Posts

Cloud marketplaces are small in revenue impact but mighty in market impact

Cloud marketplaces are more of a slow burn compared to pronounced market impacts in books, retail and music

To predict the impact of cloud marketplaces, it is worth evaluating how similar changes in go-to-market strategies have impacted other markets. Sears (Nasdaq: SHLDQ), Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN) and Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) are three very different companies that illustrate just how profound an impact sales motions can have. Sears rode the impact of its mail-order catalog for nearly 100 years in a wave of success that only recently petered out. Amazon and Apple have much broader business strategies, but both owe a considerable amount of their success — which has them jockeying for the title of the world’s largest company in terms of market capitalization — to their selling methods. Both Amazon and Apple entered well-established markets and disrupted them, not by competing on the merits of their offerings but by challenging the existing sales motion with a marketplace approach. Amazon’s online approach to the book market is a very pronounced example of marketplace disruption, as Figure 1 illustrates. Amazon began selling books online in mid-1995, overtook traditional market leader Barnes & Noble less than eight years later, and subsequently expanded and dominated the market. Today, Amazon controls over 50% of the total book market in the U.S., including both physical and digital titles.

Market overview: Online marketplaces, where customers can browse, search and then buy or subscribe to software titles, have been around for quite some time. Salesforce (NYSE: CRM) rolled out the first cloud app store in 2005, and a wide variety of new options have been introduced since. Despite their longevity, the impact of these marketplaces is still uncertain. Salesforce AppExchange is a standout success, but the impact is more nuanced for most other marketplaces and the industry overall. Marketplaces have not yet become a prominent distribution model for software and cloud services, but they play a niche role in overall go-to-market strategies that include traditional direct sales, partner-driven sales and customer self-service sales. Although marketplaces currently hold a small portion of overall cloud and software revenue share, trends could bolster their role in the market moving forward.

The IoT market continues to stabilize, with the overall market growing at a moderate accelerating CAGR of 24.8%

4Q18 Commercial Internet of Things Market Forecast infographic

TBR projects total commercial Internet of Things (IoT) market revenue will increase from $456.1 billion in 2019 to $1.4 trillion in 2024, a CAGR of 24.8%.

Topics covered in TBR’s Commercial IoT Market Forecast 2019-2024 include deeper examinations, such as trends, drivers and inhibitors of the seven technology segments we track (e.g., cloud services, IT services, ICT infrastructure, and connectivity), the 10 vertical groupings we cover (e.g., public sector, healthcare, manufacturing and logistics), and four geographies (i.e., APAC, EMEA, North America and Latin America).

In addition to a more in-depth examination of the aforementioned topics, we also delve into the rise of “bundles” and “packaged solutions,” and how vendor partnering is lowering cost of sales for IoT implementations.

For additional information about this research or to arrange a one-on-one analyst briefing, please contact Dan Demers at +1 603.929.1166 or [email protected].

The IoT market continues to stabilize, with the overall market growing at a moderate accelerating CAGR of 24.8%

TBR projects total commercial Internet of Things (IoT) market revenue will increase from $456.1 billion in 2019 to $1.4 trillion in 2024, a CAGR of 24.8%.

It is important to remember that IoT is a technique for applying technology components, not a technology itself, which leads to certain drivers and inhibitors. Because it is a technique, IoT has an unlimited shelf life. Vendors that invest now and solidify their IoT go-to-market strategy will benefit in the long run. Methods for connecting equipment and solutioning may evolve, but the overarching technique is not going away. However, IoT growth is limited by the components and solutioning that compose the technique, including capabilities, standards and cost. This leads the numerous submarkets and sub-technologies of the IoT ecosystem to experience varied growth.

IoT revenue will accelerate as technological capabilities and standards mature and common solutions appear, culminating in lower cost and complexity.

Graph showing commercial iot market forecast alternative market performance scenarios 2019-2024

TBR believes an emerging growth accelerator is the fact that IoT offerings have evolved from the initial DIY stage to easily integrated components to component kits to, finally, almost complete solutions. At each point in this evolution, IoT becomes less expensive, less burdensome and less risky to customers, while still delivering business benefits. This greatly broadens the market, resulting in market growth and revenue growth for vendors that participate in this evolution.

