Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Ovum’

New firms sprout roots in the Asia/Pacific IT analyst landscape

Like the markets it supports, the IT industry analyst landscape is in a constant state of change. Firms come and go, research agendas shift to new technologies, business models are tweaked & redirected, deliverables metamorphose to reflect changed information consumption habits.

The last few years has seen quite a bit of consolidation at the “top end of town” as larger players have bought up smaller firms which provide them with access to new markets or opportunities. Forrester acquired home-grown APJ firm, Springboard Research three years ago, and Gartner soaked up IDEAS International in 2012. More recently, 451 Research picked up Yankee Group, a shadow of its former self, and Informa Telecoms transmogrified into Ovum, which it had acquired a few years ago.

These deals have been well reported, but just as interesting is what has been happening at the other end of the market. The analyst business is a classic “long tail” industry – there are hundreds of companies which fit the broad definition of “analyst firm” – and there are few barriers to entry, so there are always new players.

Over the past couple of years, quite a number of new seeds have been sown in the Asia/Pacific region. Some of these have already borne fruit, some are still quite nascent. They all have different business models, different focus areas, different capabilities, and how well they perform remains to be seen.

But they all have something to offer. As we’ve noted before, any analyst firm can give you insights into a market or technology – how important that is to a vendor depends on its own market focus, information needs, budget availability & many other factors.

Very few analyst firms have true influence over end-user purchasing decisions, but many influence around the edges, or can help create exposure for vendors to build awareness or help them better address their market opportunities. These are all valid outcomes of an analyst relations program, just addressed differently.

We thought it worthwhile to profile some of the “new” firms which have come on to our radar in APJ over the last couple of years. There are also a couple of firms which are relatively new on the scene that didn’t want to be included in our coverage at this point, but we’ll likely hear more of them as they get themselves established. We make no judgment on the capabilities or likely success of these firms, and to avoid any allegations of bias, they’re listed alphabetically.

 BigInsights (Australia)

Big data is a big topic, and that’s all that BigInsights covers, offering research, consulting, go-to-market services & training. The firm was founded by a former HP colleague of mine, Raj Dalal, who also spent some time covering emerging technologies for IDC Asia/Pacific. Also on board is another ex-HPer, David Triggs – as CTO – and former IDC Australia software analyst, Shayum Rahim – as research director – while the advisory board includes Ramin Marzbani, who in the 1990s built the internet research firm, www.consult, before selling it to ACNielsen; and Vikram Mehta, who rolled the blade server business out of Nortel to create Blade Network Technologies, later selling it to IBM.

BigInsights’ business model is fairly “traditional” and primarily focused on vendors with specific big data products, but includes some end-user services including discovery workshops & training. Key research studies include an annual technology & vendor landscape, and demand-side research on big data technology adoption, both covering the Asia/Pacific region.

 capioIT (Australia)

It’s been nearly four years since Phil Hassey set up capioIT, so he probably has more visibility than some of the newer firms, but still merits inclusion on this list. For a one-man band, Phil covers a lot of ground within his focus area of emerging technologies & emerging markets – recent studies have included topics as diverse as BI & analytics, infrastructure services, Chinese tier 2 & 3 cities, and natural resources IT solutions – but broadly his strength is around IT services & enterprise software.

With a background leading IT services research for Springboard and IDC Asia/Pacific, Phil delivers research & consulting services to vendors, but also undertakes custom consulting projects for end-user organisations in Australia as well as in other countries in APJ. Unlike many analysts, he also invests a lot of time & some of his own money doing on-the-ground research in many countries.

 Greyhound Research (India)

Former Forrester/Springboard analyst Sanchit Vir Gogia started Greyhound just over a year ago, positioning it as an IT & telecom research & advisory firm, focused on emerging markets. While many of the pages on its website remain incomplete, Sanchit told us that the firm targeted three audiences – IT decision-makers, IT vendors & partners, and venture capital funds – and revenue was reasonably balanced across the three, with clients in India, ASEAN and the Middle East.

Greyhound’s services include free & paid research, custom research, role-based advisory, toolkits & speaking engagements, with broad technology coverage focused on five business themes. Sanchit is also fairly visible through his blog, AsDisruptiveAsITGets, and on Twitter.

