Axiell Group Expands
April 8, 2013
The Swedish Axiell Group AB is developing making moves with the acquisition of the Dutch company Adlib Information Systems. Currently Axiell Group develops as well as supplies advanced IT systems and services for clients such as archives, museums, libraries and also schools. The Journalism.co.uk article “The Swedish Axiell Group in global expansion: Acquisition of Adlib Information Systems makes Axiell the largest in Europe” talks about the big merger. This new record-breaking deal will make Axiell one of the five largest players in the global market. Not only will they gain clients in 30 counties, this merger will provide the platform for them to continue to grow internationally which is one of Axiell’s ultimate goals. Joel Sommerfeldt, CEO of Axiell Group AB made the following statement.
“We are convinced that the combined expertise of the two companies will help us to boost our offer towards the museums, archives and specialist libraries sector all over the world, and we regard this as an important part of our strategy.”
Bert Degenhart Drenth, CEO of Adlib and Marijke van der Kwartel, CFO will continue their work with the company and will become a part of the Axiell management team. Bert Degenhart Drenth, CEO Adlib Information Systems had the following to say
“We at Adlib are very proud to have become a part of the Axiell group. I feel that our combined products, markets and geographic spread enables us to take the next step into the future. However, this is not only important to us, but equally important for our customers, who will benefit from a truly European and sustainable supplier for their mission critical systems. Together we can do more: offer fully integrated solutions for Libraries, Museums and Archives on a large scale.”
The Axiell Group is definitely doing big things and from here their future looks bright.
April Holmes, April 08, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Google Adds Another AI Academic to the Mix
March 29, 2013
A recent career move from prominent algorithm designer Geoffrey Hinton has big implications, according to blogger Mohammed AlQuraishi’s post, “What Hinton’s Google Move Says About the Future of Machine Learning.” Hinton, an esteemed computer science professor at the University of Toronto, recently sold his neural-network machine-learning startup DNNresearch to Google. Though not transferring full-time to Google, the scientist reportedly plans to help the company implement his brainchild while remaining on at the university.
This development follows Google’s pursuit of several other gifted academic minds that specialize in large-scale machine learning. AlQuraishi says these moves indicate the future of machine learning and artificial intelligence. He writes:
“Machine learning in general is increasingly becoming dependent on large-scale data sets. In particular, the recent successes in deep learning have all relied on access to massive data sets and massive computing power. I believe it will become increasingly difficult to explore the algorithmic space without such access, and without the concomitant engineering expertise that is required. The behavior of machine learning algorithms, particularly neural networks, is dependent in a nonlinear fashion on the amount of data and computing power used. An algorithm that appears to be performing poorly on small data sets and short training times can begin to perform considerably better when these limitations are removed. This has in fact been in a nutshell the reason for the recent resurgence in neural networks.”
It is also the reason, the article asserts, that research in the area is destined to move from academia to the commercial sector. The piece goes on to compare what is happening now with the last century’s shift, when the development of computers moved from universities, supported by government funding, to the industrial sector. It is a thought-provoking comparison; the one-page article is worth a look.
Is AlQuraishi right, are the machine-learning breakthroughs about to shift to the corporate realm? If so, will that be good or bad for consumers? Stay tuned.
Cynthia Murrell, March 29, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
IBM Launching New Collaborative Communications Products Including Upgrade to Connections
February 26, 2013
The IBM announcement that it will be rolling out new communication products and new upgrades for its existing social networking product, Connections hasn’t really come as a big shock to many. IBM has spent time and money acquiring new technologies and working to integrate those technologies.
CIO’s “IBM To Beef Up Content Management, Analytics In Connections Enterprise Social Product,” takes consumers through some of the basic changes they can expect to see when the products are unveiled on Monday at Connect 2013.
“At a press conference after the session, Mike Rhodin, senior vice president of IBM’s Software Solutions Group, said that the impact of enterprise social technologies in collaboration and front-office business processes like HR and marketing amounts to a “generational shift” that is transforming how companies function, and will do so for the next two decades.”
We aren’t really told which acquisitions are responsible for which upgrades and integrations but if IBM’s dreams come true, the new content management function of Connections will rival that of Microsoft’s SharePoint, a big assertion for sure.
