Been thinking about Zoom a lot lately.
Here’s a snippet:
The knock against Zoom is competition. WebEx, Skype for Business, Google Hangouts, face-to-face meetings, LogMeIn, Uber Meeting, and on and on.
What makes Zoom special? And why is it growing so fast when there are so many replicas?
Well, let’s first start with a landscape of the space.
The three top dogs are Zoom, Microsoft (Skype) and Cisco (WebEx). But when we dig into the customer satisfaction, Zoom is head and shoulders above the competition.
To put it in perspective, Zoom’s net promoter score (NPS) is 62 whereas WebEx, arguably the most formidable competitor, comes in at just 6. This means that 62% of customers would recommend Zoom’s product versus only 6% who use WebEx.
Another data point is simply the growth rates. We can opine all day on the customer satisfaction metrics, but if they are not translating into real revenue dollars, it’s meaningless. So we put on our detective hats and this is what we found.
Cisco doesn’t individually break out WebEx’s revenue so we have to do some guesswork. In 2017, the company did $4.3 billion in “Collaboration” revenue. This segment actually decreased year-over-year because the hardware, like phones and video screens, is contracting whereas WebEx is growing. However, it is nearly impossible to tell how big WebEx is at this point. The company was doing about $300 million in sales 12 years ago. If we estimated a 20% CAGR (compounded annualized growth rate) sales would be around $2.7 billion which would fit in our constraints.
But this is exactly why I believe Zoom will win. Focus.
Cisco has about 7 business segments and mind you, in each one of those there could be 3-5 different products included (like how we discussed in the “Collaboration” segment).
Same with Microsoft.
Now, of course, there are counterexamples. For instance, Amazon seems like it can nearly do anything it wants. But the way I see it is Eric Yuan is a pioneer in this space, informed with exactly what customer want and now he has meticulously executing his product vision against incumbents that structurally aren’t able to focus on their videoconferencing because it just isn’t worth it.
It’s the law of specialization. Imagine you’re a Microsoft executive and your commercial cloud business is growing at 50% at a $20 billion run rate. Are you going to take resources away from it so you can grow Skype for Business, a segment that is likely growing slowly at a few billion dollar run rate? This is why disruption can happen.
Further, videoconferencing is not an industry that is on the frontier. Typically, big companies create venture funds so they can stay on top of trends to prevent disruption. But videoconferencing is not a sub-industry like machine learning or something that a lot of start-ups are trying to tackle. I imagine this further disincentivizes Microsoft and WebEx to double down to compete with Zoom.
So while a lot of investors fear that Zoom’s “moat” doesn’t have any crocodiles in it, from a structural viewpoint, we can begin to see the snouts of the crocs rising from the depths.
Notice I haven’t even touched on the technological superiority. Zoom touts it is video-first, cloud-native and I concede that has been a crucial factor in its success up until now. But we are trying to predict the future. My bet is that these structural reasons will be the secret sauce rather than Zoom’s ability to transcript calls immediately. These superior features are birthed from the structural advantages. Since Zoom can focus on only building the best videoconferencing product, it will naturally innovate faster.
Even more, Zoom is cheaper than WebEx.
If Zoom’s technology is better and now all your employees are familiar with it, even if a competitor comes in and undercuts it 50% ($20/month for enterprise plan to $10) then your cost savings for switching 500 employees over is $60,000. That is not a sum that is a game-changer to risk the workflow of all your meetings. Especially, a huge company that can afford 500 hosts. The switching costs are higher than people might imagine. This is the power of low-cost SaaS. People don’t like change once they figure something out and when the cost isn’t high enough to off-set that discomfort, then you have a recipe for customer stickiness.
Of course, the valuation of Zoom will likely be bonkers so take these thoughts with a grain of salt. Anything over $12 billion is probably a stretch off the bat.
Oh, one more thing. When I interviewed the CEO of Walmart, they sent over a Zoom link. That’s the Fortune 1 company in the world using Zoom. Just an observation…
I do think Zoom’s moat is bigger than people might imagine. Just because it is videoconferencing doesn’t mean it is easy to whip up something. It’s all about the marketing! It’s not so much about the product. Look at what Zoom spends on marketing vs. R&D. It is huge! Once you penetrate these big organizations, why would they go with a smaller player when the cost savings aren’t that great?
I would appreciate some specific push-back because I am sure some of my thinking isn’t crystal clear. But I hope that helps…
Best,
Fish