 Progessive Digital Media Group (UK)

Datamonitor founder, Michael Danson, who sold his business to Informa in 2007, has recently been rolling up a range of publishing & research businesses across a range of industries. The firm most relevant to this space is Kable, which does detailed primary research on ICT usage in 14 industries in 33 markets, and which also owns telco research & advisory firm, Pyramid, and Strategic Defence Intelligence, which tracks the global defence business.

For the past few months, former IDC Australia & Datamonitor sales director, Paul Hodges, has been ramping up the APJ sales operation in Sydney, and is planning to add country & regional analysts over coming months. Collectively, the PDM businesses have an enormous amount of data on technology consumption & usage, so the potential to further develop services of interest to both vendors & users is high.

 Specialist Computing (Australia)

After covering data centre technology for more than a decade with Gartner & a long career in marketing/technical roles with major IT vendors such as HDS, Phil Sargeant established Specialist Computing last year to focus on storage technologies, as well as server & desktop virtualisation.

While strictly speaking a consultancy rather than an analyst firm as there is no regular cycle of research, Specialist’s services are primarily focused on end-users, including creating & evaluating storage RFT/RFPs and creating storage & virtualisation plans.

 Tech Research Asia (Australia & Japan)

Tim Dillon had an extensive background as an analyst – leading IDC Asia/Pacific’s mobility practice, establishing Current Analysis’ European analyst operation& heading up Asia/Pacific research for Current Analysis, among other roles – before setting up TRA two years ago. Tokyo-based Trevor Clarke, formerly IDC Australia’s lead infrastructure analyst and a former editor of Computerworld Australia, joined the team as a partner a few months later, with former Corporate Express/Staples CIO, Garry Whatley, coming on board more recently.

While TRA positions itself as able to assist end-user executives – and many of its engagements are with CxOs and CIOs across the region – the majority of its revenues are derived from ICT vendors and service providers.TRA has broad technology coverage – although its published research has a strong focus on mobility and the future of work – and says its primary focus is analysing the business outcomes from technology, rather than technology per se. All of its team are active on the regional speaking circuit.

Generally speaking, all of these firms have chosen to focus on market niches where they can compete effectively with some of the bigger players. Key advantages they enjoy include nimbleness & flexibility, unconstrained by the business models, research methodologies & market taxonomies of the more established firms.

Of course, they lack the reach & scale that give some of the leaders a certain amount of market muscle, and scaling up requires adding quality analysts, who are often hard to find. And while some of them will be capable of producing quality research across the APJ region, they will understandably be stronger in their home markets, simply because no amount of travel can compensate for having feet on the street.

From an AR perspective, vendors should be thinking about how, when & why to engage with these firms. Some will make more sense than others, but they’re certainly worth exploring further.

Have we missed anyone? Let us know if there are other new players we should be looking at.

Cheers,

Dave

Crunching the analyst firm numbers – what do they tell us about Gartner, Forrester, IDC & others?

Not all IT research is about numbers, but the IT analyst business definitely is. It’s a business after all, and if you don’t make the numbers, you don’t have a business. But what’s interesting is how many different ways there are to make the numbers stack up.

It’s somewhat ironic that while IT analyst firms often rely on public – and private – disclosure of information from both vendors and end-user organisations to make their prognostications, they often don’t like to reveal too much about their own businesses. The big public firms, Gartner & Forrester, disclose good detail about their revenues to meet their statutory requirements, and perhaps a little more, while the private firms tend to be fairly vague.

As a former analyst, I’ve always been intrigued about the insights you can gain by breaking down the numbers. Topline and bottom line figures tell you one thing, but there’s often a more interesting story when you dig a bit deeper – you can see this in my recent post analysing the 2012 financial results for Gartner & Forrester.

I’ve long considered analyst headcount a good indicator of the health of analyst firm. If the headcount is growing, then that’s a reasonable sign that the business is also growing – or has good prospects of growth. Analysts are a product, and typically you don’t hire more of them if the ones you’ve already got aren’t selling.

But it’s not as simple as that. If you can increase revenue without adding analyst headcount ie adding costs, then you’re going to increase the profit margin, which is also a positive indicator. So you need to look at the relationship between analyst headcount, total headcount and revenue to get a better idea of how a firm is performing.

This is where it gets tricky. Not all of these data points are available for all firms, nor are they necessarily comparable. But by poking around the websites of a few of the leading firms and asking questions of their PR folks, I’ve come up with some insights.

