More on the former Bricsnet CEO embezzlement

Further to my post about the Jinian wire fraud indictment, I’ve just received an email from Cristina Niculescu, head of Bricsnet’s collaboration tool ProjectCenter in Europe, who “to avoid speculation and hear-say rumours” thought it would be useful to put Bricsnet’s position on the subject and the effects it has had on Bricsnet as a company:

To start with, the effects of the ex-CEO prosecution have been uniformly positive and it is mostly ‘old news’. Fourteen months ago, after discovering financial irregularities, Bricsnet immediately fired its then-CEO and proactively asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate.

Last week’s arrest was thus the culmination of a discovery process initiated and fully supported by Bricsnet and its Chairman and Board of Directors. During that same period of time, Bricsnet and its investors instituted measures that not only solidified but greatly enhanced its financial clout while the company became an unconsolidated subsidiary of its majority shareholder, a Madrid-based real estate based holding of companies (Torimbia).

Torimbia assumed direct operational control of Bricsnet; and Bricsnet’s executive team and staff were augmented by Torimbia executives. Notably, Bricsnet’s current CEO [Hector Rodriguez], appointed 14 months ago, is a principal of Torimbia, and had been serving uninterruptedly on Bricsnet’s Board for the past seven years, three as Chairman.

Bricsnet’s customers and business partners were duly informed 14 months ago of the investigation and Bricsnet’s pro-active stance. Bricsnet is pleased that this matter is in the hands of the criminal justice system, where it belongs.

For further details you might want to peruse the Company’s press release to this effect.

I’m happy to publish this clarification. I am also hoping to maintain this dialogue with Cristina, perhaps getting a  view on how Bricsnet is thriving in the European market to follow on from the recent perspective given by conject.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/more-on-the-former-bricsnet-ceo-embezzlement/

SaaS to grow (again)

The Construction Software State of the Industry Report, produced by US-based firm Software Advice, is highlighting five trends (three of them upwards), relating to software buying habits, and suggests that the current recession makes Software-as-a-Service-based solutions even more attractive:

Software as a Service is in the right place at the right time
Software as a Service (SaaS) is gaining momentum in many software markets. In fact, we would agree with other IT prognosticators that SaaS is a major structural shift in software deployment and is here to stay. We’ve seen this model succeed in the project management segment where there is a clear need for the collaborative benefits of web-based software. Moreover, the current recession is making the SaaS model more attractive to contractors because:

  • Subscription pricing can easily be added to a project’s general conditions;
  • Low up-front costs allow project managers to avoid an onerous approval process; and,
  • Faster and less expensive implementation makes the new systems more digestible.

We have not seen much demand for SaaS accounting, estimating or service management, although we do get asked about it now and then. We also have not seen many vendors emerge to deliver that sort of solution. We would not be surprised to see SaaS accounting and/or estimating solutions emerge over the next few years.

My perspective

Having spent most of the past ten years focused on SaaS solutions for the architecture, engineering, construction (AEC) and property sectors, I have seen numerous analysts predict continued growth for SaaS, both generally (post) and for specific industries such as construction. The recession will certainly be a factor, and the emergence of numerous start-ups offering low-cost SaaS-based file-sharing – see post – is perhaps an indication of this trend.

(I feel a little uneasy about this sudden profusion of low-cost solutions. It reminds me of the days before the dot.com implosion when it was estimated there were over 200 suppliers of ‘project extranets’. Many of these soon disappeared, but the dot.com crash was a sobering reminder of the need for customers to make careful checks that providers have resilient hosting infrastructures, robust finances and appropriate contingency arrangements to help maintain services supporting what are often mission-critical construction projects. Good technology is not enough – you need confidence that a vendor will provide a reliable 24/7 service right through to hand-over of the project, and maybe beyond.)

Some of the established SaaS construction collaboration vendors are moving towards provision of richer levels of functionality to support parallel or back-office processes such as accounting (in the process, this also helps differentiate themselves from those offering basic file-sharing solutions). For example, German provider conject recently talked to me about its cash-flow planning module, and [my former employer] BIW Technologies has its own Financial Control application, offering integration with conventional back-office accounting systems.

