6 ms·

AFAIK their business model is to send skilled engineers to client sites to be consultants and developers. Their selling point is not some product/code per-se (i

by _diyar 8mo ago

AFAIK their business model is to send skilled engineers to client sites to be consultants and developers. Their selling point is not some product/code per-se (ie. they have a code base with existing analysis tools, but nothing crazy), but the fact that they jump into whatever situation and grind through problems. The problem is that they also keep close ties to law-enforcement and (para-)military clients, and while they promise to keep your data safe, they would never inform you if they received a warrant from the government to share the data.

worldsayshi 8mo ago
If that's an accurate description it's very puzzling that European countries buy services from them.
- Krasnol 8mo ago
  It is a selective description. FDE is not the only thing they sell. Software Licenses for their products (Gotham/Foundry/AIP) is why countries (and businesses) deal with them.
rorylawless 8mo ago
So, they’re basically a traditional consultancy firm focused on data analytics, particularly record linkage?
- CuriouslyC 8mo ago
  And methodically operationalizing client work into products.
  - rorylawless 8mo ago
    So, they create powerpoints?
    - CuriouslyC 8mo ago
      No, the model is closer to AWS sending engineers into orgs to build bespoke solutions, with the platform team providing flexible building blocks rather than each solution being ground up.
themafia 8mo ago
They dump all your stuff into a schemaless database and then attach widgets to it. That's literally it. It's not even particularly good technology.
- XorNot 8mo ago
  It's literally just "better then what people had" + they're willing to work through government and military contracting processes so it can actually be deployed in those environments. They have a lot of "forward deployed engineer" roles which basically means staff with security clearances who get locked in SCIFs and provide on-site technical support. Which is really why they keep getting hired: when you write into your contract "it stays on premises and technical support can't take logs off site" they agree to it (at a hefty mark up because all of that sucks to do).
  - dkrich 8mo ago
    There are many, many, many companies much older than Palantir operating in the beltway that do this. Having TS/SCI cleared resources who can work in SCIFs isn’t in itself a differentiator. Besides, that type of security level would make it very difficult to make use of their products in the first place.
    - XorNot 8mo ago
      You're missing "better then what they had". It was as I understand it, a big innovation to just bring some post-2010s webdev to the UI experience. A relevant comparison would be that SpaceX didn't build fancy rockets and their was a lot of similarly old players in the space. They still took it over pretty thoroughly.
- caminante 8mo ago
  Went to a luncheon and sat with some IT Directors at a Fortune 20. I asked what they were seeing and excited about. They kept explaining that Foundry (Palantir's SaaS BI platform) is better than EVERY other alternative (and mind you, they've used every other major vendor as an F20). I kept asking what was special about it (Did it re-invent data models? Is it faster/cheaper than MSFT, GOOG, AWS, SNOW?) I kept getting circular answers (advantages without addressing design consequences) until I realized (to myself) that what they were describing as "great" had nothing to do with the Palantir tech. It was great because Palantir's sales people had taken a top down approach (getting CEO's blessing) and had the "green light" to greenfield data solutions and cut through internal bureaucracy/silos about connecting datasources to find revenues or savings. This is CEO (since fired) kept bragging to shareholders about rubbing elbows with Palantir's Alex Karp and gleaming with joy about the potential of their AI collaboration. That's the impression I get about PLTR. They're like if McKinsey was re-loaded with software, and sales engineers and they hunt C-Suite and government clients to "speak AI." I haven't looked recently, but one bearish sentiment was that they need growth to sustain their high P/E, and there are only so many more governments/CEOs in their addressable market to add.

by _diyar 8mo ago

worldsayshi 8mo ago

If that's an accurate description it's very puzzling that European countries buy services from them.

Krasnol 8mo ago
It is a selective description. FDE is not the only thing they sell. Software Licenses for their products (Gotham/Foundry/AIP) is why countries (and businesses) deal with them.

rorylawless 8mo ago

So, they’re basically a traditional consultancy firm focused on data analytics, particularly record linkage?

CuriouslyC 8mo ago
And methodically operationalizing client work into products.
- rorylawless 8mo ago
  So, they create powerpoints?
  - CuriouslyC 8mo ago
    No, the model is closer to AWS sending engineers into orgs to build bespoke solutions, with the platform team providing flexible building blocks rather than each solution being ground up.

themafia 8mo ago

They dump all your stuff into a schemaless database and then attach widgets to it. That's literally it. It's not even particularly good technology.

XorNot 8mo ago
It's literally just "better then what people had" + they're willing to work through government and military contracting processes so it can actually be deployed in those environments. They have a lot of "forward deployed engineer" roles which basically means staff with security clearances who get locked in SCIFs and provide on-site technical support. Which is really why they keep getting hired: when you write into your contract "it stays on premises and technical support can't take logs off site" they agree to it (at a hefty mark up because all of that sucks to do).
- dkrich 8mo ago
  There are many, many, many companies much older than Palantir operating in the beltway that do this. Having TS/SCI cleared resources who can work in SCIFs isn’t in itself a differentiator. Besides, that type of security level would make it very difficult to make use of their products in the first place.
  - XorNot 8mo ago
    You're missing "better then what they had". It was as I understand it, a big innovation to just bring some post-2010s webdev to the UI experience. A relevant comparison would be that SpaceX didn't build fancy rockets and their was a lot of similarly old players in the space. They still took it over pretty thoroughly.
caminante 8mo ago
Went to a luncheon and sat with some IT Directors at a Fortune 20. I asked what they were seeing and excited about. They kept explaining that Foundry (Palantir's SaaS BI platform) is better than EVERY other alternative (and mind you, they've used every other major vendor as an F20). I kept asking what was special about it (Did it re-invent data models? Is it faster/cheaper than MSFT, GOOG, AWS, SNOW?) I kept getting circular answers (advantages without addressing design consequences) until I realized (to myself) that what they were describing as "great" had nothing to do with the Palantir tech. It was great because Palantir's sales people had taken a top down approach (getting CEO's blessing) and had the "green light" to greenfield data solutions and cut through internal bureaucracy/silos about connecting datasources to find revenues or savings. This is CEO (since fired) kept bragging to shareholders about rubbing elbows with Palantir's Alex Karp and gleaming with joy about the potential of their AI collaboration. That's the impression I get about PLTR. They're like if McKinsey was re-loaded with software, and sales engineers and they hunt C-Suite and government clients to "speak AI." I haven't looked recently, but one bearish sentiment was that they need growth to sustain their high P/E, and there are only so many more governments/CEOs in their addressable market to add.