> Spending too much on snowflake? This one tool (of ours) can help (for some cash) reduce how much cash you are spending!
Spend to spend less. For a company struggling with spend, perhaps that’s the argument of a fixed price. Think less.
Fixed vs usage based isn’t really important beyond the bottom line. Data, Serverless, doesn’t matter. It’s just a means of charging dollars, and as long as the right amount of dollars are spent, all is well.
Shouldn’t be important at all without sufficient accompanying headcount. What good is a cost-effective tool without a hand to hold it? Funny thing, that.
also ChatGPT said you lied about me.
and that you smell of cheese.
Plus, the "price as a weapon" concept is worth exploring further - for aspiring category disruptors in this current economic cycle. It would lead to more competitive pricing and benefits for the customer in the long run.
[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ESTC
Now that VC funding is mostly on the sidelines the question is how this will play out further.
Haven't studied Elastic and Confluent, but Snowflake seems now profitable (5%) with 25% free cash flow. See p.28 of their last investor presentation. https://s26.q4cdn.com/463892824/files/doc_financials/2023/q4...
What's the evidence for that assertion? For the analogy to work VC funding would need to be a dominant factor in IT spending. Last year it was about $200B vs ca. $2T of overall IT spending. [0, 1] But VC spending is not IT spending--in fact it's probably on the order of 10% because most of the money goes to things like R&D and customer acquisition. So it's fair to argue VC spending has inflated salaries but it does not seem like enough to move the needle on IT spending in a material way.
I'm personally skeptical of the argument from the cited article because I run a company that does pretty much exactly what IOMETE is proposing. In practice, there are many confounding factors.
1. The database market is very competitive. There are very few segments that don't have 2, 3, or more substitutable products for green field applications. For existing application there are high switching costs that mute impact of lower product prices. In plain English: we lose those deals.
2. We've seen impact from startups losing funding, but it does not affect prices so much as revenue when customers simply disappear. The same thing happened at the end of the Internet boom in 2001/2.
What will make a difference in this market is offering a completely different model, such as fully open source projects that promote competitive vendor offerings without high lock-in.
p.s., Thanks for the Snowflake numbers. I just went off their last reported results.
[0] https://www.ey.com/en_us/growth/venture-capital/q4-2022-vent...
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/821769/us-spending-it-pr...
For instance, average Snowflake bill is $300k and many Snowflake customers (almost 400) pay more than a million per year. If you can cut that in half by augmenting Snowflake with IOMETE that's a pretty sweet deal.
No need to switch (that's a hard sell for an early stage startup to enterprise customers), but just augment...
How? By transitioning some of the compute load to IOMETE data lake. IOMETE charges a flat fee compared to Snowflake's consumption-based model. By cutting Snowflake compute consumption (often 5x or more the price of an AWS instance) organizations can save a lot.
Free option is already available through OSS Spark/super low cost EMR. What's your value add over those?