The IBM Employee Experience Suite is one of the few newly designed products that fully explains where the new upgrades came from, in this instance, the human resource management apps are courtesy of the $1.3 billion acquisition of Kenexa.
While still a little cloudy on the content, it will be interesting to keep an eye on IBM over the next year and not just at its product reveal early next week. It’s a sink or swim time in business technology with so many up and coming developers and technologies just waiting in the wings for an opportunity. We’ll see how IBM continues to stack up.
Leslie Radcliff, February 26, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Google Acquires Channel Intelligence
February 21, 2013
We thought search was Google Plus. Now Google is morphing into a tracking outfit? Business Insider reveals that the search giant has snapped up a sales-tracking business in, “Google Spends $125 Million on Channel Intelligence to Improve Google Shopping.”
Writer Jay Yarrow reports that Channel Intelligence (CI) provides solutions that boost online traffic for retailers of products in many categories. The company’s blog speaks of working with Google’s shopping division. Yarrow believes he knows why Google made this move:
“One of the looming threats for Google is the continued strength of Amazon. When people want to buy stuff online, they will skip Google and head straight to Amazon. Inside Amazon they will search, and then buy stuff.
“Google’s business is built around people searching on Google for things to buy. That’s the most valuable search from a commercial perspective. Google is trying to improve its shopping services to combat users tendency to go straight to Amazon.
“We assume CI will be a part of improving shopping so that when people search on Google for products it will list better, more relevant results for users.”
Probably a good guess. But will it help, or is the Amazon habit already too entrenched?
Yarrow includes the press release from the tracking firm’s parent company, ICG, in his article. Channel Intelligence is headquartered in Orlando, Florida. Just a few of its many prominent clients include Target, Microsoft, and General Electric.
Cynthia Murrell, February 21, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Salesforce Acquires Entropy Soft
February 7, 2013
Connectors are important. If a system cannot acquire content from a system, the fanciest text processing system cannot do its work. Years ago Oracle acquired Stellent which had snapped up Outside In. Now Salesforce has followed in Oracle’s footsteps with its acquisition of Entropy Soft. (I assume the story “Salesforce.com Has Acquired French Startup EntropySoft.”) Entropy Soft is not a start up in my opinion. The company was set up in 2005 or so. According to the write up, Entropy Soft had about $3.5 million in funding. Details are limited. The question which the deal raises is, “What services will Salesforce introduce which acquires software to acquire diverse enterprise content?”
A list of Entropy Soft connectors is no longer available online. According to my files, Entropy Soft has more than 40 connectors. These include:
- Microsoft SharePoint
- IBM Lotus Quickplace
- Hummingbird DM
- Alfresco
- FileNet
- Interwoven
- EMC Documentum
Update: A list of Oracle connectors is at http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/search/oses/ses-connectors-178226.pdf
Stephen E Arnold, February 7, 2013
Thoughts about Commercial Databases: 2013
January 29, 2013
After the dress rehearsal for my weaponized information webinar, a couple of librarians and I were talking about the commercial database business. I narrowed the focus to the commercial outfits selling primary and secondary information to libraries and other professionals; namely, to the legal and health care sectors.
In a nutshell, the digital future does not look too bright for companies such as:
- Ebsco Electronic Publishing (everything but the kitchen sink coverage)
- Elsevier (scientific and technical with Fast Search in its background)
- ProQuest (everything but the kitchen sink coverage plus Dialog)
- Thomson Reuters (multiple disciplines, including financial real time info)
- Wolters Kluwer (mostly legal and medical and a truckload of individual brands)
I just reread “Why Acquisitions Fail: The Five Main Factors by Pearson Education. This outfit has a long and storied past. The irony of Pearson Education explaining the problems of making an acquisition work is interesting but not germane to the main points in the write up. the fact that this item was available to me without charge via the Internet is amusing to me as well. Here’s what the Pearson analyst suggests about the causes of failure:
Survey after survey has proclaimed that most acquisitions fail. Denzil Rankine’s Executive Briefing on Why Acquisitions Fail (FT Prentice Hall) examines why. There are five key factors, which we will examine below:
- Flawed business logic
- Flawed understanding of the new business
- Flawed deal management
- Flawed integration management
- Flawed corporate development
No argument from me. The business model for these firms has been built on selling “must have” information to markets who need the information to do their job. The reason for the stress on this group of companies is that the traditional customers are strapped for cash or have lower cost alternatives.
