Connect with us

Politics

Why Your Professional Services Firm Shouldn’t Aspire to Be a SaaS Company

Published

on

Why Your Professional Services Firm Shouldn't Aspire to Be a SaaS Company


When I talk to founders of service firms, many of them express the same desire to me: They want to become software companies. They see SaaS companies taking the world by storm, and they wonder if they haven’t made a giant mistake not choosing that path.

They see the valuations of SaaS firms and get intoxicated by the numbers.

Understandably so, with a SaaS company like Salesforce worth $132 billion and the most valuable professional service firm, Deloitte, worth $27.9 billion.

Risk of being an entrepreneur

Some founders believe that service firms are more work-intensive and that somehow building a SaaS company means a better work-life balance. And there are some founders who are driven by the need for fame. They want to be commonplace names in the way that the Zuckerbergs, Musks, and Kalanicks have made headlines and had slick documentaries made about them.

However, SaaS companies are twice as likely to fail within five years, according to Professor Scott Shane at Case Western University.

The five-year survival rate of service firms is 47.6 percent, and the five-year survival rate of product companies is 23.4 percent. Founders of both service firms and product companies take a big risk when they become entrepreneurs, so it is wiser to play the odds and start a service firm instead of a product company.

Three factors to consider before going SaaS

In reality, and this is what I tell professional service founders, the challenges and limitations of SaaS life should put you off, perhaps for good. Consider three things before jumping into the SaaS world:

Evaluate the financial impact of SaaS

The SaaS world can be very inviting but remind yourself of the potential of your firm before you start building a SaaS company out of fear of missing out. Founders of professional services firms can create more personal wealth than their counterparts in product companies. The reason for this is the impact of capital intensity.

For example, let’s say two friends, Sue and Kim, start companies at the same time. Sue starts a consulting firm, and Kim starts a software firm. Sue does not need to raise capital.

Consulting firms have very little costs and aren’t capital intensive. Therefore, Sue owns 100 percent of the firm. Kim, on the other hand, must raise $5 million from investors. SaaS companies have product-development costs and are capital-intensive. Therefore, Kim owns only 15 percent of her firm.

A practical example of selling a SaaS company

Ten years later, Sue and Kim sell their firms. At the time of the sale, both were making $10 million annually in revenue. Sue’s firm gets valued at 1.5x revenue, resulting in a purchase price of $15 million. Since she owns 100% of her firm, Sue makes $15 million.

Kim’s company gets valued at 5x revenue, resulting in a purchase price of $50 million. Since she owns 15 percent of her firm, Kim makes $7.5 million, meaning Sue makes twice what Kim makes at exit.

Additionally, Kim’s investors pay Kim a salary and prohibit her from pulling money out of business. Sue doesn’t have investors; she pays herself a salary and takes cash distributions regularly.

Kim must sell the company to get rewarded in proportion to her efforts, but Sue rewards herself twice, once with regular cash distributions and once upon exit. Effort and rewards are aligned consistently.

Decide on the work-life balance you want

Second, founders of professional service firms work less than founders of product firms. The reason for this is that they can control the scale (sterlingwoods dotcom). Founders of product companies are forced by their investors to grow at all costs. And this requires a non-stop, grueling work schedule.

A founder of a well-run marketing agency, for example, can achieve a work-life balance. She can ratchet up work when she feels inspired and can ratchet down work when she feels burnt out by taking on clients as desired. She controls the firm and is not duty-bound to venture capital tech investors.

Her cost structure is variable, the talent she needs to serve clients is readily available, and she has job security because she will not fire herself when she hits a bump in the road.

Investors and work-life balance

In contrast, the limitations of SaaS companies go beyond business; product company founders have no work-life balance. They lost control of their life the minute they took capital from investors. Their days are now filled by keeping investors happy, and their cost structure is not nearly as flexible because investors are managing the burn rate.

In addition, the talent SaaS founders need to build the product is tough to find and very expensive. Quality software engineers are in short supply. Lastly, and most troubling, if the founder of a product company misses the projections, they will lose their job. Investors replace founders when trouble shows up.

Determine the best way for your firm to scale

The promise of SaaS success is rapid scaling, but you can learn this lesson and apply it to your professional services firm without the risk of trying to raise capital.

