3 ms·
This list is shit. CSC, Capgemini, TCS, Infosys, Wipro, and ACS don't sell software. They sell consulting, of which actual software coding is but a part.
by sachinag 17y ago
This list is shit.
CSC, Capgemini, TCS, Infosys, Wipro, and ACS don't sell software. They sell consulting, of which actual software coding is but a part.
- wheels 17y agoThese are the largest 20 companies classified by Forbes as software companies. With the large organizations it's almost impossible to say, "they do that" since they invariably do a lot of things; any other hand-wavey sorting wouldn't have been significantly more objective.
- sachinag 17y agoBullshit. They're all 8742 companies. http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/siccodes.htm http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/siccodes.htm
- fauigerzigerk 17y agoI don't think the SEC classification is useful for the purpose of locating software companies as the SEC regulates only publicly traded US companies. They're interested only in very specific aspects of a company and they categorize accordingly.
- sachinag 17y agoSIC codes - not SEC codes. Just the easiest list to find. SIC are international.
- fauigerzigerk 17y agoYou pointed to the SIC codes used by the SEC. It's a legacy US only system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Industrial_Classification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Industrial_Classificat...). There's a seperate UN initiative called ISIC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Industrial_Classification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Industri...) But in any event, it's a classification for the purpose of bean counting, or meta bean counting if you will :-)
- diego 17y agoThe same could be said about Google. For the most part, it sells advertising.
- sachinag 17y agoGoogle's fascinating when it comes to categorization. I think it's pretty clear that they make software. What's awesome is that they, as you say, don't monetize that s/w by selling it (like 37signals or whatever other internet company); they do so through the sale of advertising space. They're the biggest dichotomy between core competencies (software engineering) and monetization (ads) that I can think of, perhaps in history.
- nostrademons 17y agoGE: Core competency = training middle management. Monetization = jet engines, locomotives, formerly household appliances, etc. Berkshire Hathaway: Core competencies = Warren Buffett, AAA credit rating, willingness to keep former owners on as managers. Monetization = insurance, furniture, candy. WalMart: Core competency: Logistics management, supplier bargaining power. Monetization: every household good imaginable. Nike: Core competency = advertising. Monetization = sneakers & sportswear. Actually, seems like companies with wildly disparate core competencies and monetization schemes tend to do pretty well. Or maybe it's selection bias, and the ones that do well do really well but the rest fail miserably. Either way, I'm waiting for some company to close the Google -> Nike loop by leveraging their expertise in sneakers and sportswear to sell lots of software.
- stilist 17y agoLooking at it in a slightly different way, Nike+ uses expertise with shoes and expertise with interaction design to sell a decent amount of hardware.
- adamsmith 17y agoI think sachinag is trying to say that consulting companies are services companies, whereas startups and silicon valley seem to revolve around product companies. The semantics of the distinction are around scalability of the business. You could also look at revenue per employee or P/E ratios as other indicators. Personally I agree that scalability is a better metric for enterprise attractiveness than raw size. Investors agree. CSC has a P/E ratio of 5.8, whereas Microsoft's is 12.9. The list also just feels mistaken, but that might be my misguided sense of enthusiasm for shiny companies. Fiserv is a $6B company that I had never heard of. I'd probably rather go long on Facebook or Twitter, but a savvy investor might disagree.
- tlb 17y agoAlso, some locations are bogus. Accenture is incorporated in Bermuda for tax purposes, but the actual work is done in many major cities. IBM, though the headquarters are in NY, has major offices in Silicon Valley.
- abossy 17y agoIBM has major offices of comparable size in Austin, Raleigh, and several international locations, as well. I would say the proportion of their Silicon Valley presence is insignificant. They're probably to big and historic to localize, in any case.
- pg 17y agoExactly. And if you prune the consulting firms (and IBM, which was founded before Silicon Valley existed), it's striking how dominant California is.