UPDATE, JUNE 6, 9:50 AM EASTERN TIME: I JUST NOTICED THAT TEXTURA'S IPO HAS BEEN INCREASED TO 4,500,000 SHARES. THAT OBVIOUSLY MEANS THAT THERE'S BEEN EXCELLENT DEMAND FOR TEXTURA'S IPO SHARES.
On Sunday, June 2nd, I posted a note on the blog that Textura (NYSE: TXTR) was set to complete its IPO on Tuesday June 2nd. Evidently, the IPO kick-off date was changed to today. But, don’t be surprised if the IPO kick-off date is moved to next week.
On Sunday, June 2nd, I posted a note on the blog that Textura (NYSE: TXTR) was set to complete its IPO on Tuesday June 2nd. Evidently, the IPO kick-off date was changed to today. But, don’t be surprised if the IPO kick-off date is moved to next week.
It’s very interesting that firms such as iSqFt and
SmartBidNet and Newforma are mentioned as competitors but there’s no mention,
at all, of firms in the reprographics industry who offer solutions that compete
with Textura’s software products.
Very brief description as to
how Textura describes its business:
We are a leading provider of on-demand
business collaboration software to the commercial construction industry. Our
solutions are focused on facilitating collaboration between owners/developers,
general contractors and subcontractors.
From a page on NASDAQ’s
web-site, here’s how Textura describes its competition:
The intensity and nature of our competition
varies significantly across our different solutions. We face competition both
from point solution providers, including traditional software vendors and other
on-demand software vendors, and from enterprise resource planning and project
management solution providers that may address several functional elements of
our solutions, but that may not be designed specifically for the construction
market. We also compete with internally-developed and maintained technology
solutions.
Our current principal competitors include:
• CPM. We face limited competition due in
large part, we believe, to the complexity of the required solution, the
specific needs of the construction industry and the absence of third-party
solutions that provide our lien waiver functionality. Competitive solutions
that may address part of our functional capabilities include GC Pay in the
North American market and ProgressClaim.com in Australia; enterprise resource
planning solutions both specialized to the construction industry such as
Viewpoint, the Sage family of products, CMiC Open Enterprise and eCMS and other
non-specialized solutions, such as JD Edwards Enterprise One, and various
solutions offered by Oracle and SAP; and document management solutions such as
Aconex.
• Submittal Exchange. We face competition
from several project management solution providers, in particular from those
that are specialized in the construction industry. Such competitors include
Meridian Systems, Newforma and Procore Technologies.
• GradeBeam. We face competition from other
invitation-to-bid systems for commercial construction, including iSqFt and SmartBidNet. Certain project management and enterprise
resource planning solutions also have invitation-to-bid or bid management
functionality.
• PQM. PQM is most often being used to
replace paper-based processes or to establish prequalification processes that
do not currently exist. Available alternatives include in-house solutions using
online form submission tools, invitation-to-bid systems and vendor review and verification
services.
• Greengrade. We face competition from other
LEED submission management technology solutions including LoraxPro and GreenWizard.
Greengrade also faces competition from services provided by many specialized consulting
firms, architecture firms and construction management consultancies.
* In
addition, PlanSwift competes with several take-off and estimating solution providers
including On Center Software, eTakeoff and Cloud Takeoff; trade-specific
take-off solutions such as ConEst (for electrical trades); and the estimating
capabilities or modules of enterprise resource planning solutions such as
Viewpoint, the Sage family of products, CMiC Open Enterprise and eCMS.
The principal competitive factors in our
industry include solution functionality and scope, level of integration with
other enterprise systems, ease of implementation and use, performance,
security, scalability and reliability of service, brand, reputation, domain expertise,
relationships within the construction industry, and financial resources of the
provider. We believe total cost of ownership to be a lesser factor for most
general contractors; however, cost is a significant factor in competing for subcontractors.
We believe that we compete favorably with our competitors on the basis of these
factors. However, some of our existing or potential competitors may have
greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources, and there is no
assurance that we will be able to continue to compete effectively.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment