Wednesday, March 23, 2005

I admire Bloomberg

Last Sunday New York Times had an interesting article on Bloomberg. This is one company I admire and would like us, finEye, to emulate. How did Bloomberg get to be such a dominant player. Part of it is luck (luck is so important in any business), but you have to give it to Michael Bloomberg and the gang for having a great strategy to beat out Reuters and others.

What worked (and still does) for Bloomberg?
1. Strategic Investments - It is a private company and thus can invest for the long term. Investment in the news business is an example. Keeping the company private was a smart move.
2. Network Effects - Because of the messaging functions on the terminal. It is a known fact that people don't buy Bloomberg terminals just for its data. Customers want to be part of the Bloomberg messaging system. This is the most popular feature of their product. Not having a Bloomberg terminal would mean that you are not a top player.
3. Top notch service - I have talked to many money managers in the last two years and they all had good things to say about Bloomberg's service. I heard comments like "Never had a problem", "They fixed the problem in less than an hour" etc. Bloomberg's unflagging emphasis on meeting users' needs and providing top-drawer service helps it cement long-term customer relationships.

Tuesday, March 22, 2005

Soleil Securities raises an additional $11.0 million

Last week Soleil Securities raised $11 million from Bain Capital Ventures. So far these guys have raised close to $25 million. That is a lot of money to burn for a company that is essentially a new kind of "sell-side" firm. I am sure that they have a great business model to attract VC's like Bain and Bessemer. But what bothers me is the message. Read how they describe themselves.

"Soleil Securities Corporation, a member of NASD and SIPC, provides institutional investors value-added equity research produced by a network of independent research analysts and boutiques. It provides efficient trading services through which asset managers direct brokerage business as payment for research. It shares the commissions with its research partners."

How is Soleil different than other sell-side firms? Is Soleil a research firm? Where is the scalability in their model? I am not sure if I have the answers. Traditional sell-side firms employ their own analysts thus giving rise to conflicts of interest. Soleil does not "directly" employ any analysts. They get research from independent providers in the their network and pass it to the buy-side. Buy-side pays Soleil by giving them brokerage business. In my opinion Soleil is more of a brokerage firm who also provide research. And the coverage is not very large - 350 companies. But hey, it looks like they are doing well and market likes their offering. 600 customers - only metric that matters in the end.

Soleil's success (based on what they say. I have no other sources to verify their revenues/profits) gives me a lot of confidence. I think finEye's offering will be received well by the buy-side, who are hungry for good research. We have our story straight - Unbiased research, cover 5000 companies, exhaustive research insights in real-time, analysis of everything that is reported by a company (including all the footnotes, MD&A). I can't wait to get our product in the hands of a few customers to see their response. Exciting times ahead!!

Monday, March 21, 2005

Cost of Mutual Fund Ownership

The mutual fund industry needs to do some serious soul searching to serve the individual investors better. John Bogle commented on the issues facing the mutual fund industry in an article (Mutual Fund Industry 60 years later: For Better or Worse) published in CFA Digest. Accordning to Bogle, operating expenses of mutual funds have increased dramatically over the last 60 years. While the assets have increased 3600-fold since 1945, the mutual fund fees and operating expenses have increased 6,600-fold. It is a stunning rise. And this increase excludes all the cost saving coming from usage of soft dollars. Where are the economies of scale that the mutual fund industry talks and brags about all the time? This is another one of the revelations that makes me believe that the mutual fund industry is ready for a change. Just like manufacturing in the 80's and the IT industry in the late 90's, mutual fund industry needs to focus on reducing the costs and fundamentally change the way business is done.

Thursday, March 17, 2005

Apple - "Insanely Great" Product Design

Apple has been doing very well in the last two years and everyone is jumping on the bandwagon (including Paritosh who baught an Apple laptop) iPod is kicking butt and is selling like crazy. I think 20 million units have been sold so far. I am not crazy about gizmos, but I can't help but notice the beauty in these products from Apple. They are very cool, easy to use and people swear by them.

I see Apple's Infiite loop campus in Cupertino, CA everyday while driving to work. Today I decided to take a drive into the campus. I don't know why. But anyway, I drove around and came to the office and started thinking about what makes Apple great. Is it Steve Jobs?
It cannot be a single person, but a lot of credit should go to Steve Jobs. He is a great CEO. Most CEOs are focused on achieving their financial and operational goals, and on executing a strategy. But Jobs believes that Apple's ultimate advantage comes from its ability to make unique, or as he calls them, "insanely great" products. Hats off to him for figuring the "core competency" of his company. Love the passion in those two words - insanely great.

Here is what a former Apple employee had to say about Steve Jobs:
"I've been thinking hard about the Apple product-development process since I left," says design guru Donald Norman, co-founder the design consultants Nielsen Norman Group, who left Apple in 1997. "If you follow my guidelines, it will guarantee good design. But Steve Jobs doesn't want good design. He wants great design, and my method will never give you that. That takes a rare leader, who can bring both the cohesion and commitment and style. And Steve has it."