However, customers remain concerned with the cost of IoT solutions, including the expense associated with transmitting, processing and storing data. The amount of data stored increases as IoT projects remain in operation, and a thoughtful data collection and storage policy is key to maintaining positive ROI.

Voice assistant volume is increasing

A survey conducted by Adobe Analytics found that 32% of U.S. consumers owned a smart speaker in September 2018, compared to 28% in December 2017. The report also projected that near half of the U.S. consumer base could own one by the end of December 2018, supported by Adobe Analytics’ finding that nearly 80% of smart speaker sales occur during the holiday season. It is just one study, and there are more conservative studies out there ― but even if the data isn’t completely on the mark, it does uncover the trend of voice-controlled devices gaining ground inside consumers’ households despite use cases and monetization still being blurry.

I own four Amazon Alexa-enabled devices myself: two Echo Dot smart speakers and two Fire TVs. Of the Echo Dots, one was given to me by a colleague to play around with, and another I bought for about one-third the list price from acquaintances who had received it as a gift from their extended family and left it unopened because they felt it was “too creepy.” In our household, the Echo Dots have been used as glorified hands-free music players in our kitchen and one of our bathrooms. The Fire TVs are used as media players first and foremost. Sometimes, we try some of the new skills Amazon sends along in update emails as a fun diversion, but usually that is a one-off activity. I am deeply invested in the Amazon ecosystem, having been a Prime member since its debut and a fan of Prime Video, but it is still challenging to find ways to use Alexa smart-home devices to enhance my other Prime benefits or drive me to Amazon’s e-commerce business.

Adobe’s research seems to align with my anecdotal experience, noting that among the most common voice activities* are asking for music (70% of respondents) and asking fun questions (53% of respondents). The only other activity above 50% is asking about the weather (64% of respondents). So yes, people are using them, but these are not skills that require much depth or complexity or that drive additional revenue for Amazon.

Therein lies the problem for voice-platform providers such as Amazon and Google (Microsoft and Apple are also players, but I don’t believe they are as developed as Amazon and Google are in the smart speaker and voice assistant space). In an ideal world, voice assistants would provide platform companies with a wealth of consumer data as users query the devices about their everyday needs. Also, voice assistants can be a new conduit to monetization through new applications or — especially in Amazon’s case — to lowering barriers to the purchase of goods. However, most complex tasks, such as ordering a ticket for the movie you’d like to see tonight, finding out when the beach is open, or buying an outfit for an upcoming wedding, are still much easier via a smartphone or laptop interface. The Adobe study found that of the 32% of respondents with a smart speaker, only 35% and 30% used voice interfaces for basic research or shopping, respectively.

Improving the use cases, or “skills,” of voice assistants will be critical for platform vendors to increase the use of these devices for complex tasks and to elevate smart speakers from smart radios and novelties to gleaming data gems. TBR expects this to be the major battleground between voice assistant and smart speaker providers moving forward as the form factor has been relatively proved. TBR believes Google has a slight advantage due to its heritage in data mining behind the façade of services as well as its Android and Chrome cross-platform tie-ins (a lot of relevant user data is already in Google, such as contacts, schedules, and often email). Amazon is no slouch either due to its investment spend, growing media empire and robust e-commerce platform, which Google lacks. Apple could be a dark horse; however, its Siri is still weaker on an artificial intelligence (AI) basis and the HomePod’s pricing makes it an unlikely easy gift.

The next frontier for all of these platform providers is in the commercial space, an area we may see Microsoft put much of its effort into while leaving the consumer space for better-suited peers. In fact, collaboration between Microsoft and Amazon on voice and smart speakers may confirm this. Using voice assistants and smart speakers to query analytics or gain business insights or employing them as a “smart secretary” in conference rooms are areas TBR sees as avenues for commercial expansion. TBR has seen slightly different approaches from Amazon and Google in the commercial space. Amazon, likely with Microsoft support, focuses on the office with Alexa for Business, while Google seems to be positioning its voice AI and smart speaker technology to serve as an interface for a business’s customers.

However, as with the consumer space, the use case must be proved, the skills must be ironed out, and existing commercial infrastructure must be modified to support voice assistants and smart speakers. And despite furious investment in these possibilities by the major platform players, TBR doesn’t expect to see Alexa widely adopted in the boardroom for at least another two to three years. For now, I believe smart speakers will continue to find their way into homes as a novelty or curiosity for tech-excited people and early adopters, contributing to slow but steady growth, or as an easy, cost-effective tech-based gift, driving additional bursts of increased unit sales during the holidays.