There are many professional service firms that have scaled by expanding their reach. Gartner Group is a professional service firm with $4.7 billion in revenue, servicing over 15,000 clients.

The company has created economies of scale for its unique brand; it produces market research reports that clients subscribe to. The cost to produce the reports is high yet fixed. This means that with each new client, the cost to serve (on a per-unit basis) falls.

Don’t put your eggs in one basket

Economies of scope suggest that the cost of selling two services together is less than the cost of selling them separately. Some professional services are not scalable. Services that require specific client knowledge do not have the unit economics of a product.

A service firm would be wise to build a portfolio of service offerings with complimentary demand. This is when the consumption of one service increases the demand for another.

Your ego doesn’t need SaaS; it needs success

Overall, building a SaaS company isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, even if your venture does reach the heights of billion-dollar unicorn status. While the fast growth of certain unicorn companies can be tempting to pursue, the realities of raising capital are not as fun.

Instead, focus on how to find your niche in business — the areas where you have unique expertise and can build a scalable services firm that will help real people solve problems in their life. Working on creating the best scalable professional services firm you can is far more likely to reward you, both in the present and in the future.

Featured Image Credit: Provided by the Author; Photo by Dylan Gillis; Unsplash; Thank you!

Politics

Fintech Kennek raises $12.5M seed round to digitize lending

Published

on

Google eyed for $2 billion Anthropic deal after major Amazon play


London-based fintech startup Kennek has raised $12.5 million in seed funding to expand its lending operating system.

According to an Oct. 10 tech.eu report, the round was led by HV Capital and included participation from Dutch Founders Fund, AlbionVC, FFVC, Plug & Play Ventures, and Syndicate One. Kennek offers software-as-a-service tools to help non-bank lenders streamline their operations using open banking, open finance, and payments.

The platform aims to automate time-consuming manual tasks and consolidate fragmented data to simplify lending. Xavier De Pauw, founder of Kennek said:

“Until kennek, lenders had to devote countless hours to menial operational tasks and deal with jumbled and hard-coded data – which makes every other part of lending a headache. As former lenders ourselves, we lived and breathed these frustrations, and built kennek to make them a thing of the past.”

The company said the latest funding round was oversubscribed and closed quickly despite the challenging fundraising environment. The new capital will be used to expand Kennek’s engineering team and strengthen its market position in the UK while exploring expansion into other European markets. Barbod Namini, Partner at lead investor HV Capital, commented on the investment:

“Kennek has developed an ambitious and genuinely unique proposition which we think can be the foundation of the entire alternative lending space. […] It is a complicated market and a solution that brings together all information and stakeholders onto a single platform is highly compelling for both lenders & the ecosystem as a whole.”

The fintech lending space has grown rapidly in recent years, but many lenders still rely on legacy systems and manual processes that limit efficiency and scalability. Kennek aims to leverage open banking and data integration to provide lenders with a more streamlined, automated lending experience.

The seed funding will allow the London-based startup to continue developing its platform and expanding its team to meet demand from non-bank lenders looking to digitize operations. Kennek’s focus on the UK and Europe also comes amid rising adoption of open banking and open finance in the regions.

Featured Image Credit: Photo from Kennek.io; Thank you!

Radek Zielinski

Radek Zielinski is an experienced technology and financial journalist with a passion for cybersecurity and futurology.

Continue Reading

Politics

Fortune 500’s race for generative AI breakthroughs

Published

on

Deanna Ritchie


As excitement around generative AI grows, Fortune 500 companies, including Goldman Sachs, are carefully examining the possible applications of this technology. A recent survey of U.S. executives indicated that 60% believe generative AI will substantially impact their businesses in the long term. However, they anticipate a one to two-year timeframe before implementing their initial solutions. This optimism stems from the potential of generative AI to revolutionize various aspects of businesses, from enhancing customer experiences to optimizing internal processes. In the short term, companies will likely focus on pilot projects and experimentation, gradually integrating generative AI into their operations as they witness its positive influence on efficiency and profitability.