Analyst headcounts

For simplicity’s sake, I’m going to use the term “analyst” a little loosely because of the different way that each firm categorises their staff, combining analysts & consultants, because these roles are sometimes shared.

According to Gartner’s website, it has 902 analysts and 500 consultants (total 1,402), an increase of just under 10% from a year earlier, while Forrester employs 432 “research professionals”, a decline of 4% from last year. IDC told me it employs 1,075 analysts, which is higher than the 1,000 stated on its website, although that latter figure has been unchanged for some time.

Ovum advised me that it currently employs 102 analysts and consultants, which is lower than I’d estimated from the analyst bios listed on its website, but those include management. This figure seems largely unchanged from a year ago. Frost & Sullivan confirmed that it employs 1,800 analysts and consultants worldwide, and while this figure seems relatively unchanged, it is unclear how many of these are focused primarily on IT & communications, as is the case for the other firms.

Looking at analysts as a percentage of total employees, Gartner has the lowest ratio – just over 25% – while IDC has the highest, at 63%. Forrester – at 35% – and Ovum – 55% – sit in between these two extremes, and all appear to have drifted downwards slightly in the past couple of years. Of course, these firms have quite different business models, research services, analyst types and client bases, so it is not unusual that the ratios should vary, but it is interesting how starkly different they are.

Unfortunately, we don’t have accurate data for sales headcount for these firms (except Ovum, which is about 25% of its total), but we do know that Gartner has invested heavily in its salesforce over recent years, particularly in Asia/Pacific, but elsewhere as well. Forrester and IDC have also increased their sales hires in the past year, evidenced by total headcount growing at a greater rate than analyst headcount.

Mapping headcount to revenue

The headcount figures become more interesting when we map them against revenues. Forrester and IDC have similar revenue per employee figures – about $US236,000 – but Gartner’s is about 25% higher, just under $US300,000.

headcountThe differences become even more dramatic when we compare revenue per “analyst.” Gartner is generating more than $1.1 million per analyst, some 70% higher than Forrester, and more than 200% higher than IDC! Granted, the different business models don’t make this an apples-for-apples comparison, but the deltas are large enough to demonstrate the point.

So what does this tell us? Certainly, Gartner has optimised its sales-to-analyst ratio in recent years, but can it still make gains from pushing this approach further? At what point does reducing the analyst percentage of headcount start to have a negative impact?

Forrester blamed poor sales execution for its weak financial performance last year, and has indicated a greater focus on sales to turn the business around. But does it need to match Gartner to make that happen? Forrester is about one-fifth the size of Gartner, so does scale change the equation?

IDC obviously has a different client base to these two firms, and the analyst workloads are quite different, but can it benefit from adopting this approach, driving analyst percentages down and sales ratios up to increase revenues & margins?

And what does this mean for other, smaller firms, where the sales ratios tend to be lower? Can they learn and benefit from Gartner’s approach?

On the surface, this doesn’t look like a good trend for the analyst business, from an AR perspective. But on deeper assessment, fewer analysts with greater impact & influence are much easier to engage with than lots of analysts with less impact. In other words, simply increasing analyst headcount is probably less effective than improving the penetration of existing analysts by putting more sales resources behind them.

This is one of those areas where I don’t have all the answers, but I find the questions intriguing. What do you think? How important are these ratios to the performance of an analyst firm, to the health of the analyst business overall, to the execution of a vendor AR program? What else can we learn from this analysis?

Cheers,

Dave

Forrester eyes marketing & strategy opportunity in Asia/Pacific

As ICT vendors begin to focus more on the increasing proportion of enterprise technology spending which is not controlled by the CIO, Forrester Research has been quietly building out a program targeting the “new breed” of budget-owners in the Asia/Pacific region. Not surprisingly, China figures prominently.

While Forrester’s focus on delivering digital marketing & strategy services to line-of-business technology buyers in North America and Europe is well-known and now well-established, it has primarily concentrated on its mainstream technology services in APJ, particularly following the acquisition of Springboard Research in May 2011.

Although a long way behind Gartner, and despite only having a small number of buy-side analysts located in APJ, Forrester has been relatively successful in building up a client base among the IT departments of banks, retailers, government departments, FMCG suppliers and other large enterprises.