*Voice activity data includes devices that are not smart speakers, such as smartphones.

Whether by R&D or acquisition, money can’t buy SaaS performance

The SaaS market appears to provide an easy opportunity for vendors to garner significant revenue and growth. SaaS is the largest segment of the cloud market — bigger than the IaaS space, which draws so much attention due to leaders Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure. The SaaS market is also much more fragmented, littered with thousands of providers, which would seem to imply that consolidation is a foregone conclusion. However, even for three of the largest leading SaaS providers, the investment level required to compete in the space remains high, and even spending billions of dollars in R&D and acquisitions does not guarantee success.

This is not to say that these billions of investment dollars are all for naught. Despite being around for more than a decade, the SaaS space remains quite immature. Customers are still figuring out which of their applications can be moved to cloud delivery, and how, when and with which vendors those moves can take place. Until a longer track record exists for making these decisions and vendors consolidate disparate offerings into packages more closely resembling integrated solutions, the market remains very much in flux. It’s not the functionality holding back the adoption of hybrid solutions, it’s the difficulty of integrating and managing the multicloud and multivendor solutions. In the meantime, vendors such as Oracle, SAP and Workday have no other choice but to continue accelerating their investments. Their dollars will not buy SaaS performance in the short term, but this is the only way these vendors have a shot as the SaaS space becomes more predictable.

Whether by R&D or acquisition, money can’t buy SaaS performance

The SaaS market appears to provide an easy opportunity for vendors to garner significant revenue and growth. SaaS is the largest segment of the cloud market — bigger than the IaaS space, which draws so much attention due to leaders Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure. The SaaS market is also much more fragmented, littered with thousands of providers, which would seem to imply that consolidation is a foregone conclusion. However, even for three of the largest leading SaaS providers, the investment level required to compete in the space remains high, and even spending billions of dollars in R&D and acquisitions does not guarantee success.

This is not to say that these billions of investment dollars are all for naught. Despite being around for more than a decade, the SaaS space remains quite immature. Customers are still figuring out which of their applications can be moved to cloud delivery, and how, when and with which vendors those moves can take place. Until a longer track record exists for making these decisions and vendors consolidate disparate offerings into packages more closely resembling integrated solutions, the market remains very much in flux. It’s not the functionality holding back the adoption of hybrid solutions, it’s the difficulty of integrating and managing the multicloud and multivendor solutions. In the meantime, vendors such as Oracle, SAP and Workday have no other choice but to continue accelerating their investments. Their dollars will not buy SaaS performance in the short term, but this is the only way these vendors have a shot as the SaaS space becomes more predictable.

Oracle is in too far to turn back now

By virtue of its long legacy in a diverse field of software, Oracle finds itself in a unique position with cloud solutions. Aside from databases, Oracle is a company built on acquisitions, and that approach holds true with its expansion in cloud. After first downplaying the overall concept of cloud delivery, even while acquiring cloud assets, the vendor recently quickly shifted its messaging and doubled down on internal- and external-driven innovation. The results from a dollar perspective are laid out in Figure 1, representing a steady and significant stream of acquisitions focused on building out mainly SaaS offerings and R&D that funds cloud solutions across the spectrum of IaaS, PaaS and SaaS. The significant amount of Oracle’s investments is undeniable, but the returns are far from overwhelming. The downfall of Oracle’s SaaS investment plans played out quite publicly, as the company first bet it would become the first SaaS/PaaS vendor to achieve a $10 billion run rate, then recently changed its reporting structure midyear to blur the actual results.

Graph showing Oracle cloud acquisitions, R&D investments and cloud revenue for 2016, 2017 and estimate 2018

Figure 1

Oracle maintains worse performance than SAP and Workday for the return on its acquisition and R&D investments, spending more on these investments than the company generated in total cloud revenue during 2016, 2017 and 2018 (estimated). That does not mean Oracle is without successes, however, as the purchase of NetSuite, reflected in Oracle’s large acquisition expense in 2016, contributes to revenue growth and complements the organic development of Fusion Cloud ERP. A lot of Oracle’s struggles in cloud come from organic initiatives, such as its PaaS and IaaS services, which have not taken root with customers despite aggressive sales tactics. Those categories of services account for a significant portion of Oracle’s R&D investments over the past three years, but still generate relatively small revenue streams for the vendor. Nevertheless, despite the investment outweighing the associated revenue contributions, we believe Oracle will and should remain committed to its current cloud strategy. It may not pay off in the near term, but these investments are the best shot for Oracle to execute a longer-term cloud turnaround.

