MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: Jo Ann Snover on February 21, 2018, 19:53
-
https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/16/bynder-acquires-digital-asset-management-service-webdam-from-shutterstock-for-49-1m/ (https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/16/bynder-acquires-digital-asset-management-service-webdam-from-shutterstock-for-49-1m/)
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bynder-announces-strategic-acquisition-webdam-120101196.html (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bynder-announces-strategic-acquisition-webdam-120101196.html)
http://digitalassetmanagementnews.org/vendors/bynders-webdam-acquisition-stronger-together-or-proof-that-the-current-dam-software-market-does-not-scale/ (http://digitalassetmanagementnews.org/vendors/bynders-webdam-acquisition-stronger-together-or-proof-that-the-current-dam-software-market-does-not-scale/)
I guess that means this platform thing is either (a) not working out or (b) doesn't need asset management? From one of the articles above:
"As such, this is a ‘divorce of convenience’ for Shutterstock and WebDAM, which Bynder are subsidising. I suspect Shutterstock have had a case of buyer’s remorse after getting involved in a human resource-intensive, low value, professional services + product business (which still defines the current DAM software market). Shutterstock realised that Bynder’s North American sales operations were not hitting targets, so they could strike a deal that was far more favourable for them than spinning it off independently again or trying to find some other larger tech vendor to take it on (and having to write-off the expenditure incurred for less than the cash invested back in 2014). It’s a great piece of business (for Shutterstock)."
I took a look at Glassdoor (https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Shutterstock-Reviews-E270840.htm) to see if there was any hint of what might be up, and although there isn't, there are some pretty scathing comments about Oringer, high turnover rates in the C-suite and a lack of direction (along with the happy news from current employees that earlier posters had alleged were HR-directed plants).
I think we get SS Q4 and full year 2017 results tomorrow...
-
We all know that the failure of the software webdam to make SS work is what caused the divorce. Maybe this is good news.
-
Bynder is a Dutch company and they think that Webdam is an important asset for them
https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/16/bynder-acquires-digital-asset-management-service-webdam-from-shutterstock-for-49-1m/
I think its just that it was useless for Shutterstock. Bynder is a leader in the digital asset management space.
-
For completeness' sake, here's a link to the earning's call transcript:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4150291-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-q4-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript
Regarding Webdam, Jon effectively says that they thought it would help them get the enterprise customer, but it turned out it was a separate business, so they sold it. They disclosed that they paid $14.4m for Webdam in 2014
Enterprise (as a portion of total SS business) grew 26% over 2016 and now represents 34% of SS's total business. Ecommerce revenue (the subs and web-site-available packages part of the business) grew 10% - i.e. less quickly than the Enterprise business.
-
For completeness' sake, here's a link to the earning's call transcript:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4150291-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-q4-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript
Regarding Webdam, Jon effectively says that they thought it would help them get the enterprise customer, but it turned out it was a separate business, so they sold it. They disclosed that they paid $14.4m for Webdam in 2014
Enterprise (as a portion of total SS business) grew 26% over 2016 and now represents 34% of SS's total business. Ecommerce revenue (the subs and web-site-available packages part of the business) grew 10% - i.e. less quickly than the Enterprise business.
But the ecommerce part of the business accounts for much larger than enterprise so any % increases, whilst smaller, will account for a much larger $ figure