With the Springboard acquisition consolidated, Forrester is now eyeing the opportunity to tap into the wallets of large enterprises across the Asia/Pacific region that need help developing digital marketing strategies which will allow those organisations to more effectively sell their products & services to the world’s largest consumer markets.

Lead by a 12-year Forrester veteran, vice president Andrew Stockwell, the firm is well down the path of tailoring its services to meet the different needs of sales & marketing organisations in APJ. Stockwell relocated to Beijing in March 2012, a location which was chosen because “it’s the hardest place to find & recruit talent, it’s the hardest place to navigate the business, and it offers the biggest growth opportunity.”

Andrew-Stockwell Bio Picture - NEW“We did an analysis of our own research – what markets have the highest online population, the greatest levels of disposable income, the highest adoption of technology, the greatest opportunity for our clients? China came out number one in almost every one of these categories,” he said.

While cagey about revealing too much detail about headcount, Stockwell is actively recruiting local analysts, initially focusing on China and Australia – firstly to replace e-business analyst Steven Noble (no relation) who left to kick off his own tech start-up a few months ago, and potentially another Australian analyst. Singapore and India are also likely locations for marketing & strategy analysts, while Stockwell can also draw on existing resources in the US.

“We have been collecting data from consumers in APJ since 2007 – covering South Korea, Japan, China, Australia and India,” said Stockwell. “We have a good base of understanding about the customer, but the research we have been writing has been out of West, about the East, so we want to get a lot more localised about our strategy.”

While Stockwell doesn’t see Forrester replicating Ovum’s recent move to begin translating selected global research into Chinese, he does see local language capability as a key skill, with enquiries and consulting to be delivered by local staff to provide context around English research content.

“We can take a piece of research which has been written globally, spin it and add customer case studies and examples about what that means locally, and translate that piece if necessary,” he said.

“It goes back to who we are trying to serve – at the level we’re targeting, these people generally can read English .…  Our focus in the short term is not selling to the local Chinese companies, but on developing the content, the insight, the data, the analysis and the consulting that we can use to help the local representatives of multinational companies, or the clients who are sitting in North America or Europe or Australia or Singapore who don’t know how to get into China.”

From one perspective, Forrester’s strategy is not that different to that of firms such as Gartner and IDC, which initially built their China – and some other APJ country – operations to support the market entry strategies of multinational IT vendors. Those operations have since broadened significantly, with Gartner generating growing revenue from the IT organisations of Chinese companies and IDC now boasting a full complement of analysts across all of its Insights vertical market research practices.

That Forrester will gain initial success in China with companies with which it already does business in North America and Europe is undoubted – it has a global reputation, if a more limited global presence. The number of prospects is considerable, but ultimately Forrester will need to turn its attention to local companies in China and other country markets, a long-term objective which Stockwell acknowledged.

It will also have to deepen its local research, and that is much closer on the horizon. Forrester currently surveys about 10,000 consumers in the top 10 to 12 cities in China (the largest cities known as Tier 1 & 2), but Stockwell wants to extend that research to Tiers 3 through 6 – there are more than 160 cities in China with populations of more than one million, which is why companies selling to consumers are so eager to invest in China. There are also plans to extend the consumer research into other countries in the region, including Indonesia – which has the third-largest population in the region after China & India, and a growing middle class.

That these companies are also buying technology outside of the conventional IT frameworks is also without doubt. Non-IT buyers have become a significant focus for vendors such as IBM and SAP over the past couple of years, a period which has also seen the emergence of specialist analyst firms focused on the digital marketing space, such as Altimeter and Constellation, which recently appointed Gavin Heaton to lead digital marketing research from Australia.

“Companies are now seeking competitive advantage from new areas, which means they need a better understanding of the customer, to provide a better customer experience. So we want to focus on where the decisions are being made, where the budgets are being held,” said Stockwell.

“We have been saying for a long time that you don’t want to choose your technology, then define your objectives. You figure out the people you want to target, then determine your business objectives, then work out your strategy, and then decide on the technology.”

That all of the key current technology trends – cloud, big data, mobility & social media – play directly to the marketing & strategy space adds another layer of interest around this gradual shift away from IT departments being the owners of all technology spending, and how analyst firms are dealing with that shift.

It is still early days, but it will be interesting to watch & see if Forrester’s foray is successful. And just as interesting to see who else follows…. What do you think?