Some SaaS collaboration providers (eg: Aconex, Incite, Asite, Business Collaborator) also offer APIs, potentially enabling customers and developers to build their own applications, integrate enterprise systems and/or access project data from other SaaS solutions, which might include accounting or even more fully-featured ERP platforms.

I personally use SaaSu for my own SME’s financial management, but am aware of SaaS accounting systems developed by vendors such as Business Collaborator’s parent Coda, plus Xero, Kashflow, MYOB, Intuit and Sage, among others. Some of these SaaS applications are still not fully-formed yet, but as they mature I expect cost-conscious construction company finance directors may well be tempted by some of the potential efficiency savings offered by secure hosting of their data ‘in the cloud’. Equally, perhaps we will see some of the more construction-oriented finance solutions (eg: COINS, Sage’s Timberline) available on a SaaS basis.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/saas-to-grow-again/

Former Bricsnet CEO indicted on embezzlement charges

Just over two years ago, I wrote about the latest $13 million fund-raising round by US-based AEC and property solutions vendor Bricsnet. Following a news item on AECcafe.com, I see that Ethan Farid Jinian, the CEO of Bricsnet at the time of that investment, has just been indicted on charges of embezzling $1 million.

The US Department of Justice confirms Jinian appeared in federal court last week after a federal grand jury indicted him on 14 counts of wire fraud between November 2006 and September 2008 while he was Bricsnet CEO. At the time Jinian was in receipt of an annual salary of $200,000, but is alleged to have falsely told other Bricsnet employees that he was orally promised additional compensation and directed them to issue cheques totalling more than $1m to him.

Possibly Construction collaboration technology’s first major criminal scandal!

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/former-bricsnet-ceo-indicted-on-embezzlement-charges/

Collabor8 online

This year I have written about several low-cost, even no-cost, collaboration solutions that might be used by businesses in the architectural, engineering and construction (AEC) industry (eg: Glasscubes, e-Grou, Incite Toolbox, ShowDocument, drop.io, Clouds UK, Woobius, Colaab). Even the deepest recession that most AEC professionals can remember has not deterred people from launching new solutions. Maybe people believe that the recession is the ideal time to launch tools aimed at improving efficiency and cutting costs, and undercut many of the well-established but more expensive solutions? However, with some of the latter (eg: Asite) also offering low-price solutions, this is becoming a very competitive market.

Any way, the latest is a Manchester, UK-based online application, Collabor8online, described as a “A Project Extranet specifically aimed at the contracting and construction industries” (online, I have also seen it promoted as “developed to help M&E contractors and specifiers work smarter and more productively” – a reflection perhaps of the founder’s previous involvement in IT companies in the building services sector, see below).

Solutions

The Collabor8 online product line-up has three strands: a low-cost hosted model, a premium hosted model and a self-hosted model.

The low-cost hosted model is priced at £25 (+VAT, reduced from £49 for a limited period) and allows up to 25 users and 2Gb storage of files (including Word, Excel, pdf, dwg formats, plus photos and video). The service also includes version control, multiple uploads, online file management, RSS feeds, Google-style searches, and security configurable to company, project or document level. There is no document mark-up or commenting at this level.

The premium hosted model starts from £49 per month (reduced from £99), and offers five times the storage space and allows twice as many registered users. As well as all the features of the basic product, the premium package includes task management, calendaring, automatic workflow and approvals processes and red-lining and document mark-up.

For the self-hosted solution, Collabor8 say they can include more significant elements of customisation and configuration to suit each individual client’s requirements and falling in-line with existing company-wide login and security issues. “As a bespoke service pricing details are available on request following a review of your requirements”.

Company

According to its website, Collabor8 online is part of XBC – “formed in 2005 by the founders of Barnes Computing a business that was subsequently acquired by Estimation ltd (which in turn is now part of Amtech group)” – both Estimation and Amtech are well-known names in the building services IT sector; presumably XBC equals ex-Barnes Computing. XBC Ltd was incorporated in 2005, but was dormant at least up to 31 July this year. Colin Barnes is XBC’s sole director and is also owner of a Liverpool-based telecoms business, Host Telecom Ltd. (You can hear his introduction to the Collabor8 online offering in a YouTube video).