Goldman Sachs’ Cautious Approach to Implementing Generative AI

In a recent interview, Goldman Sachs CIO Marco Argenti revealed that the firm has not yet implemented any generative AI use cases. Instead, the company focuses on experimentation and setting high standards before adopting the technology. Argenti recognized the desire for outcomes in areas like developer and operational efficiency but emphasized ensuring precision before putting experimental AI use cases into production.

According to Argenti, striking the right balance between driving innovation and maintaining accuracy is crucial for successfully integrating generative AI within the firm. Goldman Sachs intends to continue exploring this emerging technology’s potential benefits and applications while diligently assessing risks to ensure it meets the company’s stringent quality standards.

One possible application for Goldman Sachs is in software development, where the company has observed a 20-40% productivity increase during its trials. The goal is for 1,000 developers to utilize generative AI tools by year’s end. However, Argenti emphasized that a well-defined expectation of return on investment is necessary before fully integrating generative AI into production.

To achieve this, the company plans to implement a systematic and strategic approach to adopting generative AI, ensuring that it complements and enhances the skills of its developers. Additionally, Goldman Sachs intends to evaluate the long-term impact of generative AI on their software development processes and the overall quality of the applications being developed.

Goldman Sachs’ approach to AI implementation goes beyond merely executing models. The firm has created a platform encompassing technical, legal, and compliance assessments to filter out improper content and keep track of all interactions. This comprehensive system ensures seamless integration of artificial intelligence in operations while adhering to regulatory standards and maintaining client confidentiality. Moreover, the platform continuously improves and adapts its algorithms, allowing Goldman Sachs to stay at the forefront of technology and offer its clients the most efficient and secure services.

Featured Image Credit: Photo by Google DeepMind; Pexels; Thank you!

Deanna Ritchie

Managing Editor at ReadWrite

Deanna is the Managing Editor at ReadWrite. Previously she worked as the Editor in Chief for Startup Grind and has over 20+ years of experience in content management and content development.

Continue Reading

Politics

UK seizes web3 opportunity simplifying crypto regulations

Published

on

Deanna Ritchie


As Web3 companies increasingly consider leaving the United States due to regulatory ambiguity, the United Kingdom must simplify its cryptocurrency regulations to attract these businesses. The conservative think tank Policy Exchange recently released a report detailing ten suggestions for improving Web3 regulation in the country. Among the recommendations are reducing liability for token holders in decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) and encouraging the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to adopt alternative Know Your Customer (KYC) methodologies, such as digital identities and blockchain analytics tools. These suggestions aim to position the UK as a hub for Web3 innovation and attract blockchain-based businesses looking for a more conducive regulatory environment.

Streamlining Cryptocurrency Regulations for Innovation

To make it easier for emerging Web3 companies to navigate existing legal frameworks and contribute to the UK’s digital economy growth, the government must streamline cryptocurrency regulations and adopt forward-looking approaches. By making the regulatory landscape clear and straightforward, the UK can create an environment that fosters innovation, growth, and competitiveness in the global fintech industry.

The Policy Exchange report also recommends not weakening self-hosted wallets or treating proof-of-stake (PoS) services as financial services. This approach aims to protect the fundamental principles of decentralization and user autonomy while strongly emphasizing security and regulatory compliance. By doing so, the UK can nurture an environment that encourages innovation and the continued growth of blockchain technology.

Despite recent strict measures by UK authorities, such as His Majesty’s Treasury and the FCA, toward the digital assets sector, the proposed changes in the Policy Exchange report strive to make the UK a more attractive location for Web3 enterprises. By adopting these suggestions, the UK can demonstrate its commitment to fostering innovation in the rapidly evolving blockchain and cryptocurrency industries while ensuring a robust and transparent regulatory environment.

The ongoing uncertainty surrounding cryptocurrency regulations in various countries has prompted Web3 companies to explore alternative jurisdictions with more precise legal frameworks. As the United States grapples with regulatory ambiguity, the United Kingdom can position itself as a hub for Web3 innovation by simplifying and streamlining its cryptocurrency regulations.

Featured Image Credit: Photo by Jonathan Borba; Pexels; Thank you!

Deanna Ritchie

Managing Editor at ReadWrite

Deanna is the Managing Editor at ReadWrite. Previously she worked as the Editor in Chief for Startup Grind and has over 20+ years of experience in content management and content development.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2021 Seminole Press.