IPVM has contracted $200,000+ in Annual Recurring Revenue in the first month of our new Research Service with 60 organizations signing up (an equivalent of 1,000+ $199 personal Info+ annual subscriptions) compared to ~240 total users canceling (~$40,000 worth).
While IPVM focuses on our reporting rather than our financials, given the scrutiny this move had received, we felt it was important to our subscribers and the industry to understand the results and metrics of this transition.
Research Subscriber Metrics
In the first month, the Research Service has been well received across various segments of the industry, with 21 small businesses signing up for the $480 Research 10 offering, numerous end users, integrators, and manufacturers signing up for a variety of levels, and 9 large organizations at the $10,000 level.
400+ Applications
Moreover, we have 400+ total applications, with more applications to the Research Service being received daily and new Research subscribers regularly being added.
Indeed, even a number of people who heatedly criticized the move on IPVM have changed their minds and purchased Research Service subscriptions.
More and more are becoming adjusted to the new model, gaining appropriate approvals, securing budget, etc., our conversations with prospects show.
Criticism And Improvements, e.g., $480 Plan
We are glad that subscribers spoke out, even in criticizing us, as it helped us better explain how and why we were doing what we did, improve the user interface and experience of the services plus create the $480 Research 10 offering, which helps smaller businesses.
Plus, we have now made it self-service for approved small business users to upgrade online, factoring in existing payments/credits one has and using one's existing payment method on file.
Significant Revenue Growth
The significant net growth in revenue helps us to better invest in our own people, products and infrastructure to do the best possible research and improve our reporting and resources that all subscribers access, like our books and tutorials.
Business Model Impact
Business modes are critical. What we have seen with the response is that this is a much better business model to support us in doing the type of in-depth research that is of great value to a small number of people.
Economic incentives matter. We are now much better incentivized to deliver the best research - testing and analysis possible - so we can ensure that subscribers read and benefit from as many reports as possible.
Apologies
I apologize for the confusion and frustration that many of you (and our team) experienced over the last 2 months. While we provided over a month's notice before this launched, with at least 3 emails to all subscribers about this, it still took many by surprise.
I certainly see why this would be surprising, as the typical tactic is to raise rates on everyone with few media or research organizations having any model like ours.
I do believe this approach is the future for organizations that are committed to delivering the very best research in niche areas, such as we do. And the financial results show this to be the case.
Outlook Strong
Our outlook with this model in place is stronger than ever. We are now focused on delivering more and even better research, reporting, Design Calculator development, and more.
Questions / Feedback
As we have throughout, we welcome questions, feedback, criticisms, and any ideas to improve our service going forward. Feel free to post them publicly in the comments to this post or contact us anytime.
Apply Now
For those interested, you can apply now.
It sounds like the changes are working out after all.
Some will call out cancellations related to the change in the subscription plan.
How much is this offset by any cancellations?
EDIT: Sorry, overlooked it in the article... "compared to ~240 total users canceling (~$40,000 worth)."
I put it in the first paragraph on purpose so that any critics would see this number right up front.
I've really enjoyed my subscription in years leading up to this one and utilize the research often. My expectation in paying my subscription in November 2021 was that I would get a year of what I had been getting in years past. My disappointment was that IPVM altered this four months into my subscription year. Although I understand the logic for the change, I question the manner in which it was executed. I have to budget for this, so we have to wait eight months to come up with the additional funds for my next subscription in November. I've tried to keep up with this change process, so I may have missed something along the way. Just a little frustrated with how this occurred. If I'm missing something, please let me know.
#2 we have worked with some others whose main concern is budgetary, if you have not talked to our team, I recommend setting up a call and they can help.
This reads like a self-congratulatory post to investors about you managing to squeeze your customers for maximum revenue. I know you're probably more looking at things from the perspective of a small business owner and founder feeling you need to prove wrong those that were saying this will be the death of IPVM, which is your life's work and greatest achievement, and something I sympathize with. But even if you didn't mean for it, it definitely will rub salt in some wounds.
Also, just because I criticized it, then signed up for it, doesn't mean I completely changed my mind and I'm now totally happy with it. I feel most of my previous complaints and especially disappointments in how this was done are still valid. I would guess many others feel the same.
We are setting the record straight about the success of this move.
No other organization in this industry would allow such criticism as we received during this launch on their own website. I am proud to have allowed it and would surely allow it again.
That noted, this public commenting process has created a false impression for many so this sets the record straight.
I feel that IPVM is simply being transparent, just like when the subscription change was announced and discussed in a long thread.
If they hadn't shared this information, eventually the naysayers would call them out on that as well.
IPVM is damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
If they hadn't shared this information, eventually the naysayers would call them out on that as well.
Lol, something like "Why won't IPVM reveal how many people are (not) signing up for Research Service? They know it's failed and are hiding it from us..."
To be clear, I don't intend to do a month-by-month or even year-by-year "celebration" of revenue, as we have not done in the past, since it's not our focus and we want our work to speak for itself. This was the exception as the finances of IPVM became a core public debating point.
with 60 organizations signing up (an equivalent of 1,000+ $199 personal Info+ annual subscriptions) compared to ~240 total users canceling (~$40,000 worth).
Can you specify how this data is being broken down by different countries?
Can you specify how this data is being broken down by different countries?
We have not tracked the country of companies signing up, and it's not a focus for us.
John, would you mind lending some insight into the breakdown of those 60 orgs? I have concerns that the research service turns IPVM into facing the great problem plaguing most other surveillance industry trade mags or tradeshow awards: namely, that the only people taking it seriously are the marketing teams.
Put another way, what's the point in building a better product and submitting that product for a shootout if the only people who are reading the research reports are other manufacturers? Are there enough end integrators in the 60 research accounts to bother?
As for the online shows, we are adding a major new element later in the year that we are quite excited will help connect buyers and sellers.
Oh my goodness you're finally going to start hosting Among Us sessions after the final presentation every day? That will revolutionize how people interact in these shows...
namely that the only people taking it seriously are the marketing teams.
Structurally the Research Service is the opposite of that. We have a strict no marketing policy so marketing people cannot use these results. What we have generally found is this is most appealing to management looking to make product or partnering decisions. Product people, like I was before IPVM, care about building better products to win deals, not awards.
in the 60 research accounts to bother
That's 60 organizations in 1 month. Those numbers are going to rise significantly throughout the year especially as more accept the reality of this model.
Less than half, 24 are manufacturers out of the 60, there are 26 integrators, the remaining 10 is a mix. It is not surprising manufacturers are signing up early as it informs their strategy.
We have had very strong interest from both integrators and end users in the applications that are still in progress.
I was expecting to see this:
Wow. Congrats guys!
Cha ching! All aboard the re$earch train!!
My company is also a subscriber who has not decided if we will terminate our services when our subscription is up. Are you counting my company as a win or a loss? I always speak of the difference between 10 year thinkers and 10 minute thinkers. I meet so many business owners who make bad decisions because they are focused on the short term value rather than the long term. This article and your calculations really feel short sighted. Just as your decision to offer a reduced amount to certian companies midway through. That change shows a lack of real thought before executing your plan. What about new customer acquisition? Will it be harder to aquire a new customer that can not see the value in the research as did some of the existing customers? I hope your calculations that you used for your outlook remain constant. Either way I wish you all the best.
Are you counting my company as a win or a loss?
We are not counting the hundreds of thousands of dollars in contracts requested that have not been signed yet just like we are not counting people who may cancel but have not.
More people are going to going cancel, for sure, but we will generate far more revenue in upgrades and new Research subscribers.
difference between 10 year thinkers and 10 minute thinkers
What we are doing is a 10 year move. It would be far easier to just raise prices on everyone 20% or 50% etc. That's a 10 minute move. Obvious to anyone and would result in far less short term backlash.
This new model sets us up for the next decade with the right economic structure to do the type of research that no one else has ever done in this industry. It incentivizes and rewards us for going deeper for those who truly value our work.
offer a reduced amount
As a point of fact, we reduced the amount by 55.5% (from $1080 to $480) but reduced the Research reports included by 66% (from 30 to 10) and we limited who can purchase such access.
Will it be harder to aquire a new custome
New customer acquisition has not been affected. Indeed, the more common complaint has been some existing subscribers who are so long accustomed to getting everything for $199.
Some people are going to be upset and cancel out of spite.
Most people will realize that $199 per person per year for all that Info+ offers to industry professionals is still a great value.
And we are rapidly growing our Research Service business delivering unique competitive intelligence that put non subscriber organizations at a disadvantage.
Everyone should carefully note the wording here - "celebrates".
This now very clearly demonstrates the true intent behind Re$earch+:
What you're doing takes courage. IPVM was always in credible bargain and is still not only a good deal but the true "Consumer Reports" of our Industry.
It's good to see a teacher make a buck.