SAP is making all the right financial decisions, but still falling short

Though still acquisitive, SAP’s cloud strategy has been more focused on internal innovation compared with Oracle. A more even mix of R&D and acquisition investments, combined with an earlier commitment to cloud delivery, is producing a better rate of revenue return for SAP, as shown in the graph below. SAP ranks fairly close to Oracle in total cloud revenue but is achieving those run rates after incurring significantly fewer R&D and acquisition expenses. TBR estimates SAP’s combined R&D and acquisition investments for cloud were $6 billion for the past three years, compared with more than $21 billion for Oracle over the same time period.

Graph showing SAP cloud acquisitions, R&D investments and cloud revenue for 2016, 2017 and estimate 2018

Figure 2

Despite the comparatively positive financial returns for SAP in cloud, the vendor is still struggling with multiple elements of its portfolio. After allowing Salesforce to capitalize on the shift to moving front-office apps to cloud, SAP recently started circling back to carve out territory in that domain. Through multiple acquisitions in the customer experience space and new messaging, SAP is making a concerted push, but it faces an uphill battle winning more market share in that space. Furthermore, SAP’s effort with SAP Business Suite 4 HANA is a long-term one, and in the meantime, assets such as SAP Cloud Platform are underrepresented in the platform space. The net is that SAP has managed investments well and grown revenue in cloud but is still not achieving at a scale that ensures the vendor’s leadership in the SaaS space.

Workday is opening its wallet after trying the DIY route

Historically, Workday has been more reliant on internal R&D as the sole means of advancing its cloud strategy compared with Oracle and SAP. That certainly does not mean the company was shy about entering new markets or delivering new products, as Workday has rapidly increased its activities in both regards over the past three years. The addition of student, financial and now platform offerings illustrates how broadly Workday has expanded its portfolio beyond core human capital management (HCM) offerings. Part of Workday’s reliance on R&D comes from its core focus on a “single line of code,” which provides simplicity and consistency in the vendor’s offerings to customers. Integrating multiple offerings and services is part of the challenge with acquisitions, which Oracle and SAP know all too well. Workday’s past acquisitions have always been functionality-focused and intermittent. The company’s three acquisitions in 2Q18, including its $1.55 billion purchase of Adaptive Insights, is a departure from that strategy but is likely not indicative of broader plans to acquire more fully baked applications. Workday Cloud Platform will allow Workday to leverage partner-developed, inherently integrated technology to expand portfolio breadth.

Graph showing Workday cloud acquisitions, R&D investments and cloud revenue for 2016, 2017 and estimate 2018

Figure 3

The assumption that Workday’s acquisition-lite approach to investment would be advantageous is not necessarily true. Even without significant acquisitions, Workday’s investment ratio (R&D + Acquisitions/Cloud Revenue) is higher than SAP’s for the three years from 2016 to 2018. Workday had a lower ratio than Oracle, which is spending aggressively on acquisitions, but Workday ranked above SAP in internal R&D investment level proportional to revenue. Additionally, Workday’s streamlined “single line of code” approach is not guaranteeing success in new product categories. HCM revenue growth remains strong, but Workday’s new expansions in Financials and Student are not seeing accelerated early revenue growth. The new offerings are certainly growing, but not at the rate one would expect given the strong HCM base into which they can be cross-sold. The large acquisition of Adaptive Insights could be part of a change in strategy to add inorganic revenue and could lead to greater cross-selling possibilities for the Financials business.

Signals of consolidation appear in the cloud IoT platform space

Infographic discussing signals of consolidation appearing in the IoT cloud platform space

The cloud IoT platform landscape consolidates around largest vendors as customers seek continuity, consistency and the best tools

Cloud services revenue grew 48.2% year-to-year and increased as a percentage of total benchmarked Internet of Things (IoT) revenue from 12.4% to 15.8% year-to-year in 2Q18. Growth is driven by customers, especially those without deep legacy ties, moving their workloads to the cloud. The public cloud ecosystem is beginning to consolidate, with the top vendors competing on best-in-class tools, partnerships and business-problem-solving messaging.