Another company is also involved. The Collabor8online.com domain name was registered to Collabor8 Ltd, a company based in Newcastle, Staffordshire, of which the majority share-holder is director Nicholas Mark Jellyman. Update (26 January 2010): I have received a helpful email from Paul Haddlesey, who handles marketing for XBC’s Collabor8, saying that they have no connection to Collabor8 Ltd. I’m glad to make that clarification – the names are certainly similar and likely to cause confusion should the Staffordshire business ever launch a website (it’s currently dormant).

[PS: thanks to Mel Starrs for the tip. ]

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/collabor8-online/

Project Bluestreak

Autodesk’s AEC division has just launched an experimental BIM collaboration environment, Project Bluestreak, aimed at “accelerating building information modeling through the open exchange of design information and ideas between desktop applications, web-based services, and people” (reports Autodesk blogger Scott Sheppard). It is also deploying Web 2.0 tools to help speed up the development of the application.

Login to the site is separate to Autodesk’s Buzzsaw and Constructware offerings, and apparently allows users to create their own profiles, to organise private groups, share project files and activity streams, and make notifications and comments, all via a browser-based interface. And by making the prototype available online, Autodesk is hoping that user feedback will help improve the application still further – the team is using GetSatisfaction as a user feedback system – there is also a Bluestreak Twitter feed, a Facebook fanpage, and a YouTube video about the project – aiming to fast-track the development of the service. I’m not sure if these social networking tools will be incorporated into Bluestreak itself, or if they will remain part of the community space around the product (perhaps an opportunity missed if they aren’t?).

(By the way, Scott finishes his blog post with a cheery: “Social networking in the AEC world is alive in the lab“. Given the scepticism about social media I sometimes encounter in AEC businesses, I expect some will be happy if social networking remains in the lab!)

[PS: Thanks to Be2camp contributor John Allsopp (Amonle) for the tip.]

Update (24 November 2009) – Some CAD blogger reactions have been less than positive. This review, Project Bluestreak. Dead on Arrival?, by Piotr Zurek, suggests:

  • it lacks any industry specific vision and functionality
  • it tries too hard to be “social”
  • Autodesk didn’t make a big commitment to this project

He continues:

“…if Autodesk wants this project to succeed they need to commit some serious resources to it. Possibly even go back to the drawing board and work out a clear vision of how to integrate all the latest collaboration technologies with their other product. Make the project future proof by embracing new, emerging technologies (like the Wave Federation Protocol) instead of following in footsteps of social projects that have been around for a few years. Finally, Autodesk – be a bit smarter about it. Talk to Novell, talk to Google …. Use their experience, buy their expertise if necessary. Spice it up with what you have learned from Buzzsaw and Vault products and you’ll get something useful to every engineer, architect or draftsperson using BIM/CAx software every day.”

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/project-bluestreak/

Not a free press release service

I don’t republish company’s press releases on this blog. Last week I received an email asking:

“We are interested to publish our company news in Extranet Evolution; I could not navigate the place to find the details of how to submit the article. Please send us the details.”

I responded and patiently explained:

“ExtranetEvolution is a blog, and so doesn’t have a news-posting service. However, if you have something that you think I should write about it, please email me a copy or send me a link to the relevant page on your website.”

Nonetheless, I still received a news release attached to an email asking me to “publish this article in your website”. It had some relevance to project collaboration, but not enough to excite me to write about it (and the writer’s apparent ignorance of blogging didn’t help).

(By the way, if you want sites that will automatically publish your company news, there are quite a few free press release sites around – typing “free press release” into Google gives over a million results – as well as some good paid-for services – PRnewswire is one I have used in the past).

Blog engagement

By all means, send me your news releases, but make sure they are relevant to the blog. Actually reading the blog would be a good start. It can help sometimes if you identify a previous post on a related topic and perhaps drop me an email or a Tweet to explain why your release is relevant. You can also use my blogs’ comment facilities; I monitor all comments, so can pick up on interesting snippets added through that route.

