>>We're here at AWS Reinvent. If it wasn't for the people, if it wasn't for the individuals that we have on this show, none of this would be possible, and we're very thankful for those, those individuals. We're very thankful for our hosts, and I'm very thankful for the rest of my production team that does such an incredible job here at aws. Reinvent. Thank you for joining us, and we'll see you next year.

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> OpenAI The company, and ChatGPT have taken the world by storm. Microsoft reportedly is investing an additional 10 billion dollars into the company. But in our view, while the hype around ChatGPT is justified, we don't believe OpenAI will lock up the market with its first mover advantage. Rather, we believe that success in this market will be directly proportional to the quality and quantity of data that a technology company has at its disposal, and the compute power that it could deploy to run its system. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE insights, powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we unpack the excitement around ChatGPT, and debate the premise that the company's early entry into the space may not confer winner take all advantage to OpenAI. And to do so, we welcome CUBE collaborator, alum, Sarbjeet Johal, (chuckles) and John Furrier, co-host of the Cube. Great to see you Sarbjeet, John. Really appreciate you guys coming to the program. >> Great to be on. >> Okay, so what is ChatGPT? Well, actually we asked ChatGPT, what is ChatGPT? So here's what it said. ChatGPT is a state-of-the-art language model developed by OpenAI that can generate human-like text. It could be fine tuned for a variety of language tasks, such as conversation, summarization, and language translation. So I asked it, give it to me in 50 words or less. How did it do? Anything to add? >> Yeah, think it did good. It's large language model, like previous models, but it started applying the transformers sort of mechanism to focus on what prompt you have given it to itself. And then also the what answer it gave you in the first, sort of, one sentence or two sentences, and then introspect on itself, like what I have already said to you. And so just work on that. So it it's self sort of focus if you will. It does, the transformers help the large language models to do that. >> So to your point, it's a large language model, and GPT stands for generative pre-trained transformer. >> And if you put the definition back up there again, if you put it back up on the screen, let's see it back up. Okay, it actually missed the large, word large. So one of the problems with ChatGPT, it's not always accurate. It's actually a large language model, and it says state of the art language model. And if you look at Google, Google has dominated AI for many times and they're well known as being the best at this. And apparently Google has their own large language model, LLM, in play and have been holding it back to release because of backlash on the accuracy. Like just in that example you showed is a great point. They got almost right, but they missed the key word. >> You know what's funny about that John, is I had previously asked it in my prompt to give me it in less than a hundred words, and it was too long, I said I was too long for Breaking Analysis, and there it went into the fact that it's a large language model. So it largely, it gave me a really different answer the, for both times. So, but it's still pretty amazing for those of you who haven't played with it yet. And one of the best examples that I saw was Ben Charrington from This Week In ML AI podcast. And I stumbled on this thanks to Brian Gracely, who was listening to one of his Cloudcasts. Basically what Ben did is he took, he prompted ChatGPT to interview ChatGPT, and he simply gave the system the prompts, and then he ran the questions and answers into this avatar builder and sped it up 2X so it didn't sound like a machine. And voila, it was amazing. So John is ChatGPT going to take over as a cube host? >> Well, I was thinking, we get the questions in advance sometimes from PR people. We should actually just plug it in ChatGPT, add it to our notes, and saying, "Is this good enough for you? Let's ask the real question." So I think, you know, I think there's a lot of heavy lifting that gets done. I think the ChatGPT is a phenomenal revolution. I think it highlights the use case. Like that example we showed earlier. It gets most of it right. So it's directionally correct and it feels like it's an answer, but it's not a hundred percent accurate. And I think that's where people are seeing value in it. Writing marketing, copy, brainstorming, guest list, gift list for somebody. Write me some lyrics to a song. Give me a thesis about healthcare policy in the United States. It'll do a bang up job, and then you got to go in and you can massage it. So we're going to do three quarters of the work. That's why plagiarism and schools are kind of freaking out. And that's why Microsoft put 10 billion in, because why wouldn't this be a feature of Word, or the OS to help it do stuff on behalf of the user. So linguistically it's a beautiful thing. You can input a string and get a good answer. It's not a search result. >> And we're going to get your take on on Microsoft and, but it kind of levels the playing- but ChatGPT writes better than I do, Sarbjeet, and I know you have some good examples too. You mentioned the Reed Hastings example. >> Yeah, I was listening to Reed Hastings fireside chat with ChatGPT, and the answers were coming as sort of voice, in the voice format. And it was amazing what, he was having very sort of philosophy kind of talk with the ChatGPT, the longer sentences, like he was going on, like, just like we are talking, he was talking for like almost two minutes and then ChatGPT was answering. It was not one sentence question, and then a lot of answers from ChatGPT and yeah, you're right. I, this is our ability. I've been thinking deep about this since yesterday, we talked about, like, we want to do this segment. The data is fed into the data model. It can be the current data as well, but I think that, like, models like ChatGPT, other companies will have those too. They can, they're democratizing the intelligence, but they're not creating intelligence yet, definitely yet I can say that. They will give you all the finite answers. Like, okay, how do you do this for loop in Java, versus, you know, C sharp, and as a programmer you can do that, in, but they can't tell you that, how to write a new algorithm or write a new search algorithm for you. They cannot create a secretive code for you to- >> Not yet. >> Have competitive advantage. >> Not yet, not yet. >> but you- >> Can Google do that today? >> No one really can. The reasoning side of the data is, we talked about at our Supercloud event, with Zhamak Dehghani who's was CEO of, now of Nextdata. This next wave of data intelligence is going to come from entrepreneurs that are probably cross discipline, computer science and some other discipline. But they're going to be new things, for example, data, metadata, and data. It's hard to do reasoning like a human being, so that needs more data to train itself. So I think the first gen of this training module for the large language model they have is a corpus of text. Lot of that's why blog posts are, but the facts are wrong and sometimes out of context, because that contextual reasoning takes time, it takes intelligence. So machines need to become intelligent, and so therefore they need to be trained. So you're going to start to see, I think, a lot of acceleration on training the data sets. And again, it's only as good as the data you can get. And again, proprietary data sets will be a huge winner. Anyone who's got a large corpus of content, proprietary content like theCUBE or SiliconANGLE as a publisher will benefit from this. Large FinTech companies, anyone with large proprietary data will probably be a big winner on this generative AI wave, because it just, it will eat that up, and turn that back into something better. So I think there's going to be a lot of interesting things to look at here. And certainly productivity's going to be off the charts for vanilla and the internet is going to get swarmed with vanilla content. So if you're in the content business, and you're an original content producer of any kind, you're going to be not vanilla, so you're going to be better. So I think there's so much at play Dave (indistinct). >> I think the playing field has been risen, so we- >> Risen and leveled? >> Yeah, and leveled to certain extent. So it's now like that few people as consumers, as consumers of AI, we will have a advantage and others cannot have that advantage. So it will be democratized. That's, I'm sure about that. But if you take the example of calculator, when the calculator came in, and a lot of people are, "Oh, people can't do math anymore because calculator is there." right? So it's a similar sort of moment, just like a calculator for the next level. But, again- >> I see it more like open source, Sarbjeet, because like if you think about what ChatGPT's doing, you do a query and it comes from somewhere the value of a post from ChatGPT is just a reuse of AI. The original content accent will be come from a human. So if I lay out a paragraph from ChatGPT, did some heavy lifting on some facts, I check the facts, save me about maybe- >> Yeah, it's productive. >> An hour writing, and then I write a killer two, three sentences of, like, sharp original thinking or critical analysis. I then took that body of work, open source content, and then laid something on top of it. >> And Sarbjeet's example is a good one, because like if the calculator kids don't do math as well anymore, the slide rule, remember we had slide rules as kids, remember we first started using Waze, you know, we were this minority and you had an advantage over other drivers. Now Waze is like, you know, social traffic, you know, navigation, everybody had, you know- >> All the back roads are crowded. >> They're car crowded. (group laughs) Exactly. All right, let's, let's move on. What about this notion that futurist Ray Amara put forth and really