Software, while still a sizable portion of benchmarked revenue, is experiencing slowing revenue growth, from 19% year-to-year in 2Q17 to 4.2% year-to-year in 2Q18. Software, along with ICT infrastructure, will continue to play a role in IoT solutions with the advent of edge computing, but as providers’ cloud platforms mature and tie-in deals with application partners are cemented, demand increases.

ICT infrastructure revenue grew 14.1% year-to-year in 2Q18 due to increased IoT deployments as well as hybrid IoT becoming an increasingly common IoT framework. ICT infrastructure gross margin rose 80 basis points year-to-year. TBR believes the increase stems from the need for more specialized or powerful hardware to handle the more advanced needs of IoT and its components, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine vision. Despite the increased utilization of ICT hardware due to hybrid IoT and the need for specialization, the long view for ICT infrastructure will be complicated by commoditization. TBR expects most ICT infrastructure companies to deeply invest in software and service components to buttress the profitability of customer engagements as the threat of commoditization looms.

Vendors across the technology spectrum are all fervently trying to crack the code for the “killer app” within specific verticals that can solve common business problems and be widely adopted by customers. The vendors that win with building the first widely accepted solutions will be set up for success, while others in the oversaturated market will at best become acquisition targets and at worst become history.

For more information, contact Analyst Daniel Callahan at [email protected].

The diversity of IoT solutions and their multicomponent and multivendor nature require new approaches from vendors

The Internet of Things (IoT) market is beginning to stabilize, if not mature, and this is a good time for vendors to focus on vertical markets and use cases within those markets, especially where there is a gap that aligns well with an IT vendor’s strength, such as telecom operators’ capabilities in logistics.

“We project total commercial IoT market revenue will increase from $370.3 billion in 2018 to more than $1 trillion in 2023 at a CAGR of 24.4%,” said TBR Analyst Dan Callahan.

Commercial IoT Market Forecast Alternative Market Performance Scenarios 2018-2023

Other topics we cover in the Commercial IoT Market Forecast 2018-2023 Update include the emergence of embedded IoT solutions, the rise of independent software vendors and independent hardware vendors as paths for propagating embedded solutions, and the drivers and inhibitors for select verticals and technology segments where we anticipate the most change.

The Commercial IoT Market Forecast 2018-2023 Update highlights the current and emerging revenue opportunities in the commercial IoT market for vendors. It leverages financial models and projections across a diverse set of IT and operational technology components, verticals and geographies. In addition, the report outlines the major component and industry drivers and trends shaping the market.

For additional information about this research or to arrange a one-on-one analyst briefing, please contact Dan Demers at +1 603.929.1166 or [email protected].

 

ABOUT TBR

Technology Business Research, Inc. is a leading independent technology market research and consulting firm specializing in the business and financial analyses of hardware, software, professional services, and telecom vendors and operators. Serving a global clientele, TBR provides timely and actionable market research and business intelligence in a format that is uniquely tailored to clients’ needs. Our analysts are available to address client-specific issues further or information needs on an inquiry or proprietary consulting basis.

TBR has been empowering corporate decision makers since 1996. For more information please visit www.tbri.com.

1Q18 device revenue results were boosted by market shifts and increasing ASPs in PCs and smartphones compared to a weaker 1Q17

HAMPTON, N.H. (July 13, 2018) — Technology Business Research, Inc.’s (TBR) 1Q18 Devices and Platforms Benchmark finds that there is ongoing revenue opportunity in both the PC and smartphone markets. Total benchmarked revenue increased 15.9% year-to-year to $112 billion despite indications of saturation in the high end of the PC market.

Total PC benchmarked revenue increased 12% year-to-year to $32 billion. Total PC benchmarked gross profit increased 10.4% year-to-year to $5 billion despite increasing component costs. “Despite speculation that the PC market is dead, major device OEMs have been able to successfully navigate the shifting market and generate healthy profits,” said TBR Analyst Dan Callahan. “Renewed appetite for premium PCs in enterprise — and PC OEMs shifting their go-to-market strategies to respond — has been the primary driver.”

