-
SCRI: Avid Ex CEO Now Resigns As Director
Avid Ex CEO Now Resigns As Director
https://scri.com/avid-ex-ceo-now-resigns-as-director/Avid has reported via a Form-8K filing with the SEC that ex Chairman and CEO, Gary Greenfield has now also resigned as a director of the company. The statement went on to say that the departure was “not a result of any dispute.”
…
With the date for the 2013 Annual Meeting being delayed beyond the originally anticipated date, Mr. Greenfield has decided to resign from his position as director of the Company so that he could attend to other commitments,… and three days to go before Avid files a report with their plan to get back into NADAQ compliance (and target how they’ll file their report… while the class action vultures hover).
-
21 Replies
-
Avid Technology to Restate Results Amid Ongoing Review
https://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130521-714388.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Key comments
The digital audio and video technology firm said that a review found that no-charge software updates should have been accounted for as post-contract customer support revenue.
…
financial statements for the first three quarters of 2011 and 2012, and the full-year results for 2009 through 2011 contain errors.
…
Avid’s management has concluded that the company’s controls over financial reporting were not effective, as of March 2013. -
…a review found that no-charge software updates should have been accounted for as post-contract customer support revenue.
Meanwhile, Adobe looks on and says to themselves, “See, if Avid had gone to a subscription cloud model, they’d be able to crank out updates as often as they want and they wouldn’t be in this mess”
______________________________________________
“Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.” -
[Greg Andonian] “Meanwhile, Adobe looks on and says to themselves, “See, if Avid had gone to a subscription cloud model, they’d be able to crank out updates as often as they want and they wouldn’t be in this mess”
“Or,
“See, if Avid had just developed an on-line store that pushes updates regularly to the loyal owners of their software without asking to dip into their pocket each and every month (whether or not there were any updates that might have enhanced the actual value of the software you were using two months ago) like – maybe – I don’t know – Apple? – then all those stated “accounting compliance issues” would have disappeared also!
The link between monthly subscription and updateability is imaginary. Apple (and many other software manufacturers including most Apps on your phone – do it constantly.
This is about revenue. Nothing else. And, BTW, there’s nothing wrong with it being about revenue. It’s the lifeblood of any business. Period.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bill Davis] “The link between monthly subscription and updateability is imaginary. Apple (and many other software manufacturers including most Apps on your phone – do it constantly.”
Bill, this point would be debatable by experts with much fancier degrees and much higher hourly rates than we.
A salient quote from an in-depth and Apple-centric SOX article [link]:
“…lots of accountants lined to testify that the law does not specifically require payments for such upgrades, but only forces companies to estimate the value of any post-sale upgrades and withhold the booking of that revenue.”
Apple can surely afford to defer FCPX revenue indefinitely without it denting their bottom line, but note that Apple themselves have charged for feature updates on revenue-critical items like iOS devices and laptops.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “A salient quote from an in-depth and Apple-centric SOX article [link]:
“…lots of accountants lined to testify that the law does not specifically require payments for such upgrades, but only forces companies to estimate the value of any post-sale upgrades and withhold the booking of that revenue.”
Apple can surely afford to defer FCPX revenue indefinitely without it denting their bottom line, but note that Apple themselves have charged for feature updates on revenue-critical items like iOS devices and laptops.
“I wonder if they were some of the same accountants who “lined up to testify” about how appropriate it was before the whole US economy almost crashed for the credit reporting agencies and home mortgage lenders to be fed out of the same pie?
At some level, all complex system accounting is closer to voodoo than math, IME.
The point is that yes, any business has a fiducdiary responsibility make profits. As much as they can if they want to compete for capital.
But history has also show us that it’s extremely easy to sacrifice long term viability in any business in the search for short term profits.
The big question here is whether Adobe’s “rent only” strategy – over the long haul – will prove to be the smart play for locking in user revenue streams – or whether faced with the changing models of software consumption (which I think of as the “Costco model” where you try to satisfy customers by offering products that generally place at 60-80% up the quality curve, but at at 40-50% of the way up the price curve) as being something that will increasingly work in software as well.
The oft mentioned Pixelmator (which I was kinda touting here more than a year ago) is a prime, if extreme, example. A large chunk of the capabilities of Photoshop at truly significantly less cost.
And here we are.
It was interesting that Adobe exempted Lightroom from the Cloud model, isn’t it? I wonder why? It’s the only Adobe Software I use regularly for my still photo work.
I wonder what made Adobe single it out for survival outside the cloud?
Be fascinating to know.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bill Davis] “I wonder if they were some of the same accountants who “lined up to testify” about how appropriate it was before the whole US economy almost crashed for the credit reporting agencies and home mortgage lenders to be fed out of the same pie?”
I generally don’t like knee-jerk reaction legislation, as SOX was to the Enron scandal. Even when the ideas are good, a hasty implementation leads to confusion at best and poor unintended consequences at worst.
[Bill Davis] “But history has also show us that it’s extremely easy to sacrifice long term viability in any business in the search for short term profits. The big question here is whether Adobe’s “rent only” strategy – over the long haul – will prove to be the smart play for locking in user revenue streams – or whether faced with the changing models of software consumption (which I think of as the “Costco model” where you try to satisfy customers by offering products that generally place at 60-80% up the quality curve, but at at 40-50% of the way up the price curve) as being something that will increasingly work in software as well.”
Lots of cheap products piggy-back on the more expensive products, which bear the brunt of the costs associated with R&D and creating the market. Put another way, where would Pixelmator be without Photoshop before it?
That’s not to say that cheap software can’t be innovative — far from it, and they also have the “advantage of backwardness” of no existing user base at risk that could get scared off by a big change — but I’d hate to be in an industry where large developers couldn’t afford to play.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Bill Davis] “The link between monthly subscription and updateability is imaginary. Apple (and many other software manufacturers including most Apps on your phone – do it constantly.
This is about revenue. Nothing else. And, BTW, there’s nothing wrong with it being about revenue. It’s the lifeblood of any business. Period.”
Bill, for once you and I are in complete agreement.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
Actually there could be a link. Right now, with the current App Store model, there is no incentive for Pro Apps to continue developing FCP X. They have your money and new updates don’t generate re-occuring revenue from existing customers. They will continue development, because right now they are on a path to do that. Will that be true in a couple of years? Aperture? Logic?
OTOH, If Adobe quits advancing the products, then users will move to other software and drop the subscription. Loss of revenue.
It’s not just about revenue, but also incentive.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Bill Davis] “The link between monthly subscription and updateability is imaginary. Apple (and many other software manufacturers including most Apps on your phone – do it constantly.
This is about revenue. Nothing else. And, BTW, there’s nothing wrong with it being about revenue. It’s the lifeblood of any business. Period.”
If the link is imaginary then why did Apple used to charge iPod users for feature upgrades that iPhone users (on cell phone subscription plans) got for free and why is Avid going through this internal audit? SOX is real and so are companies attempts to do business how they want while abiding by its regulations.
And why is it only one or the other? Can’t it be about accounting procedures, revenue and freeing all their applications from the artificial lock-step of upgrading in unison (ready or not)? Ultimately you are right that everything a business does is comes back revenue. Even Apple’s grand re-imagining of what editing could be was little more than a ploy to separate you from your money. 😉
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up