Cheers,

Dave

Ovum’s three-pronged strategy to increase its relevance in Asia/Pacific

Ovum is planning to up its commitment to the Asia/Pacific region with a three-pronged strategy – translating current research into Chinese; increasing the level of primary research conducted at a country level; and selective recruitment of analysts and support staff.

Speaking during a visit to Australia last week, the global firm’s managing director, Brett Azuma, acknowledged that Ovum had not met the needs of clients in China and other parts of the region by only delivering its research in English, and so was now focusing on providing services and support in other languages.

Best known for its focus on telecommunications, Ovum also has solid coverage of enterprise IT – primarily software & services. In APJ, its major concentrations of analysts are in Australia and India, with other analysts and consultants scattered throughout the region. In Australia, it has a strong analyst roster focused on telco, IT services & cloud, public sector and financial services, while its Indian analysts are primarily focused on telco and enterprise solutions.

Azuma said that Ovum had hired a marketing assistant in China to initiate the translation project, which will involve machine translation of reports and summaries, with manual verification. Its marketing website, Ovum.com, will also be translated into Chinese.

“We’re planning a Chinese language version of the Knowledge Centre. Although not every report will be translated, there will be the ability to request reports in Chinese. By making translated report summaries available, our non-English reading audience will be able to identify reports of interest to them. We also produce a great deal of quantitative research which requires considerably less translation to make it useable for our clients,” he said.

“If we’re serious about making an impact in China, then we realise that considerable investment will be needed, and we’re 100% committed to make this happen.”

While there is plenty of technology research available in Chinese, most of it is produced in China for local consumption, or to assist multinational vendors with China market entry. Ovum’s decision to deliver global research into China in local language is an unusual one – and a fairly bold one – which will differentiate it from its key competitors.

Azuma said that Ovum was actively recruiting in China, but didn’t talk about specific roles or numbers. However, he did say that language skills are important and it will play a major factor in the recruitment process globally.

“Vertical expertise is country or at least regionally -specific, so we will have country/regional experts based in the AP region, he said.  Beyond the focus on China, Ovum is also increasing the volume of primary demand-side research it conducts across the region – and around the world. It uses its own survey platform and designs the questionnaires, but outsources the data collection & consolidation.

“AP was the first region in which we conducted a vast array of country-specific primary research, which we packaged up as CIO Executive Insights. This has been highly successful and now serves as an excellent template to roll out to the rest of the world,” Azuma said.

The firm is also looking to deepen its engagement with vendors and service providers through a focus on sales enablement with its lead generation product, ICT Sales Prospector.

“This is part of a long-term trend towards diversifying our product set, which helps our vendor clients sell more effectively, and allows our enterprise customers to buy more effectively,” Azuma said.

Taken individually, each of these tactics is interesting, but hardly a game-changer. Collectively, though, they have the potential to increase the relevance of Ovum in many countries across a region which remains under-penetrated and under-supported.

As always, the challenge lies in the execution. From a headcount perspective, Ovum has roughly the same number of analysts in APJ as Forrester, with both of them a long way below IDC, Gartner and Frost & Sullivan.

Finding the people with the right skillsets to increase that number will not be easy, nor will breaking into markets such as China, where insight & advice from external consultants is not valued as highly as it is in western countries. But if the analyst business in the APJ region is to continue to grow, then it’s a worthy goal.

What do you think? Will Ovum’s strategy work? What other challenges will they face? Join the discussion below.

Cheers,

Dave

There’s still plenty of upside for the analyst business in Asia/Pacific…

At first glance, the technology analyst business in Asia/Pacific looks pretty mature – the first global firms established their beachheads in the late 1970s, there are many analysts now who can measure their tenure in decades rather than years, and there has been an ongoing process of consolidation which is typical of maturing industries.

But when you look more closely, it seems that the analyst business in this part of the world is still under-penetrated. And by a fair degree….

The Asia/Pacific region is all about growth – everybody knows that. Not just for technology, but for everything – consumer goods, manufacturing, professional and personal services, airlines, you name it… Due to their sheer population size and rate of growth, China and India attract most of the attention, but there are plenty of smaller economies in Asia which are belting along while the US and Europe try to figure out whether they can pay their bills.

