Commentary: MCAD Industry View - A March 2007 Update
's total revenue for 2006 was $884 million, up almost 19% from the $744 million in 2005. Net earnings for the year were $60 million, down 16.5% from the $71.9 million in 2005.
total revenue for 2006 was $1.218 billion, up 5.6% from the $1.154 billion in 2005. License revenue was $379 million, or 31% of total revenue, an increase of 5% compared to 2005. Maintenance revenue was $541 million, accounting for 44% of total revenue, a rise of 7.3% compared to 2005. Services revenue was $298 million, accounting for 24.5% of total revenue, which was 2.4% above 2005.
Year-over-year revenue from Americas was up 2%, from EMEA up 7% and from Asia up 10%.
Net loss for the year was 10.4 million compared to a net loss of $10 million in 2005. EBITDA was $297 million up 23% from the prior year.
Stock Prices for Calendar 2006
MCAD versus EDA 2006
The detailed quarterly performances of a selected group of public EDA Vendors has been provided in the authors' February 2007
recently published on EDACafe.
The 2006 revenue from the top three MCAD vendors was $4.5 billion, 33% more than the revenue from the top three EDA vendors. Net earnings for the top 3 MCAD firms were 8% higher than the earnings for the top 3 EDA companies. Note that UGS' net loss is largely due to financing the debt incurred in the leveraged buyout. Top 3 MCAD earnings were 5.2% of revenue, while Top 3 EDA earnings were 6.3% of revenue.
Keep in mind that Autodesk sells its products predominantly through valued added resellers and distributors. Dassault Systemes sells predominantly through IBM and its Business Partners and in some instances, notably SolidWorks, through VARs. Thus, if one were to count actual end-user purchases of the latter MCAD products, the combined MCAD revenue total would raise the Big 3 MCAD dollar total substantially. On the other hand, Autodesk has not-insignificant revenue outside MCAD in AEC, GIS and Media/Entertainment.
The comparison of earnings across the two industries is also difficult general due to a plethora of one-time charges associated with acquisitions. The earnings comparison for UGS is further complicated by purchase accounting adjustments related to its Venture Capital buyout from EDS.
MCADCafè.com currently tracks the financial performance of multiple public companies in the Mechanical CAD market. Eight (8) companies were chosen for the author's May 8, 2003 Commentary. Four of these companies (Autodesk, Dassault Systemes, PTC and EDS PLM Solutions (now named UGS, a privately-held company) represented approximately 85 percent of the total revenue in this grouping, and each of these four companies offers a wide array of software and services products across the entire design to manufacturing space. The remaining four public companies (ANSYS, Moldflow, MSC.Software and Tecnomatix) offered specialized software/services products in specific MCAD niches and together they created the remaining 15 percent of the total group-of-8's revenue. Indeed, these latter four companies frequently partnered with the initial four to provide end-customers with broader solution suites.
For the author's August 2003 Commentary in MCADCaf?.com, a ninth company, the ESI Group, was added. All nine were studied thereafter for comparison purposes. Tecnomatix has since been acquired by UGS and hence has been removed from this report.
The combined worldwide total annual revenue of these companies is over $6 billion, not an insignificant sum. But it is, in fact, less than 3 percent of the $200 billion spent annually on all types of software (source IDC). So why study MCAD companies at all? The key to MCAD's importance lies in the leverage its users apply to create the everyday durable goods with which we are all familiar: automobiles, trucks, military gear & weapons, appliances, farm & construction equipment, aircraft & aerospace vehicles, etc. In short, MCAD is arguably responsible for enabling today's manufacturing industries, which are the centerpieces of creating real productivity and wealth in every modern economy.
Understanding the comparative MCAD revenue content of various vendors is not merely academic. For example, it helps observers better understand the likely future competitive MCAD strength of each vendor relative to its peers in such areas as amount of money available for R&D, for potential new acquisitions, for financial stability to weather economic cycles, and for other key business factors.
In comparing financial performances of the four largest MCAD companies tracked by MCADCafè.com, it's instructive to account for the actual MCAD content of each. For example, the revenues of Dassault and PTC can arguably be considered 100% MCAD in nature, whereas Autodesk's total revenue is only partially made up from its business in MCAD. Some Autodesk revenue (~15%) stems from a segment which provides systems and software for creating and animating imagery. Even in the remaining 85% of Autodesk's total revenue, derived from its Design Solutions Segment, is divided among solutions for Manufacturing, GIS, the building industry, and the platform technology group. Only the solutions of the Manufacturing Group (Inventor, AutoCAD Mechanical, Mechanical Desktop, Streamline, Point A, etc.) might be thought of as "pure" MCAD revenue.
It should also be noted that the companies have different business models. IBM, both direct and through Business Partners, is the exclusive marketing and sales arm for Dassault Systems high end product lines: CATIA, Enovia and Delmia. The IBM channel also carries SmarTeam solutions in a non-exclusive basis. IBM records the end user revenue and pays DS a royalty of approximately 50%. DS subsidiary SolidWorks is sold through value added resellers. Autodesk sells its products overwhelmingly through valued added resellers. The other MCAD vendors sell mostly on a direct basis. Direct sales result in greater percentage of end user revenue recognition but also involve higher cost of sales and risk.
UGS annual revenues are right there at similar levels as the world's other MCAD revenue leaders Autodesk, Dassault and PTC. For purposes of our discussion, we considered the revenues from the remaining public companies (ANSYS, ESI Group, Moldflow, and MSC.Software) to be 100% MCAD.
Tell us what you think about this topic, or share any additional information you may have on the subject! Submit your comments to:
About the Authors:
Since 1996, Dr. Russ Henke has been president of HENKE ASSOCIATES, a San Francisco Bay Area high-tech business & management consulting firm. The number of client companies for Henke Associates now numbers more than forty. During his corporate career, Henke operated sequentially on 'both sides' of both MCAD and EDA, as a user and as a vendor. He's a veteran corporate executive from Cincinnati Milacron, SDRC, Schlumberger Applicon, Gould Electronics, ATP, and Mentor Graphics. A Professional Engineer, Henke is a Fellow of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME) and served on the SME International Board of Directors. He is also a member of the IEEE and a Life Fellow of ASME International. In April 2006, Dr. Henke received the 2006 Lifetime Achievement Award from The CAD Society, presented at COFES2006 in Scottsdale, AZ. In February 2007, Dr. Henke added to HENKE ASSOCIATES an affiliation with Cyon Research Corporation.
An affiliate of the HENKE ASSOCIATES team since 2001, LA-based Dr. John R. (Jack) Horgan co-authored this March 2007 MCAD Industry Commentary. Dr. Horgan's prior corporate career has included executive positions at Applicon, Aries Technology, CADAM and MICROCADAM, as well as a stint at IBM. Dr. Horgan is also an editor of EDAcafe Weekly.
Be the first to review this article