If one of these outfits buys a company, the likelihood that the acquisition will be a home run revenue success is low. These five companies are bottom-line oriented, so the acquisitions will have to perform. The idea of massive investment to realize the promise of the purchase is not in the game plan.
So big traditional commercial database companies have to find a way to work around the Pearson Education hurdles. Let me consider some of the options available to the Ebscos, Elseviers, ProQuests, Thomsons, and Wolters Kluwers of the world. (Yes, there are oligopolies in a number of other countries, not just the US and Western Europe.)
The Hail, Mary Deal
This is the option which makes investment bankers’ and deal brokers’ hearts go pitty patter. We know how that approach works.
Buy One Another
The idea is that no other outfit wants to buy commercial database companies. Ergo: These outfits buy one another in some combination. Good for the investment bankers but long term, the customers may not be able to cope with ever increasing prices. Librarians, lawyers, and accountants are not exactly in a GEICO made of money mode.
The Microsoft Dell Variant
The idea is that a third party like Google buys one or more commercial database companies and monetizes the content with ads. (I would lobby for this if I were attached to a giant money machine like the Google.)
Fire Sale
I think that Thomson Reuters’ effort to get out of the health fraud business makes clear that the price offered kills the deals. Nevertheless, some of the commercial database publishers may be forced to chop off fingers and toes to keep the core alive. Highly probable path opine I.
Raise Prices and Innovate from Within
This option keeps the Board of Directors engaged. The reality is that such innovation goes nowhere. Ah, I am looking forward to annoyed vice presidents asserting, “I am innovative. We do innovate.” Okay, okay.
Net net?
Big changes are coming for commercial database producers, access to curated content, and the quality of the commercial information. Lawyers are looking to cut costs. No good for Lexis and West. Librarians are under severe financial pressure. Accountants? Accountants don’t want to spend their own money.
Looks like the future is moving in directions different from what these traditional, commercial database producers are going. I suppose after a couple of decades of evolution, the arrival of the End of Times is tough to accept.
Disagree? Agree? Surprise me. Keep in mind that I don’t have a stake in these companies and find myself baffled by the management challenges each has created for itself.
Stephen E Arnold, January 29, 2013
Sponsored by Dumante.com
Tech Acquisitions in 2012: Where Does Search Fall?
January 28, 2013
I read “Report: There Were 94 Tech M&A Deals in 2012 above $100M. Average Deal Value Was $717M.” Interesting stuff. Let’s assume that the data are accurate. Where do to search system buys outs fall.
Autonomy sold for $11 billion but that number may be soft due to the Hewlett Packard write down of $8.8 billion. I don’t have a dog in the fight, but the matter does suggest that some acquisition deals in search were overoptimistic.
Vivisimo sold to IBM for about $20 million. This is a fuzzy number which I heard about from poobahs at a trade show. If the number is accurate, Vivisimo sold to IBM for about the 2013 estimated revenues. However, Vivisimo is not a search company. Vivisimo was, at the time the deal was announced, was a big data company.
Brainware and ISYS Search Software sold for undisclosed amount. The amount Lexmark paid is not known. Lexmark did pay $280 million for Perceptive Software, so let’s assume that these transaction were less than $280 million. Close enough for horseshoes.
Oracle has not disclosed how much it paid for Endeca. Endeca, a privately held company, sold for about $1.1 billion. Again the only source I have is poach outputs.
So what?
- Search can yield some nice payouts
- Paying too much for search can trigger some interesting post purchase hand wringing
- Search is not really search. The reason people buy search companies is to get customers and solutions to specific problems like customer support or “meaning based computing.”
With some venture firms pumping money into search and content processing vendors, the likelihood of a big payday exists. On the other hand, search, like other software niches, poses some significant risks in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, January 28, 2013
Finally The Truth On The Autonomy Purchase
January 27, 2013
The truth is out! After weeks of discussion going back and forth between Autonomy, HP, and everyone else in between Business Insider reports that, “Meg Whitman Admits That HP ‘Paid Too Much’ For Autonomy.” Meg Whitman is the CEO of HP and she has officially declared that her company paid $11 billion too much for the Autonomy mess, along with the Department of Justice investigation. While Whitman admitted the fiasco, she and the board do not take the blame; instead they have placed it with the Deloitte auditors. So the finger pointing continues.
