Still can't justify the price difference between ENTU and VRSN
I think I can. Companies prefer the backend CA work done by a private entity, ergo VRSN's OnSite platform. For the sake of brevity: ENTU is a software company; VRSN is a service-oriented company with cutting-edge encryption technology. Companies want to service-out this work because most either don't understand the technology or don't want to be bothered doing this at all. This is why VRSN is the market leader, ergo it's valuation.
Also, regarding the views of analysts, here's a sample of the views of Forrester Research:
Forrester Research analyst Ted Julian says that he wouldn't trust the digital certification process to any company other than VeriSign. Choosing a CA that's juggling too many technologies, or one whose corporate parent's focus is elsewhere, is a risk, he claims. He cites Entrust Technologies, which acts as a CA but also develops enterprise security software, as a competitor that's spread too thin. "If you're doing a little encryption, a little messaging, and a little authorization," says Mr. Julian, "you're too diluted to be my CA."
redherring.com
BTW, perhaps the reason Royal Mail went to ENTU was because of ENTU's ties with the Canadian Government? Just curious.
Regards,
Pat
|