Total benchmarked smartphone revenue increased 11% year-to-year to $72 billion. Total smartphone benchmarked gross profit increased 14.8% year-to-year to $23 billion. Smartphone OEMs are combating worldwide saturation by increasing average selling prices (ASPs). Apple’s gamble with a $1,000 smartphone paid off, as customers responded with demand, and Android peers are following suit.

Device as Service (DaaS), an expansion of the former PC as a Service market, is transforming into an offering aimed at supplanting traditional PC financing. The benchmark explores how HP Inc. was the first of the big three PC OEMs to capitalize on the emerging opportunity and has been the first with concrete outbound messaging to partners and customers. This has afforded the company a lead, but it is not cemented. Dell Technologies and Lenovo will use the path HP Inc. paved to introduce DaaS to the market and quickly solidify their own unique solutions. Lenovo and HP Inc. see opportunity beyond the PC in PC as a Service, thus the introduction of DaaS.

The DaaS opportunity remains mostly untapped. Customers and partners are still trying to understand how this service differs from traditional financing and are still kicking the tires on the analytics often attached by OEMs as the main selling point of DaaS.

TBR’s Devices and Platforms Benchmark provides insight on interrelated ecosystems, including device vendors, platform providers, supplier relations, and technology partners across the consumer and commercial spaces. TBR’s vendor-centric analysis speaks to industry trends, while market sizing illustrates opportunity. Our Devices and Platforms research includes PC, tablet and smartphone vendors; platform providers; and technology partners.

For additional information about this research or to arrange a one-on-one analyst briefing, please contact Dan Demers at +1 603.929.1166 or [email protected].

 

 

ABOUT TBR

Technology Business Research, Inc. is a leading independent technology market research and consulting firm specializing in the business and financial analyses of hardware, software, professional services, and telecom vendors and operators. Serving a global clientele, TBR provides timely and actionable market research and business intelligence in a format that is uniquely tailored to clients’ needs. Our analysts are available to address client-specific issues further or information needs on an inquiry or proprietary consulting basis.

TBR has been empowering corporate decision makers since 1996. For more information please visit www.tbri.com.

Time to get industrial about healthcare

Internet of Things (IoT) hesitation in the healthcare vertical stems from the industry’s complexity, as it is chained by liability and privacy issues, a general unease about change, legacy equipment, and unevolved processes. These complexities are all rooted in real concerns of customers and vendors in the healthcare space. However, the “Industrial IoT Analytics for the Healthcare Industry” presentation by Glassbeam employees Gopal Sundaramoorthy and Puneet Pandit at PTC’s LiveWorx event highlighted that it is time to shift how vendors go to market within the healthcare industry.

Sundaramoorthy indicated there are not a lot of high-level analytics, or grand-scheme IoT implementations, in healthcare. The challenges mentioned above, especially privacy issues, including healthcare organizations’ desire to keep data internal, prevent it. Instead, Sundaramoorthy explained vendors need to talk to healthcare organizations like they talk to manufacturers, focusing on how healthcare organizations can connect equipment to improve asset utilization, save costs and increase efficiencies. This is the operational technology (OT) discussion instead of the IT discussion.

With asset utilization, for example, how is a medical scanning device being used? How many scans are being done and in how much time, what types of scans are being done, and when are the scans happening? Or, a conversation around operator utilization could include aspects such as determining whether operators are fully trained by measuring what functions they are using and how long they take compared to average or trained users. Likewise, predictive maintenance, such as noting when a bulb needs to be replaced in an MRI machine, helps avoid costly or dangerous downtime. These simpler-to-implement OT-based measurements will help hospitals run more efficiently and save money just through connecting machines and adding straightforward analytics. It also helps medical device manufacturers better understand why things are going wrong and how to best improve diagnostic time, shorten repair time and relieve frustration for medical professionals.

Sundaramoorthy indicated that simple connectivity is healthcare’s biggest problem. To break the hesitation barrier, vendors should focus on solving the first step in IoT: connecting the often woefully out-of-date machinery and building in IoT, in the spirit of OT, to prove ROI to medical organizations. After machines are connected and OT-based IoT is proving consistent ROI, the discussion to move to more transformative IT use cases will be a much easier sell.