Amara's Law that we're showing here, it's, the law is we, you know, "We tend to overestimate the effect of technology in the short run and underestimate it in the long run." Is that the case, do you think, with ChatGPT? What do you think Sarbjeet? >> I think that's true actually. There's a lot of, >> We don't debate this. >> There's a lot of awe, like when people see the results from ChatGPT, they say what, what the heck? Like, it can do this? But then if you use it more and more and more, and I ask the set of similar question, not the same question, and it gives you like same answer. It's like reading from the same bucket of text in, the interior read (indistinct) where the ChatGPT, you will see that in some couple of segments. It's very, it sounds so boring that the ChatGPT is coming out the same two sentences every time. So it is kind of good, but it's not as good as people think it is right now. But we will have, go through this, you know, hype sort of cycle and get realistic with it. And then in the long term, I think it's a great thing in the short term, it's not something which will (indistinct) >> What's your counter point? You're saying it's not. >> I, no I think the question was, it's hyped up in the short term and not it's underestimated long term. That's what I think what he said, quote. >> Yes, yeah. That's what he said. >> Okay, I think that's wrong with this, because this is a unique, ChatGPT is a unique kind of impact and it's very generational. People have been comparing it, I have been comparing to the internet, like the web, web browser Mosaic and Netscape, right, Navigator. I mean, I clearly still remember the days seeing Navigator for the first time, wow. And there weren't not many sites you could go to, everyone typed in, you know, cars.com, you know. >> That (indistinct) wasn't that overestimated, the overhyped at the beginning and underestimated. >> No, it was, it was underestimated long run, people thought. >> But that Amara's law. >> That's what is. >> No, they said overestimated? >> Overestimated near term underestimated- overhyped near term, underestimated long term. I got, right I mean? >> Well, I, yeah okay, so I would then agree, okay then- >> We were off the charts about the internet in the early days, and it actually exceeded our expectations. >> Well there were people who were, like, poo-pooing it early on. So when the browser came out, people were like, "Oh, the web's a toy for kids." I mean, in 1995 the web was a joke, right? So '96, you had online populations growing, so you had structural changes going on around the browser, internet population. And then that replaced other things, direct mail, other business activities that were once analog then went to the web, kind of read only as you, as we always talk about. So I think that's a moment where the hype long term, the smart money, and the smart industry experts all get the long term. And in this case, there's more poo-pooing in the short term. "Ah, it's not a big deal, it's just AI." I've heard many people poo-pooing ChatGPT, and a lot of smart people saying, "No this is next gen, this is different and it's only going to get better." So I think people are estimating a big long game on this one. >> So you're saying it's bifurcated. There's those who say- >> Yes. >> Okay, all right, let's get to the heart of the premise, and possibly the debate for today's episode. Will OpenAI's early entry into the market confer sustainable competitive advantage for the company. And if you look at the history of tech, the technology industry, it's kind of littered with first mover failures. Altair, IBM, Tandy, Commodore, they and Apple even, they were really early in the PC game. They took a backseat to Dell who came in the scene years later with a better business model. Netscape, you were just talking about, was all the rage in Silicon Valley, with the first browser, drove up all the housing prices out here. AltaVista was the first search engine to really, you know, index full text. >> Owned by Dell, I mean DEC. >> Owned by Digital. >> Yeah, Digital Equipment >> Compaq bought it. And of course as an aside, Digital, they wanted to showcase their hardware, right? Their super computer stuff. And then so Friendster and MySpace, they came before Facebook. The iPhone certainly wasn't the first mobile device. So lots of failed examples, but there are some recent successes like AWS and cloud. >> You could say smartphone. So I mean. >> Well I know, and you can, we can parse this so we'll debate it. Now Twitter, you could argue, had first mover advantage. You kind of gave me that one John. Bitcoin and crypto clearly had first mover advantage, and sustaining that. Guys, will OpenAI make it to the list on the right with ChatGPT, what do you think? >> I think categorically as a company, it probably won't, but as a category, I think what they're doing will, so OpenAI as a company, they get funding, there's power dynamics involved. Microsoft put a billion dollars in early on, then they just pony it up. Now they're reporting 10 billion more. So, like, if the browsers, Microsoft had competitive