camoscato:

That's what I think, too, but apparently Mark doesn't see it that way.

camoscato:

So, not directed at you.

camoscato:

If you read that post again, you'll see I was responding to Jeroen, who said:

….Hi Carl: Yeah, I'm really sorry. I completely mis-read and totally misunderstood your post.  

camoscato:

When they're looking at Vegas or Premeire or FCP it's not because they think they're too stupid to use MC, but rather that they think they'll get more for their money with the other packages,

….Ding ! Yup !

camoscato:

Someone who doesn't need to cut film, or need multicam, or need to connect multiple machines to shared storage may not need to spend the money on MC when Vegas is so much cheaper.

…I have to acknowledge that this may also be a possibility.

Mark Job

switthaus:

Avid's marketing has been terrible for a very long time now.

….Yes. I agree. There web site sends out mixed messages and general confusion. The larger editing community is what Avid seems to be unable to communicate with. It's all about Academy Award winning enterprise users and that's it !

Mark Job

switthaus:

Job ter Burg:

{snip}

The result of this (and being the only game in town for a while) led to a certain corporate arrogance that prevented Avid from seeing real competition at its heels and kept Avid in a legacy product line, confusing upgrade policy, and outdated price structure for almost too long.  I think what we see is scrambling and confusion to define what the "brand" of Avid actually is (anyone here care to answer that?  What is the Avid "brand"?).  Certainly a visit to the web site does not clarify that definition.

{snip}

Why isn't your analysis so obvious to AVID?   Perhaps it is because AVID can't see the forest for the trees... or... because AVID can't see the value of a defined brand reflected in it's site.  Or... maybe/most likely it is obvious to AVID... but, AVID is still trying to overcome past marketing mistakes. 

Each of your observations are extremely accurate and if I was to put emphasis on what probably has a the biggest impact on AVID's growth (or lack of)... it would be when you noted AVID's previous (or current - take your pick) "outdated price structure" and the "certain (level of) corporate arrogance" that contributed to the loss of market share to it's competitors.

As it stands, I see AVID trying desperately to play catch up... 

One of the simpliest thing AVID could do to define itself would be truthfully ask itself this ONE QUESTION:

"What does AVID do that it's competitors can not?"

This is not the same question as... "What can AVID do that is BETTER than it's competitors"? 

To grab market share with a tight grip... AVID must do something that it's competitors can not do and do it for less cost... anything less is simply maintaining market share at best.  I think AVID has spent too much time trying to prove it does things better than it's competitors instead of innovating to do things that it's competitors can not do at a better price.

If someone would like to post an answer to the question..."What does AVID do that it's competitors can not?" ... then, feel free.  But, from an editing application point of view... I honestly can not think of anything significant that MC can do that any one of AVID's competing professional level NLE can not do also and at a marginally lower cost.  As a result, this means market growth for AVID is and has been defined more by price and less by innovation.  This growth model is a definate problem for AVID in the long run.   A problem that I also think AVID is currently trying to rectify (...even at the expense of making some more traditional users unhappy - which I believe is not necessary if planned changes are carried out correctly and in a timely manner).

To paraphrase a quote from a CEO friend of mine... Change or Innovation is seldom the problem... but, rather it always the rate at which that change occurs that creates most if not all of the problems and missteps. 

 

Joe M:

To paraphrase a quote from a CEO friend of mine... Change or Innovation is seldom the problem... but, rather it always the rate at which that change occurs that creates most if not all of the problems and missteps. 

I would add to that equation the factor of user feedback regarding changes and how responsive (or non-responsive) the company is to it.

I am wondering where upper management has gone...a year ago there seemed to be a real connection, especially with the Liquid initiative. There was a genuine sense of involvement and messages getting to the right ears, and answers right from the top.

Why did this breakthrough in corporate behaviour cease?

TVJohn:

There was a genuine sense of involvement and messages getting to the right ears, and answers right from the top. Why did this breakthrough in corporate behaviour cease?

I don't know why, but I'm pretty sure of when...when the "Chat with Avid" Forum was effectively shut down and made read only. Any presence of either Gary Greenfield or Kirk Arnold on the Forums since that happened has been slim to none.

