SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The New Economy and its Winners

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dave Doriguzzi who wrote (13112)7/26/2002 1:57:32 PM
From: Bill Harmond  Read Replies (2) of 57684
 
Here's the gist.

FullSource (the big reverse auction product) is very profitable and QuickSource (the day to day sourcing product) is less profitable.

So SWS surveyed 16 customers (no names or categories mentioned). One was new so they disregarded the result (didn't say whether they were using FS or QS) That leaves 15. Three were pilot customers that don't use FreeMarket any longer, so that leaves 12.

Of the twelve, four said they plan to use more FullSource, two about the same amount of FullSource, and five are migrating to QuickSource. (they added that of these five some used FullSource for big multi-year deals, and are using QuickSource for day-to-day.) Lastly one uses Quicksource exclusively.

The conclusion they draw form this is that there are early signs of cannibalization in the FreeMarkets base, and so they're lowering next years estimate fron .47 to .37 (up from this years .27, which they are not changing (not sure why), and they are keeping a 50% growth rate.

My problem with this is how does this point to canibalization if most are planning to use the same or more FullSource, which represents the most dollars? Plus how statictically reliable is a survey of just twelve unnamed, uncategorized users?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext