With Cornerstone OnDemand’s recent IPO (NASDAQ: CSOD) and their high valuation based on a negative EBIDTA, many are starting to ask if we are headed for a second Internet or SaaS Bubble?

I do agree that some of the valuations at this point are a lot higher than a reasonable person would expect, but this is probably just pent up interest in the technology sector. It doesn’t help that Facebook and LinkedIn has seriously pumped up the valuations for Internet/Social Media firms, but today’s SaaS companies are very different from the Dot Bombs of 1999/2000.

Remember these companies?

All of these companies were built on bad business models, too much money and expectations that were out of control. And by the way are all out of business.

But not all of the Internet companies that were formed during this period were bombs; in fact there are a number of firms that are now pillars of the technology industry including these firms:

It would be safe to say that each of these companies struggled during and after the Dot-Com collapse but they were able to modify their models to take advantage of the efficiencies that the Internet provided. Amazon has built a business that can effectively compete against the largest retailer in the world, Walmart, even though its sales are only 1/12^th their revenues.

All of these Internet Survivors had to develop a real business model that would deliver solid margins, profits and growth. They each had to assemble experienced management teams, learn how to deliver superior customer service and build trusted brands. Not easy to do, but they did it.

Fast-forward to today and we have a whole new set of Internet and Software-as-a-Service companies that have emerged and gone public including these firms:

(1) CSOD IPO: March 17, 2011

(2) SREV IPO: March 25, 2011

As you can see most of these companies were founded before the Internet Bubble burst and were forced to create real business models that could deliver profits.

At Montclair Advisors, we specialize in SaaS business advisory services and we know many of these firms quite well and they all have strong management teams, growing businesses and staying power. Unlike the Internet firms that went IPO in 1999 or 2000, most of these firms have had to build up their businesses over ten or more years and are based on some form of recurring revenues.

Major differences between the companies on this list versus the early Dot Bomb firms include:

• Proven Over Time. As you can see most of these firms are at least ten years old and have weathered the economic changes through the last two recessions.

• Businesses at Scale. Most of these companies are over $100M in annual revenues, which means they have been successful in selling into multiple markets and geographies.

• Recurring Revenue Streams. Anyone who has been involved with a company that has developed a subscription business can tell you how hard it is to create a meaningful recurring revenue stream. The advantages of being a SaaS software company based on subscriptions means that revenues remain consistent so there is a high degree of transparency and visibility.

• High Degree of Customer Satisfaction. All of these companies are dependent on satisfied customers that want to renew their annual subscription agreements and purchase more services. This is quite different than the ‘drive-by’ relationships many of the early Internet companies developed with their customers.

• Strong Management Teams. After the Dot Com crash it became much harder to file for an IPO and manage a company in the post Sarbanes-Oxley world. These next generation of Internet companies have attracted leading management expertise that knows how to innovate and rapidly scale viable businesses.

So are the valuations of companies like Cornerstone OnDemand and Servicesource, Facebook and LinkedIn too high? Are we beginning to see a SaaS Bubble? Maybe, but all of these companies have been built for the long term and will be around long after any correction, unlike their early Internet cousins Web Van or Kozmo.com.

By Kevin Dobbs

Montclair Advisors, LLC

Dreamforce 2010 was in San Francisco last week and there were a lot of announcements and it is only now that I am starting post my thoughts.   This post is going be around Force.com 2 and how Salesforce has rethought their approach, repackaged their platform and now have relaunced their PaaS.

This table provides a quick summary of how Salesforce has repackaged the Force.com 2 Platform.

What is interesting is that several of these offerings are just new packaging concepts and several are net-new products.  Let me walk you through the suite:

Appforce

This is basically the original Force platform using their proprietary 4GL, point-click-language APEX that has been repackaged as a departmental application platform.  What is interesting is that this environment is not just for departments, large enterprises like Japan Post and Thomson Reuters have done very large Cloud development projects using this platform.  I think that Salesforce realizes that due to its proprietary nature, most organizations will be attracted to Force.com but would prefer a more open and portable development environment.  Applications built with Appforce are also able to be easily integrated with Salesforce’s collaboration capability Chatter

.

Siteforce

This is a development environment specifically designed for building websites without having to write code. There was a great demonstration of how you can build and modify websites, even for mobile devices, using their drag-and-drop interface.  This will be popular with firms that do a lot of campaigns and need to design a lot of landing pages which can be tied back to Salesforce.  Like the Appforce products, Siteforce can be linked to Chatter to add social and mobile features to websites.  This was an existing capability inside of Force.com that has now been exposed as a new offering.  The marketing materials we were given state that there have been more than 20,000 website built using Siteforce.

VMforce

This platform is a result of a partnership with VMware, that opens up the Force.com platform to more than 6 million Java developers.  Using VMforce, developers can now run their Java-based applications on the Force.com platform, similar to what they would do it they were using Amazon EC2.  Developers can also use Java IDE’s like Spring or Eclipse as well as other open standards.  With my clients, this is a popular approach, it provides some leverage with existing Java-based apps as well as professional developers prefer to develop in this type of environment, rather than using a 4GL point-and-click product.   VMforce is currently in beta and will be ready for general availability in 2011.