I often link to news releases and reproduce extracts from them, but – just like mainstream media outlets – I am selective about what I write about and how I present it. Also, as I’m not a full-time blogger, I pick the topics I judge most important in the time I’ve got available to write about them. Remember these things and I’m sure we’ll get along famously….

Technorati Tags: press releases,blog,company news,blogging,PRnewswire

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/not-a-free-press-release-service/

The conject interview

conject-logoHaving recently received a comment from Chris Brandt, CTO at conject, I thought it was high time that I took a more detailed look at this construction and real estate collaboration vendor. Based in Munich, Germany, but with operations across most of Europe, conject has gradually been expanding its international reach beyond Europe. It has bases in Dubai and Boston in the USA, and this year has opened offices in Singapore and South Africa.

I decided it might be best to get some conject people to tell me about the company and its history, so I posed a few questions (and a couple of follow-ups), and this is how Chris and his colleague Elke Tonscheidt responded….

1. Conject was founded in 2000 just before the dot.com bubble burst. How did it survive that period and how has it grown into the company it is today? Were there any mergers or acquisitions along the way?

First: We had (and have) a big and strong founding team (12 people!) with a powerful and ultimately successful vision – offering ASP [application service provision] tools to make collaboration in the real estate market possible. The dot.com crash was not helpful but the team and idea were outstanding. In 2002 and 2003 we made two acquisitions that helped to create a whole lifecycle product from (a) planning, through (b) building to (c) running – operating and maintaining – the built asset.

2. Which markets did conject target first? What was the initial reaction in those markets to an on-demand/SaaS solution? Have attitudes towards SaaS changed, and, if so, how?

We have always consistently targeted the real estate market. The initial reaction was: ‘Yes, we need that but we do not want to be the first ones’ – real estate people are innovative in building but regarding technology they do not belong to the trend-setters…. So for us it was more than helpful getting well-known clients like BMW very early (in 2001). After the ice was broken, the attitude quickly changed a lot. Today nobody would dare to say that these tools are unimportant.

3. Who do you see as your main competitors?

As a software as a service (SaaS) company for infrastructure lifecycle management (ILM), conject is the only company covering the entire life cycle of Real Estate assets. However in selected fields of our activities we have high profile competition that we appreciate and love to take on. Aconex from Australia is competing with us is some markets outside Europe. However, the market itself is our most challenging competitor since it still takes a lot to convince the conservative market participants to adopt the value-add of SaaS – a notion most of our competitors would agree on.

4. Give me a sense of the scale of the business. What is conject’s annual turnover? Is it profitable? How have revenues grown over the past 2-3 years? How many people are employed by conject?

In 2008 we had a turnover of €11.5m [£10.3m] and generated a profit of €2.1m [£1.9m]. This revenue was 18% more than the year before. In the preceding years we grew at a rate of 16% (2007) and 15% (2006). Currently conject employs 124 people (up from 92 at the end of 2008).

5. What has been the impact of the current downturn in the construction sector on conject?

In times of crisis people HAVE to think about efficiency. They are forced to control their costs – if they don’t do it on their own, others will remind them…. With conject you save time and money and the chance to achieve even more quality is high. So the demand for tools we offer is even stronger when a downturn takes place.

6. Any plans to market conject in the UK?

UK is a very interesting market due to its maturity and size. But due to resource restrictions on the management level we aren’t currently planning to enter the UK organically. Nevertheless we follow our customers into foreign markets (that naturally includes the UK) and are always in search for partners, that could open us the doors to the UK.

7. How do you see the market for your services changing over the next five years?

Due to the financial crisis but also due to the fact that products became easier-to-use, more speedy and more mobile we expect the market to continue growing. Together with devices like trendy iPhones and reasonable applications for them we are prepared for a strong demand – especially worldwide. So we are looking for new partners all over the world – at the moment especially in Asia and Africa.

8. Can you tell me about the history of conject’s applications? Were they designed from the start as web-native applications or migrated from client/server?

conject’s ILM suite consists of over 45 modules. Each one is based on the most appropriate technology for the processes it supports. For example, our collaboration modules are multi-tenant web based, the module for (project) time tracking is single tenant web based, and the module for cash-flow planning is implemented as a fat client. Our SaaS offering was designed as web-native from the start but most of our single-tenant web modules are new developments based on already existing client/server modules.