For those of you who have not been following the news, in November 2012, HP said they were going to write off $8.8 billion of the $11 billion. Not a problem, until $5 billion of the write-off came with an “improper accounting” tag. Whitman stated in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal that the write down was worth 85% of the company.
Here is part of the interview:
“Murray: You had people doing do diligence at the time for the board?
Whitman: Absolutely. But we didn’t go in and question Deloitte and say, ‘Are you appropriately accounting for the revenues and the operating profits’?
Murray: What does it say more broadly about corporate governance? If the board can’t find an 85% hole –
Whitman: Alan, that’s not fair at all in my view. The company turned out to be smaller, slower growth and somewhat less profitable than we anticipated, but we’re still investing in Autonomy. We just announced yesterday that we’re hiring 50 more engineers in the meaning-based compute side of this.”
And let us begin another round of the blame game. Well, Autonomy was not my fault. It was the accounting firm! Yes. Evil accountants. Do these folks wear masks and black capes?
Whitney Grace, January 27, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Beyond Search
HP Autonomy Problem Larger than Accounting Snafus?
January 11, 2013
Nigel Cannings at The Global Legal Post believes HP has a more crucial Autonomy-related problem than one of financial analysis, we learn from his article, “HP and Autonomy—Lacking the Innovation Sauce.” Cannings asserts that HP’s real issue is one of squashing the potential of the company it just purchased. He writes:
“My father is a 45-year veteran of the software industry and a serial entrepreneur. His last business was acquired for a substantial sum by a North American company, so he was speaking from experience when he commented: ‘When will these large corporations learn the three golden rules of acquiring an entrepreneurial company? First, work out what it was that made it so successful and bottle it. Second, tie in the technical and marketing resources that achieved that success. Third, allow the founders to do what they do best — don’t try to reinvent them.’
“HP has ignored these rules.”
Cannings argues that had HP stayed out of the way of Autonomy’s Mike Lynch and his team, the investment would have paid off handsomely. Instead, not only did the tech titan level their startling accounting charges, they are focused on the wrong aspect of their asset. While HP seems intent on pursuing the voice retrieval technology, they would do better, he says, to go after co-processer—fueled supercomputers. This, he insists, is the path to maximize profit from the Autonomy buy. Navigate to the article to see how he makes his case.
Cannings also says that this failure is a symptom of HP’s larger lack of innovation. Specifically, he charges, the company lacks the drive to re-innovate frequently, a quality that helped propel companies like Oracle, Apple, Microsoft, and IBM to the heights of success. Is HP on the road to mediocrity?
Cynthia Murrell, January 11, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Lynch of Autonomy Responds to HP Charges
January 6, 2013
You may have noticed the recent dustup between HP and the folks from unstructured data company Autonomy, which the tech giant acquired last year. Now, Autonomy’s former management speaks out via Web site at AutonomyAccounts.org. The site’s creator explains:
“This website is maintained by Dr Mike Lynch on behalf of the former management team of Autonomy. The site provides relevant information pertaining to the accusations made by Hewlett Packard (HP) on 20 November 2012 of financial impropriety at Autonomy. The former management team of Autonomy strongly rejects the accusations made by HP. . . .
“This site is designed to be a public point of contact for Dr Mike Lynch and other former managers at Autonomy with the wider world. It will contain information about Autonomy and any public statements made on behalf of the former management team related to these issues.”
Lynch emphasizes that he and his colleagues want to put this mess behind them as transparently and quickly as possible. A link to HP’s press release is provided, and the site presents an “open letter to Hewlett-Packard” penned by Lynch on December 3. The letter is full of details, and is worth the read if you’re curious, but it can be summed up with its most succinct paragraph: “I utterly reject all allegations of impropriety.”
Further down the page is a letter from the former management team, written the day HP blasted the company. It also strongly rejects the accusations, and closes with one of its own: “It took 10 years to build Autonomy’s industry-leading technology and it is sad to see how it has been mismanaged since its acquisition by HP.” Wow.
Cynthia Murrell, January 06, 2013
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