Heroku

In a really interesting move, Salesforce went out an purchased a leading provider of Ruby-on-Rails for $212M in cash, $27M in stock and another $10M for un-vested employee shares.  Like VMforce, Heroku will offer developers a way to write applications using Ruby and then run them on Force.com.  The rumor was that VMware had made a run at the firm several months ago, but wanted to remain independent.  Marc Benioff in his keynote indicated that Heroku would remain independent from Salesforce, I am assuming in the way VMware has remained independent from EMC.  Several benifits for Heroku as part of Salesforce will be access to their 87,000 customers as well as their technology stack including Chatter.  Today, there are more than 100,000 websites and applications written using their platform including BestBuy and FlightCaster.

ISVforce

In another re-packaging move Salesforce has taken the Force.com platform and created a new program to help larger ISV’s to build their next generation applications on top of their PaaS.  This is a program that contains services and tools to help Independent Software Vendors to move their apps to the Cloud. Salesforce provides development services, trails and provisioning, connections to AppExchange and application monitoring along with their multi-tenant Infrastructure-as-a-Service.  Some early adopter ISV’s include Blackboard (who did a quick little demo), BMC (RemedyForce) and CA (Agile Vision).

AppExchange

Salesforce continues to promote their on-line application marketplace, which is similar to what Apple offers with their App Market, and how has over 1,000 applications available. Some interesting facts provided by Salesforce about the AppExchange include there have been more than 360,000 application test drives through the AppExchange, nearly 700,000 application installs and more than $1B invested in companies who are on the AppExchange.

Database.com

Another interesting announcement is that Salesforce has gone into the database business.  When I first heard this, I thought it wasn’t necessarily a good idea, but then I read that they were just repackaging a gigantic Cloud-based version of Oracle and selling the database by-the-slice.  Apparently Oracle thinks this is not a secure approach to selling databases, but let’s see how this all works out.  Amazon has something similar with their RDS offering.

The result is that Salesforce now has a suite of offerings that are designed to meet the needs to enterprise customers, software companies, professional and casual developers.  The strategic benefit of all of these offerings is to open up several new revenue streams for the company and continue their leadership momentum in the Cloud.

Here is our updated Public Company SaaS interactive spreadsheet.  Enjoy!

After our post on January 26th we got several great comments about the cost of starting a SaaS company.  It definitely takes a commitment to build a true SaaS company, especially when you consider some the following facts about the 15 public companies that I tracked in my high level analysis:

• Average Start-up Capital Required:                                   $44M
• Average Time Required from Start-up till IPO:                 7 years
• Average Capital Required per Year till IPO (Burn):             $6.8M
• Average IPO Proceeds:                                                    $76M
• Additional Capital Raised After the IPO:                           $243M
• Average Total Capital Raised:                                          $363M
• Average Market Capitalization:                                      $1,262M
• Companies Who are Profitable:                                            8

The costs of getting a SaaS start-up off the ground are substantial but only about half of the firms we tracked actually started out as a pure SaaS company.   These other Cross-Over firms started out as either Application Service Providers (ASP’s) or were traditional On-premise ISV’s that move to SaaS through a combination of organic migration or through a series of acquisitions.  Companies like Concur, Kenexa, Taleo and Ultimate Software have all transitioned to SaaS from an on-premise heritage.

Montclair Advisors - SaaS Start Up Costs - Pre IPO

The shortest time to go from start-up phase to an IPO was 4 years and the longest was 13 years.  Most of the firms we tracked were founded between 1997 to 1999, which was prior and during the Internet Bubble.

When these firms went public they raised a range between $30M (LivePerson and Ultimate Software) to over $150M (DealerTrack and NetSuite), but on average they raised about $75M.  All the firms then went on to do additional capital raises from $32M (LivePerson) up to $750M (DealerTrack) but on average each raised $243M!   The total capital raised, when considering both pre IPO, IPO and post IPO capital raised, these firms raised between $100M (LivePerson and Ultimate Software) to close to more than $500M (DealerTrack, Salesforce.com and SuccessFactors).

Montclair Advisors - SaaS Start Up Costs - Post IPO

After going public, this SaaS market basket of companies have done well as a group.  The majority of the firms are profitable, which makes for solid cash flow performance, revenue visibility and overall stability of the company’s stock, for the real SaaS firms.

The most valuable company, based on their Market Cap is Salesforce.com at more than $8B and there are at least 4 other SaaS firms with valuations over $1B (Blackboard, Concur, NetSuite and SuccessFactors).  When comparing the amount of capital raised to the market valuation, the 5 best performing firms are Salesforce.com (.09), Ultimate Software (.13) , Concur (.19), RightNow (.22) and LivePerson (.31).

Montclair Advisors - SaaS Start Up Costs - Market Caps

This year, as the economy improves, promises to launch a few new SaaS IPOs and we will continue to track this core group as well as a larger group of Hybrids and Cross Overs and will periodically report back with our findings.

When speaking with entrepreneurs and investors about the investment required to start up a new Software-as-a-Service company, I often refer back to this list.   At Montclair Advisors thought this would be a handy reference for those looking to start a SaaS company during 2010.

Looks like you might need a money tree to start a SaaS company, but for those that reach critical mass and go public, there is a tremendous payback.  This is information has been gathered from various sources including Wachovia, CrunchBase and Google Finance.