All this growth creates an appetite for technology, which is why so many global vendors have a strong focus on APJ. Many of them get their best growth figures from this region, quarter after quarter, and they don’t see that changing – Symantec’s regional senior VP, Bernard Kwok, was quoted today as saying that the company would double its business in the next five years.

Some big vendors aren’t even really here yet! Analysts tweeting out of Dreamforce today quoted Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff as saying that the company hadn’t entered China yet (although its website lists offices in Shanghai and Beijing). However you look at it, though, that vendor has hardly scratched the surface in APJ.

And then there are the local vendors…. Software and services suppliers from India, communications equipment vendors from China, the established hardware manufacturers from Japan and South Korea, and lots of start-ups right across the region developing applications, tools and solutions for their local markets.

Every analyst firm I talk to in this part of the world says business is good – they’re sharing in this growth, but not at the same levels as their clients. And when you break down the numbers around the analyst business in APJ, you get the feeling that there’s still plenty of upside, and those firms that ratchet up their level of investment are going to reap the benefits.

So let’s look at the numbers.

I’ve consolidated these from analyst firm websites and my own databases, and I regard them as good estimates, but they may not be 100% accurate. Indeed, the total analyst workforce numbers quoted on the firm websites appear to be “rounded” and may in fact understate the case, and some of them use vague terminology so it’s difficult to make exact comparisons.

IDC

There’s no doubt that IDC is the biggest technology analyst firm in APJ. It employs approximately 230 analysts who are located in 14 countries, accounting for something like 23 per cent of the “more than 1,000 analysts” that its website says it employs worldwide. Interestingly, IDC employs the same number of analysts in China – 45 – as it does in its Singapore regional headquarters, with Japan the next largest office, followed by Malaysia, then India.

 Gartner

Gartner established its first Asia/Pacific office in Australia in the late 1970s, just after IDC, and expanded progressively across the region. It added significant headcount with the acquisition of Dataquest in 1995, and the majority of its analyst hires more recently have been in China and India. Gartner employs approximately 120 analysts in APJ – out of a global total of 800, or 15 per cent – in offices in 10 countries. Japan is its largest office by analyst numbers, followed by Australia and India, with China still relatively small.

Forrester

Until its acquisition of Singapore-based Springboard Research in May last year, Forrester had very little presence in APJ – a couple of analysts in Australia, and one in Japan. There are now about 40 analysts & researchers employed by the firm in APJ, the majority of them in India, although it also has reasonable presence in Singapore, Australia and China. But this figure is just 9 per cent of its worldwide headcount of 450 “research professionals.”

 Ovum

Ovum employs the largest percentage of its analysts in APJ – just over one-quarter – but as a European firm, it doesn’t have a large number of analysts in North America. Its website says it employs 140 analysts and consultants worldwide, and about 36 are in APJ – primarily in India and Australia.

Frost & Sullivan

Frost’s website says it employs 1,800 analysts and consultants worldwide, but getting any insight on how many of those actually focus on technology – as opposed to the other industries Frost also researches – is pretty hard. In APJ, Frost’s technology focus is primarily on telecommunications, contact centre and some other specific segments such as information security, but the regional organisational structure is a little complex, and in some countries, analysts don’t specialise in a single industry or topic. I’d estimate about 70 fulltime technology analysts in APJ, but the number could be higher.

Apart from those five global firms, there are probably another 30 or so firms with some sort of analyst presence in APJ. As well as US and European firms which employ a handful of analysts in the region, this group includes advisory firms in Australia such as IBRS and Longhaus; Japanese “numbers houses” such as Yano and MIC; and the intriguing Chinese players such as CCID and Analysys International.

According to my friends at KCG, there are about 350 “real” analyst firms worldwide, which means that just 10 per cent of them have some sort of analyst presence in APJ. Granted, many of those firms are quite small, but that doesn’t mean they couldn’t or shouldn’t be investing in the real growth opportunities that exist in this region.

There are plenty of gaps in the research portfolios of the larger firms too. For example, deep focus on technology in specific industries is limited, and very little attention is paid to non-traditional purchasers of technology. There are huge provincial markets in China for which there is very little good market intelligence, while coverage of emerging markets such as Vietnam has barely scratched the surface.

APJ is one of the major growth engines of the global economy for the foreseeable future, so you would think the analyst firms would be throwing resources at this region to cash in. That doesn’t seem to be the case, but maybe that will change – after all, it’s all upside.

Cheers,

Dave