• On TV.com: New TV sex symbol: Vintage black PORSCHE
September 18, 2007 8:02 AM PDT

Zimbra's valuation...a hint of things to come (UPDATED w/ more accurate sales numbers)

by Matt Asay
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 8 comments

I just heard from an unimpeachable source close to the company that Zimbra's revenue last year was ~$6 million. (Though the more interesting number is the significant increase they've had this year (on track to hit $20 million), which points to a strong future.) That makes the $350 million acquisition by Yahoo outstandingly profitable for Satish and crew. That's a ~60X valuation (on 12 months trailing revenues).

Was Yahoo foolish? Yahoo isn't a foolish company. I think it means that Yahoo believes Yahoo plus Zimbra is worth more than $350 million, and I think it's right. Citrix spent $500 million on a company that had $1 million in 12 months trailing revenues. Foolish? Not when you consider the future.

The future belongs to open source. Yahoo, Citrix and others are buying into that future now, in a similar way to how Google and others have been buying up SaaS/Web 2.0 companies (at heightened multiples). Microsoft is about to go on record as saying that open source can't offer sustainable business models.

What Microsoft means, of course, is that it doesn't know how to do so. And so it will continue to flail as the industry evolves beyond Microsoft's 20th century business model. Tant pis.

Incidentally, the company I worry about in all this is Red Hat. It's the industry's best chance for a standalone open-source ecosystem, and it can't afford to pay this kind of outsized multiple. Red Hat has to buy accretive companies to maintain its profit margins. It can't hide unprofitable companies on its balance sheet.

This may well lead to Tim O'Reilly's contention that proprietary companies, not open-source purists, will end up buying up all the open-source companies. Proprietary companies have money to burn and a future to secure. So long as they're buying open source to build the future rather than to stave it off, I'm not sure it matters.

P.S. Who knew that Zimbra would be so forthright on its Web site that the company was for sale? That "buy" button does refer to the company, doesn't it?

Buy Zimbra now

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay.
Recent posts from The Open Road
Why is Google Android beating Symbian?
The convenient fiction that Microsoft is evil
Apache: 'No jerks allowed'
Cloud to suck money out of market, report says
When open source isn't (open enough)
SAP wants an open Java process (pot, meet kettle)
Google shifts software value to operations, away from IP
Mobile: Still waiting to see what sticks
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
Open Source = 200x multiple?
by jlee888 September 18, 2007 11:19 AM PDT
Umm saying just because Zimbra is "Open Source", it is worth the 200x multiple is equivalent to saying a neon purple and orange car is worth 200x the market price because its "psychedelic".

I had expected some sort of in-depth analysis on how Yahoo! aims to recoup its 350M investment other than some "rah rah open source" comments.
Reply to this comment
More analysis
by afletcher2004 September 19, 2007 9:01 PM PDT
I don't think the intended scope of Matt's post was this deep, so feel free to check out one I've authored as a bit of a supplement.

http://alexfletcher.typepad.com/all_bets_off/2007/09/the-zimbra-acqu.html
Open Source = 200x multiple?
by jlee888 September 18, 2007 11:19 AM PDT
Umm saying just because Zimbra is "Open Source", it is worth the 200x multiple is equivalent to saying a neon purple and orange car is worth 200x the market price because its "psychedelic".

I had expected some sort of in-depth analysis on how Yahoo! aims to recoup its 350M investment other than some "rah rah open source" comments.
Reply to this comment
More analysis
by afletcher2004 September 19, 2007 9:01 PM PDT
I don't think the intended scope of Matt's post was this deep, so feel free to check out one I've authored as a bit of a supplement.

http://alexfletcher.typepad.com/all_bets_off/2007/09/the-zimbra-acqu.html
read your other blog posts
by jlee888 September 18, 2007 11:47 AM PDT
Apologies. I guess I should've read your article in relation to your other blog posts touting Open Source. Your statements now make more sense.

Reading this "post" (I guess its not an article per se) alone gave me the impression its just an OS puff piece.
Reply to this comment
read your other blog posts
by jlee888 September 18, 2007 11:47 AM PDT
Apologies. I guess I should've read your article in relation to your other blog posts touting Open Source. Your statements now make more sense.

Reading this "post" (I guess its not an article per se) alone gave me the impression its just an OS puff piece.
Reply to this comment
Growth rate
by tristanbob September 18, 2007 2:20 PM PDT
If you look at price/sales, then it is 100x. But what if you factor growth into that ratio? (PSG, similar to PEG)

Growth = (Current Year Sales - Previous Year Sales)/Previous Year Sales

Growth = (10 - 1.5)/(1.5) = 5.6 (or 560% growth)

PSG = (Price/Sales)/(Growth)

PSG = (350/10)/5.6 = 6.25

Perhaps this number is meaningless, since I have not heard of PSG, only PEG. Matt, do you have any numbers on earnings? That would also let us calculate margins...

Tristan
Reply to this comment
Growth rate
by tristanbob September 18, 2007 2:20 PM PDT
If you look at price/sales, then it is 100x. But what if you factor growth into that ratio? (PSG, similar to PEG)

Growth = (Current Year Sales - Previous Year Sales)/Previous Year Sales

Growth = (10 - 1.5)/(1.5) = 5.6 (or 560% growth)

PSG = (Price/Sales)/(Growth)

PSG = (350/10)/5.6 = 6.25

Perhaps this number is meaningless, since I have not heard of PSG, only PEG. Matt, do you have any numbers on earnings? That would also let us calculate margins...

Tristan
Reply to this comment
(8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

A CNET Conversation with Eric Schmidt

CNET's Tom Krazit and Molly Wood sit down with Google CEO Eric Schmidt to discuss the future of Android, the Chrome OS, the problem of real-time search indexing, and more.

Verizon tests sending RIAA copyright notices

The No. 2 phone company, known for its reluctance to intervene in antipiracy cases, strikes an agreement to forward copyright notices on behalf of the music industry.

advertisement

About The Open Road

Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to the Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is general manager of the Americas division and vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Open Road topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right