I heard SAS revenue coming from overseas like Europe exceeds revenue coming from US.
Is this really true?
56 replies (most recent on top)
“C’mon guys, downvotes express differences of opinion. This is just math.”
The math is fine or at least close enough. The downvotes are because it is has nothing to do with anything.
The revenue is 3 billion. Period.
Nobody really needed inflation explained to them,
$3 billion is rookie numbers. M&Ms are for closers!
“$3B from 10 years ago is worth over $4B now, accounting for inflation.“
That statement got downvotes, but it’s correct. SAS made ~$3B every year for the past 10 years. If SAS kept pace with inflation, it would be making ~$4B now.
C’mon guys, downvotes express differences of opinion. This is just math.
@dp+1jrxc31bf The funny thing about your post is that it is clearly meant as sarcasm but I’m betting some of those +1s are sincere agreement. You sir/maam are theonion of thelayoff.
I bet Australia and NZ are kicking all their behinds.
$3B from 10 years ago is worth over $4B now, accounting for inflation.
$3B represents a downward spiral because when adjusted for inflation it’s a ~20% decline. SAS has reduced headcount by ~20% to compensate.
Yet $3B is still a lot of money. Broadcom or private equity would pay at least $5B for that declining revenue stream. An IPO would probably bring a higher price; they usually do.
But “the company does not seem to be behaving with much sense of urgency towards a sale/IPO.”
True that!
@de+1jrxc31bf $3 billion is an abject failure. You know how many companies are 3 billion steady revenue these days? Probably less than 1%. Poverty numbers.
SAS should be embarrassed.
A $3B company is spiraling downward to it's current form? $3B is still a lot of money
"Is EMEA/AP surging or are US revenues falling off a cliff?"
Maybe. Maybe not. With the current discombobulated SAS accounting system, no one can accurately assign profit to a region or heck, even a single product. Gross revenue is all we hear about, as if that was the most important metric. It is not! Andre B realized that but upper management at SAS did not seem ready at the time to embrace his messaging...I digress.
Until SAS Finance implements a fully GAAP compliant accounting system, the numbers will continue to be stirred into a messy stew of the cook's preference. My gut believes that unnecessary foot dragging is happening towards the goal of being GAAP compliant. The speed of that project is slower than the norm. Lack of decisiveness might be the most likely culprit.
Bottom line, the company does not seem to be behaving with much sense of urgency towards a sale/IPO. That, unfortunately, is easily sniffed by potential buyers and likely explains their meager interest. Meanwhile the patient(SAS) keeps dying due to lack of receiving proper treatment.
It is saddening that such a once wonderful company that was universally admired has spiraled downward to the present form.
It’s been like that for awhile. But I’ve heard that the director for the Globalization department is absolutely useless and is hurting our ability to sell abroad. So it might change soon.
"Yes according to Atlas, EMEA/AP has greater TOR than Americas."
Wasn't TOR like 60% US (not including the rest of the Americas) just a few years ago?
Is EMEA/AP surging or are US revenues falling off a cliff?
“ Of greater concern is the ratio of new sales to renewals. Does anyone have those numbers?”
If you don’t know the numbers then why concern versus curiousity?
Of greater concern is the ratio of new sales to renewals. Does anyone have those numbers?
Yes according to Atlas, EMEA/AP has greater TOR than Americas.
According to the latest data I saw from marketing on leads at least, EMEA is blowing the U.S. out of the water.