Sridhar Vembu
(Credit: Zoho)
Vembu's analysis is based on a comparison of revenue per employee and profit per employee metrics. "The gap in revenue per employee between Google and SAP and Salesforce.com, for instance, indicates that Google would more likely be more interested in what eBay does or in monetizing YouTube than in Zoho or Salesforce.com's barely profitable business. Companies invest in what generates the best return on investment," Vembu explained to me.
(Credit:
Zoho)
In an e-mail explaining his financial analysis, Vembu wrote:
We simply don't believe Google has the rational business incentive to go deep into the business/IT software category. The lower revenue and profit per employee figures would be tolerable if there were huge growth opportunities there; but when very successful companies like Adobe and Intuit pull in revenues well shy of a Yahoo, when even the enterprise software leader SAP is the same size of Google (Google makes more in profit per employee than SAP makes in revenue per employee), it is fairly clear this market is not going to make a material contribution to Google's growth and profitability objectives. So what is Google's plan here? It is fairly obvious they are in it to put Microsoft on the defensive on its home turf, so that Microsoft's offensive capability in the internet is diminished. It is also perfectly clear why Microsoft wants to be an Internet player--as Google has shown, it is a higher margin business even than its monopoly-profit core business.
"Google's margins are a once in a lifetime occurrence, and Google will move in that high-growth direction--that's why Microsoft is so desperate about search. It has a higher growth rate. We are more worried about Microsoft than Google. Microsoft will address the Internet, but pulling down Office margins is a challenge for them. No company peacefully accepts a lowering of margins," Vembu said. "Our intention is to help erode Microsoft's profit margin, coming in from below." Zoho has built a more comprehensive suite of cloud-based apps than Google or Microsoft, and most of them are currently free to users.
Vembu cites the cost of sales and support as a drag on revenue per employee and profit per employee. "If salesforce is a proxy, it would be difficult for Google to justify the investment. More costs are associated with support than in R&D, even with on-demand software. The moment you have paying customers, the expectations are different, and Google is finding that out with recent Gmail problems," Vembu said. In addition, he noted that selling into small- and medium-size businesses is difficult, but the margin is higher than for large enterprise accounts. Adobe Systems and Intuit, for example, have more revenue per employee than Oracle or SAP.
Zoho's revenue per employee is mostly nonexistent given most of the Zoho suite is currently free and not-ad supported. Vembu estimates Zoho's revenue per employee will be in the $200,000 to $250,000 range when the revenue spigot is fully turned on at some undetermined point.
While Zoho behaves like a scrappy start-up, it is well-funded by India-based parent company AdventNet, which develops enterprise IT management software. AdventNet has 900 employees and is profitable, according to Vembu. "One of the privileges we enjoy as a private company is to not disclose revenue/profit numbers, which lets us do the kind of analysis on competitors they can't do on us," he joked.
The problem with Vembu's logic is that Google has an enormous pool of cash to invest in improving the economics of business and consumer productivity software suites. And, part of being a software company is having multiple and adjacent revenue and user data streams. Microsoft is a highly profitable software company with many adjacent divisions. Google Apps won't be as profitable as search, but it will be profitable and ties users into the Google platform and monetization engine.
If Google can attract consumers with its apps, gaining entry into small- and medium-size business won't be a huge profit-sucking sinkhole of sales and marketing. The search giant claims that more than 500,000 businesses and schools have signed up for the free and $50 per-user-per-year Google Apps. According to Dave Girouard, head of Google's enterprise division, the Google suite has about 10 million active users. Google can afford to invest in building the the market for Google Apps, and Microsoft will be forced to alter the economics of its Office business as cheap and capable cloud-based suites, with offline capabilities, gain traction.
What does that mean for Zoho? Run faster and hope that Google and Microsoft move slowly.