9. Can you explain the thinking behind infrastructure lifecycle management? What types of organisations (maybe a few named examples) are using ILM?

The lifecycle phases of real estate are becoming shorter. Today, it’s short-lived technical and usage-specific infrastructure which dominate the costs. Traditionally, the main costs beyond construction were heating and maintenance. Today, the ongoing costs of maintaining a building make up the majority the of the lifetime costs of the building. Traditionally, buildings were built for the eternity. Today, the owner has to consider later conversions even during the initial construction phase.

Due to these shortened lifecycle and usage phases, real estate is no longer the safe long-term financial investment it once was. In fact it has become a significantly more risky investment. In order to effectively manage these risks, real estate must be actively managed throughout the entire lifecycle.

Successful real estate requires more than just an ideal location, dynamic architecture, and effective cost control. More importantly, successful real estate demands that these and other factors harmonise well together. It is the combination of multiple well-managed elements that creates long-term success. Nowadays, the real estate manager requires at all times a high transparency of all processes and the possibility to react quickly to changes in the market and the community.

(conject’s website lists a big selection of its corporate clients. As well as the afore-mentioned BMW, it includes Bilfinger & Berger, Deutsche Bank, Hochtief, Hugo Boss, IKEA, Lufthansa, Siemens Real Estate, ThyssenKrupp and T-Mobile.)

10. Is conject looking at building information modelling (BIM)? What is the current appetite for this approach among designers in your target markets, and how do you see this changing?

BIM during the design phase was a fad in Germany already over ten years ago. We see some new initiatives in the market to re-fuel this topic under the heading of four or five dimensional planning/design. We are not convinced this is the best approach.

We see a high relevance of building information during the hand-over phase when owners would like to receive their as-built documentation in a format that is suitable for use in a CAFM [computer-aided facilities management] system. As we also provide such modules to the market we see ourselves uniquely positioned to support contractors and owners during that phase. It is still hard to find owners who are forward thinking enough to address this topic in their contracts but some of our clients have successfully received a fully loaded CAFM system from their general contractor at the end of the project thanks to our help.

Some financial context

In terms of its turnover, conject is larger than all but one of the UK-based construction collaboration vendors. The much merged business that is today Sword CTSpace (while the parent Sword group is a France-listed company, shortly to relocate to Luxembourg, the CTSpace business is headquartered in west London) had a 2008 turnover of €14.4m [£11.5m], of which around €4.4m came from the former Citadon operations in the USA, and roughly the same amount from Germany and Austria (see post).

However, conject lags some way behind Aconex, which recently reported global turnover of €21.1m [£17.985m] in the year to 30 June 2009 (post) – around twice the level of conject.

Looking at the key profit metric, conject is just ahead of 4Projects, who generated an impressive €2.2m [£1.8m] profit in the year to 31 March 2009 on a lower turnover of €6.6m [£5.5m] (post).

But 4Projects’ healthy pre-tax profit margin33% – is almost double the 18% margins achieved by both conject and Sword CTSpace.  And to put 4Projects’ performance further into context, UK rivals BIW and Business Collaborator (post) achieved margins of 13% and 7% respectively in 2008; retail specialist StoreData’s most recent results (post) showed a 17% margin.

Updates (24 November, 2 December 2009) – Having mentioned IKEA above, it might be worth pointing out that Aconex recently announced it was being used to support the refurbishment of IKEA’s Wembley store in north-west London, and Sword CTSpace is also working for the Swedish retail giant.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/the-conject-interview/

StoreData trading in line with management expectations

Retail fit-out specialist Styles & Wood yesterday issued an Interim Management Statement relating to the period from 1 July 2009 to 18 November 2009, saying (among other things) that its specialist collaboration business StoreData was trading “in line with management expectations”, adding:

“The retail fit out and refurbishment market place is starting to show some signs of stabilising but this is against a very difficult period in the first half of 2009. Overall our customers remain cautious with their investment programmes and we expect that this position will continue into 2010.”

