4 ms·
Chrun for these services take a long time. They are "sticky" and have the baggage of enterprise agreements. With the switching costs never being zero, if SLAs
by PaulWaldman 4y ago
Chrun for these services take a long time. They are "sticky" and have the baggage of enterprise agreements. With the switching costs never being zero, if SLAs are being met, it's exceedingly difficult to switch vendors.
Alternatively there is a faster impact on new sign-ups when falling behind competitors on costs and benchmarks.
- dominotw 4y agoTheir stock price is pegged at new customer acquisition. They signed up over 6k new customers last qtr. This is one of their top stats that they present to investors.
- cs702 4y agoExactly. For enterprise customers in particular, replacing a SaaS tool that's deeply intertwined with many internal systems is about as easy and convenient as it is for a homeowner to rip out his/her home's existing HVAC system to replace it with a newer, more efficient one. No one ever wants to do that -- unless there's absolutely no other choice.
- danielmarkbruce 4y agoThey are all out to get new logos. They spent about $800m on S&M TTM v $1.4 bill rev. They aren't milking their customer base for cashflow. And large customers are moving to them in droves.
- beoberha 4y agoI worded it poorly, but I don’t necessarily mean a full exodus from the platform. In my experience, large enterprises have a lot of workloads running on different technologies (for whatever reasons) and the migration to cloud is a multi-year effort. If someone is just dipping their toe into Snowflake with easy-to-migrate workloads (which is very likely given their relative age in the market) and see performance and cost issues with those workloads, they may be hesitant to migrate the bigger ones and use that as leverage to get Snowflake to improve.
- tomnipotent 4y ago> have the baggage of enterprise agreements Snowflake let's you roll into pay-as-you-go after a contract expires.