I guess that sums what it take to have a great product organization - cohesion, commitment and style.

Monday, March 14, 2005

Former analysts put stock in blogs

The world of financial research has changed. The article published in New York Business is interesting and proves that wall street is ready for a change. Some of the comments reflect the mood on the street.

"I try to bring information without translating that into opinion," he says. "My aim is to give investors all the raw material they need to make decisions."

"There are no shortcuts to generating a quality investment research team, and every time someone tries, people get hurt," says Nicholas Colas, director of research at Rochdale Securities and a former analyst at hedge fund SAC Capital.

----NY Business Article (in case the link does not work)------
A few choice words from David Jackson could send stocks soaring when he was a Morgan Stanley telecommunications analyst at the peak of the technology mania. But when the market nose-dived in 2002, Mr. Jackson was one of thousands who lost their jobs.

Today, Mr. Jackson has found a new vehicle that he hopes will restore some of the clout he once wielded: blogs.

Late last year, he started the Internet Stock Blog, where investors can read his lively analysis about companies such as Google and Yahoo. Although the blog generates only $1,000 a month in revenue, a tiny fraction of what he made on Wall Street, he's excited by the possibilities.

"It's incredibly liberating to be able to say what you think in real time and have people responding to you," says Mr. Jackson, who does most of his work from his Riverdale, Bronx, home after putting his three children to bed. "I want to be the place to go."

He's not alone. About a dozen former Wall Street research analysts have started blogs in the last few months in an effort to strut their smarts before a new audience and revamp reputations that took a severe beating when the stock market bubble popped. The trick for these analysts accustomed to pocketing multimillion-dollar paychecks is finding an audience and earning more than the few dollars that are now dribbling in.

Stock research blogs "are an interesting idea to attract attention," says Allan Rosenstein, a partner at financial services consultancy Capco. "But I have trouble seeing them as a distinct business."

While these nascent research sites might present interesting investment ideas, they also present risks.

Because few bloggers charge for their insights, they have the incentive to talk up stocks they own. It can also be hard to verify whether a blogger is really an experienced investment professional or some mischievous teenager. To some market experts, investment research blogs bear uncomfortable similarities to the Internet chat rooms that proved a breeding ground for unscrupulous promoters touting stinky stocks. The Securities and Exchange Commission eventually filed fraud charges against some of these promoters, though so far it has left blogs alone.

"There are no shortcuts to generating a quality investment research team, and every time someone tries, people get hurt," says Nicholas Colas, director of research at Rochdale Securities and a former analyst at hedge fund SAC Capital.

Mr. Jackson says he's mindful of the risks and does not tout stocks so he can sell them. He says he's turned down requests by chief executives to write about their shares and is careful not to make recommendations or predict directions of stocks.

"I try to bring information without translating that into opinion," he says. "My aim is to give investors all the raw material they need to make decisions."

He turned to the Web because the advantages that made him so valuable to investors at Morgan Stanley vanished with the bubble. He used to tool around in a private jet to meet companies that wanted his firm to take them public and frequently got advance word on corporate earnings. But regulators have since mandated a separation between analysts and investment bankers and now also require that companies disclose news to everyone at once rather than dole it out to selected parties.

Those reforms, however, make blogs possible because they've opened the doors to the same conference calls, press releases and regulatory filings available to brokerage house analysts. Even better, from their new perch bloggers are spared the angst of compliance lawyers scrutinizing their every word.

Stephen Castellano, a former associate telecommunications analyst, started his blog last year in hopes of attracting enough attention to help him land a job after he finishes his MBA in the spring. The strategy seems to be paying off: Recently, he heard from a research firm in India interested in hiring a U.S. sales representative.

"I couldn't go to a potential employer and show them a report with my name on it from 2000," Mr. Castellano says. "People would laugh at me."

Bill Burnham, a venture capitalist and former analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston, says his blog helps put him in touch with entrepreneurs with investment ideas. Even though his blog generated only $15 in revenue from ads last month, it's worth the time because it gives him a chance to pontificate about whatever is on his mind.

"A blog is 100 times better than trying to produce research at an investment bank," he says.

As for Mr. Jackson, he hopes his blog is the start of a new business that will prove as successful as Marketwatch.com, the financial news site that was recently sold to Dow Jones for more than half a billion dollars. He's already brought on two former brokerage house analysts and added two new sites with plans to offer up to 20 more sites, which he hopes will be sustained by ads as traffic increases.

In the meantime, he's managing money for a handful of people and can afford to wait.

"I'm prepared to spend five years on this," he says. "Blogs are successful because of the conversations they foster, and the question is how to apply that to equity research."