Seems to confirm the view presented by most collaboration vendors of a difficult 2009, particularly in the first six months of the year.

Related posts:

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/storedata-trading-in-line-with-management-expectations/

“A tough year for BIW”

Duncan Mactear of 4Projects has forwarded me an article about [my former employer] BIW Technologies, published recently to subscribers to Megabuyte.com (an “invaluable source of market intelligence for IT companies, their advisers and investors providing in-depth coverage of the corporate and financial affairs of all of the UK’s leading listed and privately owned software & IT services companies”). The article says:

A tough year for BIW

When SaaS vendor to the construction sector BIW Technologies announced that it had refinanced the business in September, the statement talked very positively about the prospects for the company and how it had been performing. CEO Colin Smith is quoted in the press release as saying “despite the downturn, BIW continues to trade very successfully with strong revenue and profits.” However, when we went looking for BIW’s latest accounts at Companies House to see just how strong the revenue and profits were, what we found instead was that BIW Plc, the parent company of BIW Technologies, had been put into administration. Not only was it news to us that BIW Plc had been put into administration but also it was clear from the administrators report that 2009 has been a very difficult year indeed for the company.

How quickly things have changed for BIW; as recently as July 2008, the Telegraph reported that the company was looking to IPO with a valuation of between £30m and £50m. The Administrators report confirms that BIW was indeed looking for investment in early 2008 and, after a few months, issued £3.5m of loan notes but these were redeemable after only one year. The main investor in the loan notes was 20% shareholder Nova Capital and, given that it was highly unlikely that the company was going to generate sufficient cash to pay back these loan notes, Nova must have been confident of some kind of liquidity event before the loan notes fell due.

However, it seems that the credit crunch has had a dramatic impact on trading at BIW. According to press reports, BIW generated a £1m profit on revenues of £7.5m for the year to September 2008 but things got a lot tougher thereafter. The Administrators report says that, in the first half of fiscal 2009, BIW lost a number of customers and that it suffered losses of £0.4m in the eight months to May 2009. It goes on to say that BIW undertook ‘a number of redundancies and cost cutting initiatives’ but none of this was enough to convince any trade buyers, let alone allow for an IPO. Despite this, even as trading was worsening, BIW was keeping up an external appearance that all was well. The FT reported in December that BIW was still aiming to come to the market saying that the company was looking to raise £5m-£15m. Indeed, Finance Director Bill Flind was quoted as saying ‘we’re all ready and raring to go’. Furthermore, the statement announcing the refinancing in September comments that ‘the company continues to trade profitably in 2009’; an assertion which seems at odds with the Administrators report.

When the loan notes came due, the company had no choice but to call in the administrators who then sold the business for £3.5m in a pre-pack deal to Nova Capital who effectively converted their £2.5m of loan notes into equity and paid out the other loan note holders in cash. We’re not sure how much the existing shareholders got to rollover into the new vehicle but we suspect the answer is not very much. The good news is that BIW’s financing issues don’t seem to have affected BIW’s customers and partners. Attenda, for example, which is BIW’s hosting partner, renewed its partnership February.

All of this goes to show that it doesn’t matter how fast you are growing or how brilliantly you are riding the technology wave, recessions impact everyone. Up to now, BIW has been a trail blazer for the UK software sector and cloud computing in particular so we very much hope that is can put 2009 behind it and get back to growth in 2010. But the IPO may have to wait a few years.

My reaction

Clearly, BIW has suffered, like governments and most businesses, from failing to anticipate the global financial crisis that hit last autumn, and the depth of its impact. Rivals 4Projects and Aconex both managed to instigate and complete their fund-raising moves before the construction market imploded; BIW didn’t.

BIW is not alone in losing customers during the credit crunch, of course. For example, Aconex recently reported the cancellation of projects, particularly in the Middle East, with a corresponding knock-on effect on the company’s order book, and some redundancies. BIW had significant operations in Dubai and was expanding into neighbouring states, and the well-publicised problems at client Nakheel certainly had an impact, particularly in the first three months of 2009. And as can be judged from its news releases, BIW’s clients also included several banks. Once considered blue-chip customers, these clients’ problems also resulted in project cancellations as the financial crisis deepened and banks had to cut back on their property programmes.

