Flow of revenue statement in that article is not applicable to PCTR. PCTR builds infrastructure tools, not content. Content builders must buy infrastructure tools whether they're making a mint or not.
Look at app server tools as an example. Loads of dot com's have gone belly up and the majority of others haven't made a penny. But they still had to pay for infrastructure tools, and as a result, companies like ATG, Broadvision, BEA, etc. have done very, very, well.
What's nice is that the type of companies (entertainment content focused) outlined in the article are only a single source of revenue stream; there are plenty of other sources that may turn into viable revenue streams. Likewise, the inclusion of real-time, multi-user facilities in shock, flash, real audio/video, etc., may very well prompt completely different uses of these products prompting unexpected streams.
I continue to see enormous, exciting "possibilities" for their tech. The questions are the same as they've always been: 1. will they take advantage or, will competitors beat them to the punch; 2. will the space be large enough for multiple winners; 3. will they get the funding necessary to aggressively compete, and if not, will they remain a small player or will they partner, sellout, etc.
Valued at about 7 mil, I still love the risk/reward ratio.
jn |