On this week's EIC Squared podcast, ZDNet's Larry Dignan and I discuss this week's big stories. It was a busy week on the search front. Adobe is providing Google and Yahoo with Flash Player technology that allows their search engine crawlers to find and index SWF content, including Flash "gadgets" such as buttons or menus and self-contained Flash Web sites. It's good to make more information accessible via search engines. However, Microsoft has been silent on whether Live Search would index Flash content.
In addition, Microsoft bought Powerset for about $100 million to enhance its search platforms. It's not a substitute for acquiring market share via Yahoo Search, but it provides a foundation for making the search experience far more compelling and precise in fewer clicks.
Of course, the Microhoo drama continues this week with the latest rumors. Larry is ready for this opera to be finished.
Finally, we discuss a judge's ruling in Viacom's $1 billion copyright infringement suit against Google and YouTube.
U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton ruled that records of every video watched by YouTube users, including login names and IP addresses, should be given to Viacom's lawyers. Larry said it was like combining the worst aspects of a fishing expedition and a witch hunt. Viacom is maintaining that it won't look at personal data and Google is asking for time to anonymize the information. If Judge Stanton's ruling stands, the last shreds of personal privacy on the Web could be thrown out the window.
The cloud is taking over the world of applications, casting a shadow on the desktop. The browser rules. Operating systems are simply plumbing. The Web is the new OS.
The tipping point for the on-demand, software-as-a-service applications has come. No software, as Marc Benioff likes to say, and no downloads. All you need is a browser and Google Apps, Facebook, Amazon.com, MyYahoo, HotMail, Zoho, Salesforce.com, TWiki, or whatever applications (sometimes known as services) you prefer for business or personal use.
If this is really the case, then why is my desktop littered with hybrid applications such as Thwirl, Yahoo Messenger, Alert Thingy, Skype, Gtalk, and a bunch of other widgets and toolbars.
It turns out that taking advantage of computing resources on client devices has some value. Adobe AIR and Microsoft Silverlight are breathing new life into the desktop and so-called rich Internet applications, or RIAs. Browsers are also benefiting from the new technologies. As ZDNet blogger and Adobe evangelist Ryan Stewart writes:
While I'm a huge advocate of desktop RIAs, I think the browser should still be getting a bunch of the attention. And in fact, the browser is still where most of the energy is and as a result a really good RIA platform will build on what they know in the browser and leverage that in their desktop clients.
Look at Adobe. We've got the Flash Player in the browser and you can use ActionScript as well as the Flex Framework to build browser RIAs. Then you can take that exact same knowledge/code and start building a desktop application on AIR. Look at Microsoft. You can build a C# and XAML application in Silverlight then take that code and start building a desktop application in WPF. Look at Java. You can write Java code along (soon) with JavaFX and run it in the browser or as a regular Java app. Seeing a pattern? Same thing with Curl. You can use the Curl language to build a Curl application in the browser and now with Nitro you can take that code and build a desktop application. Mozilla Prism is the most basic example because all you're basically doing is taking a browser application written in Ajax and turning it into a desktop application. The browser space is also where a lot of the Ajax frameworks exist and where companies like OpenLaszlo exist, so there's room for all of those to grow.
Data is increasing moving into the cloud, just as the bits designated as your money are accessed on a mainframe through an ATM card. But the desktop, the browser, and the cloud are meshing. Applications will increasingly become sturdy hybrids, synchronizing online and offline access, delivered with richer interfaces that take advantage of local processing power and OS software.
We'll see more on this topic as the Web 2.0 Expo get under way this week.
In this week's EIC Squared podcast, ZDNet's Larry Dignan and I discuss current events--Comcast and BitTorrent teaming up, Oracle's latest earnings, recent moves at Facebook, and Adobe Systems' introduction of Photoshop for the cloud.
For reference, here are links to some of the coverage:
BitTorrent president: Comcast agreement is a 'win'
Comcast and BitTorrent bury the hatchet
Oracle new license revenue triggers IT spending worries
Facebook goes hyper-viral with 'People You May Know'
Facebook ignores OpenSocial, embraces Windows Live Contacts API
- prev
- 1
- next