BIW’s financial year end is 30 September, so the reported full year results for 2008 (“£1m profit on revenues of £7.5m” – final accounts have yet to be lodged at Companies House) reflect solid growth prior to the start of the current recession. However, unlike rival vendors whose financial years have straddled the recession (eg: Business Collaborator – see last week’s post – has a 31 December year-end; 4Projects’ year-end is 31 March – post), BIW’s 2008-2009 will pretty much cover the whole of the credit crunch. So – unless the downturn extends (I have spoken to people talking bleakly about recovery only in 2011 or even later) – its losses should be concentrated into one financial year, rather than affecting two years’ results.

The September 2009 recapitalisation of BIW Technologies Ltd [about which I was briefed] was preceded by a sobering and painful period of cost-cutting and some redundancies in the first quarter of 2009 as the scale of the industry problems and their impact on BIW became clear [I had little option but to accept statutory redundancy terms, but was happy to re-establish my consultancy business]. Up to this point, BIW’s directors had remained optimistic, hence the FT fund-raising story in December 2008 (mentioned above) and the new deal with Attenda. The comments that ‘the company continues to trade profitably in 2009’ may well depend upon how one uses the term ‘trade’ – perhaps month by month the business is making an operating profit, but its full year figures (which are due in the summer of 2010) may yet reflect the project cancellations, tougher market conditions and restructuring costs?

The article underlines that it was the parent company that was put into administration, not the operating company, BIW Technologies Ltd. Nobody likes to hear of a business reaching this stage, but at least customer and supplier uncertainty was avoided. Instead, the pain was confined to investors and share-holders, which also included directors, staff and, as a founder and very modest shareholder, former employees like me…. I have been a regular recipient of communications from administrator Zolfo Cooper. Disregarding the paper loss that this administration has meant to me personally, and sifting through the legal and accountancy speak, it does seem that the surviving BIW operation will be in a much better financial shape, even if – as Megabuyte.com say – “the IPO may have to wait a few years”.

More importantly, a morale-sapping failure of one of the UK’s leading vendors has been avoided. Back in 2001, when iScraper went bust as the dot.com bubble burst, it was important that businesses like BIW and BuildOnline picked up the pieces to maintain business confidence in the AEC Software-as-a-Service sector as a whole. Eight years later, we are facing a much deeper recession that is affecting more than just technology businesses, and – while some investors, shareholders and employees may have lost out – BIW has at least continued to provide its services to dozens of clients and hundreds of project teams.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/a-tough-year-for-biw/

Contract terminated

UK construction trade weekly Contract Journal is to shut down at the end of the month.

The news comes as no surprise to anyone who has been monitoring the UK construction press over the past year, and it confirms a prediction made by CIB Communications’ Andy Cassie in February that one major construction title and one architecture title might disappear (see post Testing times for AEC IT magazines?).

The announcement came in an email from parent company Reed Business Information. It said:

… the end of this month will see the closure of Contract Journal and its sister web site www.contractjournal.com. Like the construction contractors it serves, Contract Journal has been hit severely by an unprecedented market recession which has slashed advertising volumes by more than half. The editorial and sales team have reacted superbly to the downturn, producing great content and satisfying the needs of the much smaller advertising base. But despite their efforts, the market is now not large enough to support a large circulation free title. The last issue of Contract Journal will be at the end of the month and Contractjournal.com will close simultaneously. Every effort is being made to redeploy the staff elsewhere at our parent company Reed Business Information (RBI).

Sadly, despite recent debates about balancing digital and online content (see The future of the construction media), RBI clearly sees no point in continuing with its advertising-driven contractor-oriented news and feature content, so the website will also be shut down. Presumably, CJ’s web 2.0 presence (see post) will also either disappear or re-emerge in new guises. I hope Brian Green’s Brickonomics blog continues as a stand-alone project (or maybe Brian will link up with another publication), but I think we will see the demise of the discussion board Construction Space, and the Twitter feed of CJ stories will cease. And as for the Facebook page, who knows?

 

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2009/11/contract-terminated/

Load more