 

TVJohn:

Why did this breakthrough in corporate behaviour cease?

No idea.  They used to come on here every few months and answer questions, but they quit doing that because they wanted to use the emailed newsletter instead.  Why they decided to skip the forum with 90,000+ members and concentrate on the newsletter that goes directly into people's spam folder I have no idea.

(I mean no offense to the newsletter people, but your newsletter looks like every other spammy tech email I get from Sorensen, Sony, Nintendo, etc, etc, etc.  I give them all a cursory glance to see if there's anything interesting in them, then to the trash folder they go.)

[edited to add] John, why are you using British spellings from Bayonne, New Jersey?  

I believe I can state with some confidence, many former Liquid users took the MC offer due to the statements directly made by top management. The value of this level of reasurance cannot be overstated.

PS I have spent (enjoyed) too many exchanges with you, Carl, and my friend Douglas. It rubs off.

TVJohn:

PS I have spent (enjoyed) too many exchanges with you, Carl, and my friend Douglas. It rubs off.

Oh, man, that's bad, John.  I've lived in the UK since 2007, but I still spell stuff right (i.e. the American way).

camoscato:

I've lived in the UK since 2007, but I still spell stuff right (i.e. the American way).

Uh, oh. I smell a response on that coming from Douglas!

 

camoscato:

I still spell stuff right (i.e. the American way)

Since adopting my own correct English (Andrew English) I spell and punctuate all my posts perfectly! Even when I spell the same word differently on each of the three times it appears in the same post.

In Canada, the word, "Color" (US Spelling), is still often spelt like, "Colour." In french it is spelt, "Colour," here in Le Quebec. "Colour" is the correct way to spell "Color." Unfortunately, I lack any rational reason for brining this up in this thread.

Mark Job

EDIT: Beyonne, New Jersey. You sure there wasn't a French Fort, or a courier de bois trading post there once ?

Joe M:

Why isn't your analysis so obvious to AVID?

Because I don't have to answer to stockholders and a board.  Think how tough it is for Avid.  Just a few years ago they were selling turnkey systems at $50,000 plus.  Upgrades were several thousand dollars each and the company was an edit software company...that's where it generated its revenue and profit (Avid had millions and millions of cash on hand back in the day.  I believe that is mostly, if not all, gone today). 

Then, very quickly, the "race to the bottom" started and Avid was trapped.  Its corporate structure was set up on the past and things are now changing very rapidly.  So, it downsized, trimmed a bit of product (needs to trim Symph, but thats another thread) and adds other products to its line to generate revenue.  All the while the NLE and aquisition landscape is changing even more rapidly.  IMHO, the result of this dizzying change in the market is where we see Avid now...and its not getting any easier.  What is Avid now?  Editing software?  Sound software?  Shared storage?  Or is the professionals choice for all of the above?  The company has still not figured it out.

 

sw

 

switthaus:

What is Avid now?  Editing software?  Sound software?  Shared storage?  Or is the professionals choice for all of the above?  The company has still not figured it out.

And for proof of that, go to the home page of avid.com. To a person completely unfamiliar with Avid, they would assume Avid's mainstay is live on location audio capture. And oh yes, by the way, we sell Media Composer, Avid Studio, and Pro Tools too. (If you know what they are.) With over 500 products now under the Avid umbrella, it's no surprise this company is having an identity crisis as to who they really are, who their customer base for the future really is, and how they connect with them in a way that assures increased sales and profitability.

Larry Rubin:

Joe M:

To paraphrase a quote from a CEO friend of mine... Change or Innovation is seldom the problem... but, rather it always the rate at which that change occurs that creates most if not all of the problems and missteps. 

I would add to that equation the factor of user feedback regarding changes and how responsive (or non-responsive) the company is to it.

 

Based on that addition...

Perhaps it could be also said... A company that doesn't do a good job of responding to long term requests for very basic and simple changes... much less responding to miscalculations in changes they make that are NOT requested by it's customer...

And... doesn't really add to the idea of being "innovative" but rather only seems to be making changes in order to catch up with the competition...

...is a company that will find market share growth to be a tough uphill battle.