Tag: margins

LLMs and Software Margins

A few months back, I came across this article that talked about margins in the software industry. Long ago, computer software was well known to be an insanely high gross margin industry. However, it is not the case any more.

If you look at SaaS (software as a service) companies, a lot of them barely make much profits any more. So what changed?

The answer is infrastructure. In the olden days, when all hardware was “on premise”, software would be a bunch of lines of code that would get sold, and then run on the client’s on-premise hardware. Thus, once the code had been written and tested and perfected, the only cost that the vendor faced was to install the code on the client’s hardware (including the cost of engineers involved in the installation). And the margins soared.

Then (I’m still paraphrasing the article that I had read, and now can’t find), the cloud happened. Hardware wasn’t all on-premise any more. People figured out that software could be sold “as a service” (hence SaaS). Which means, instead of charging for installing some code on a computer, you could charge for API hits, or function calls. Everything became smooth.

The catch, though, was that the software would now have to be hosted on hardware maintained (in the cloud) by the vendor. Which meant now the marginal cost of delivery suddenly became non-zero. Rather, it went from O(1) (one time installation) to O(n) (costing each time it gets hit, or the time for which it is maintained). And this had a material impact on software margins.

I’m thinking of this now in the wake of new-fangled open source LLMs that keep getting announced every day. Every new LLM that comes out gets compared with ChatGPT, and people tell you that this new LLM is “open source”. And you get excited that you can get for free what you would have to pay for with ChatGPT.

Of course, the catch here is that ChatGPT is like SaaS – not only does it provide you the “LLM service” it also hosts the service for you and answers your questions, for a fee.

These open source models are like the traditional “on-premise” computer software industry – they have good code but the issue of course is that you need to supply your own hardware. Add in the cost of maintaining the said hardware, and you see where you might spend with the open source LLMs.

That said, Free != Open Source. The Open Source LLMs are not only free, but also open source – and so, the real value in them is that you can actually build on the existing algorithms and not have to pay a fee (except for your own infrastructure).

And from that perspective, it’s exciting that so many new tools are coming along.

Sales and marketing

On Saturday evening, I drank a Pepsi.

You might wonder why I’m making such a big deal about it. Because it is a big deal. Because I don’t normally drink pepsi. My preferred choice of cola is Thums Up, and if it’s not available I have a Coke. The only time when I have a pepsi is when both Thums Up and Coke are not available. There are times when I end up at PepsiFoods only stores, and sometimes I even have dew instead of pepsi.

You might think I’m extrapolating based on one data point. But I know more people who swear by thums up. For whom Pepsi is only a third choice cola.

The reason I’m bringing this up now is that Pepsi has spent a bombshell on sponsoring the IPL. Yes, despite being on HD, I managed to see a number of their ads. Pepsi Atom seems cool but they didn’t seem to have had its distribution in place when I wanted to try one. I reverted to my old faithful thums up. Now, I hear news that the India head of Pepsi has been sacked because he was deemed to have over spent on the IPL.

Why someone like Pepsi would spend so much on advertising is beyond me. Yes, they need to be on the top of people’s minds. But considering that everyone they advertise to has tried each of the major colas once, and loyalties to cola brands being rather heavy, I don’t see how they seek to influence sales by advertising. That Shah Rukh Khan drinks pepsi doesn’t alter my opinion one bit – I’m loyal to my thums up. I would think the same to be true to a loyal pepsi fan.

After having said so many times that I’m a loyal Thums Up customer, you might want to know why I drank Pepsi on Saturday. Because that little shop in Malleswaram I went to stocked only pepsi products. And he didn’t have dew. Faced with the choice of Pepsi or Mirinda or 7Up, I opted for the first. It was that exclusive agreement that PepsiCo had with that shopkeeper that made me consume their product.

Pepsi should invest more in this. Give higher margins to retailers who are willing to stock only pepsi products. Cola is something in which people have loyalties, but those loyalties are typically not so strong that the shop tends to lose business if the customer’s favourite brand is not available. Given lack of choice, customers will switch.

But then I guess the problem is that Pepsi is a “marketing-driven” rather than “sales-driven” company (we used to hear a lot about this distinction during recruitment time at business school). And the thing with marketing everywhere is that they are not measured. Like this friend who markets phones once gleefully told me that an advertisement he put out had a million likes on facebook. I asked him how many extra phones his company sold as a function of that ad. He had no answer. Marketing is like that everywhere. It is not judged based on real tangible numbers. And I hear that marketers like to keep it that way!

The last time I was in this guru mode I had commented that Nokia’s strategy of promoting Lumia by the strength of its camera was doomed to fail – for people don’t buy phones because they want a camera. Nokia seems to have learnt. The latest ad for the 520 talks about the apps that are available. This time they seem to have got it right.

 

Free float and rupee volatility

Following a brief discussion on twitter with @deepakshenoy I’m wondering what’s preventing the RBI from making the rupee fully convertible. The usual argument for full convertibility is that it will make the exchange rates volatile. My argument is that exchange rates are already so volatile that the additional volatility that could stem out of a free float is marginal, and a small price to pay.

The wise men at RBI, though, might argue the precise opposite. They will claim that in terms of already high volatility they wouldn’t want to do anything that might add to volatility, however marginally. This is a constant battle I faced in my last job, of delta improvements. I would frequently argued that when something was already high, making it delta higher was not so bad. I would argue in terms of making systemic changes that would reduce drastically the already high number, rather than focusing on the deltas.

Coming back to the rupee, you can also imagine the wise men talking about some stuff about black money and hawala money and all that. The thing with making the rupee fully convertible would be that hawala would be fully legal now, and the illegal practice would cease to exist. And when something becomes legalized it comes back to the mainstream rather than remaining on the margins, and that is always a good thing.

Then you can expect some strategic affairs experts to bring some national sovereignty and national security argument there. There will be people who will talk about the increase in counterfeit money (since it’ll become easier to “smuggle” rupees into India then), and about how foreign governments might pose a threat to India’s security by manipulating the rupee (who says that threat doesn’t already exist?)!

I don’t know. I don’t find any of these anti-full-convertibility arguments compelling. If we do adopt full convertibility, though, we can at least pay Iran for the oil we get from them, and that might for all you know help tackle inflation. I don’t, however, expect the RBI to act on this.