. rolled on even when it was clear that the customer wasn’t happy with the expense or the value.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

SaaS isn’t a Panacea for Success

June 8th, 2008 § 2 Comments

No one has ever accused entrepreneurs of being stupid which is why almost every new B2B software company emerging today is SaaS-based.

This is good because trying to build a software company using the traditional enterprise software model is just too difficult and expensive. Over the past 15 years, enterprise IT has developed a gauntlet (e.g. internal architectural standards, purchasing processes, etc.) that prevents all but the largest brands (e.g. IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, etc.) from selling to them.

So, the only way to sell to these companies is to bypass IT — at least as much as possible — and go directly to line of business owners. And, since the SaaS business model obviates the need for IT and is success-based (customers can cancel any time) business leaders in these companies are becoming more open to using these solutions for non-mission critical functions. This is primarily why SaaS holds such promise for new and innovative start ups and their investors.

That said, SaaS isn’t a panacea for success for these new companies.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Fund Raising: What a Venture Capitalist is Thinking

March 2nd, 2008 § 2 Comments

This is an excerpt from a recent interview I did with Advisor Garage – http://www.advisorgarage.com , a web community focused on helping entrepreneurs. I hope it gives you insight when you present to us, or any venture firm, to understand just what in the heck we are thinking as you’re presenting.

Venture Capitalist Gives Entrepreneurs Advice

Top Ten Questions:
1. Tell us about your Venture Capital Company.
InterWest Partners was established in 1979 and is a leading diversified venture capital firm currently investing InterWest IX, a $600 million fund. With more than $2B in capital under management, we take a long-term, collaborative approach to venture funding, providing early-stage and ongoing capital, management development and access to a broad network of resources.

InterWest is the lead investor in more than 70% of the investments we make, reflecting our ability to marshal resources and organize financings on behalf of our portfolio companies. We maintain relationships with our portfolio companies for an average of 5 years and in some cases for 10 years or more. An InterWest general partner serves as a director for 85% of the companies in our portfolio, often continuing to serve even after the partnership’s investment in the company has been returned.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

Creating Global Market Leadership

February 15th, 2008 § 0 Comments

The Power of Brand in the Technology Markets

I have listened to hundreds of presentations from entrepreneurs looking for funding since I joined InterWest Partners. They all have one thing in common: the majority of the presentation is spent on the product they are building and the market they are targeting.

Similarly, when a venture firm does its due diligence, it spends a significant amount of time and effort speaking with current or prospective customers and analysts to gauge their level of interest, the importance to the business, ROI, usage rates, etc.

This is all very laudable.

However, if you were to perform autopsies of technology start-ups that have failed, I think you would find that most were able to build the products they said they would—and that the customers who purchased them received more than marginal utility from them.

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter

The Rise of SaaS and Departmental Applications

February 15th, 2008 § 2 Comments

Market Overview

The enterprise software market, which includes a diverse set of software for different functions such as: HR, Sales, Marketing, Finance and IT is a mature market (with a range of 2% – 10% compound annual growth rate). This market is dominated by just a few global brands such as IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, and SAP. IT budget constraints and software complexity make it difficult enough for companies to support and maintain their current enterprise software let alone allow new vendors to enter the mix. As a result, IT organizations have created extensive policies to block new entrants, making it extraordinarily difficult for recent independent software vendors (ISVs) to break into the enterprise market. This, coupled with the high go-to-market cost structure of an enterprise software company has made the enterprise software market a relatively uninteresting investment area and caused innovation to stagnate in this field over the past decade. However, all of this may be poised to change due to Software as a Service (SaaS).

» Read the rest of this entry «

Follow Bruce on Twitter