advantage over Netscape, and used monopoly power, and convicted by the Department of Justice for killing Netscape with their monopoly, Netscape should have had won that battle, but Microsoft killed it. In this case, Microsoft's not killing it, they're buying into it. So I think the embrace extend Microsoft power here makes OpenAI vulnerable for that one vendor solution. So the AI as a company might not make the list, but the category of what this is, large language model AI, is probably will be on the right hand side. >> Okay, we're going to come back to the government intervention and maybe do some comparisons, but what are your thoughts on this premise here? That, it will basically set- put forth the premise that it, that ChatGPT, its early entry into the market will not confer competitive advantage to >> For OpenAI. >> To Open- Yeah, do you agree with that? >> I agree with that actually. It, because Google has been at it, and they have been holding back, as John said because of the scrutiny from the Fed, right, so- >> And privacy too. >> And the privacy and the accuracy as well. But I think Sam Altman and the company on those guys, right? They have put this in a hasty way out there, you know, because it makes mistakes, and there are a lot of questions around the, sort of, where the content is coming from. You saw that as your example, it just stole the content, and without your permission, you know? >> Yeah. So as quick this aside- >> And it codes on people's behalf and the, those codes are wrong. So there's a lot of, sort of, false information it's putting out there. So it's a very vulnerable thing to do what Sam Altman- >> So even though it'll get better, others will compete. >> So look, just side note, a term which Reid Hoffman used a little bit. Like he said, it's experimental launch, like, you know, it's- >> It's pretty damn good. >> It is clever because according to Sam- >> It's more than clever. It's good. >> It's awesome, if you haven't used it. I mean you write- you read what it writes and you go, "This thing writes so well, it writes so much better than you." >> The human emotion drives that too. I think that's a big thing. But- >> I Want to add one more- >> Make your last point. >> Last one. Okay. So, but he's still holding back. He's conducting quite a few interviews. If you want to get the gist of it, there's an interview with StrictlyVC interview from yesterday with Sam Altman. Listen to that one it's an eye opening what they want- where they want to take it. But my last one I want to make it on this point is that Satya Nadella yesterday did an interview with Wall Street Journal. I think he was doing- >> You were not impressed. >> I was not impressed because he was pushing it too much. So Sam Altman's holding back so there's less backlash. >> Got 10 billion reasons to push. >> I think he's almost- >> Microsoft just laid off 10000 people. Hey ChatGPT, find me a job. You know like. (group laughs) >> He's overselling it to an extent that I think it will backfire on Microsoft. And he's over promising a lot of stuff right now, I think. I don't know why he's very jittery about all these things. And he did the same thing during Ignite as well. So he said, "Oh, this AI will write code for you and this and that." Like you called him out- >> The hyperbole- >> During your- >> from Satya Nadella, he's got a lot of hyperbole. (group talks over each other) >> All right, Let's, go ahead. >> Well, can I weigh in on the whole- >> Yeah, sure. >> Microsoft thing on whether OpenAI, here's the take on this. I think it's more like the browser moment to me, because I could relate to that experience with ChatG, personally, emotionally, when I saw that, and I remember vividly- >> You mean that aha moment (indistinct). >> Like this is obviously the future. Anything else in the old world is dead, website's going to be everywhere. It was just instant dot connection for me. And a lot of other smart people who saw this. Lot of people by the way, didn't see it. Someone said the web's a toy. At the company I was worked for at the time, Hewlett Packard, they like, they could have been in, they had invented HTML, and so like all this stuff was, like, they just passed, the web was just being passed over. But at that time, the browser got better, more websites came on board. So the structural advantage there was online web usage was growing, online user population. So that was growing exponentially with the rise of the Netscape browser. So OpenAI could stay on the right side of your list as durable, if they leverage the category that they're creating, can get the scale. And if they can get the scale, just like Twitter, that failed so many times that they still hung around. So it was a product that was always successful, right? So I mean, it should have- >> You're right, it was terrible, we kept coming back. >> The fail whale, but it still grew. So OpenAI has that moment. They could do it if Microsoft doesn't meddle too much with too much power as a vendor. They could be the Netscape Navigator, without the anti-competitive behavior of somebody else. So to me, they have the pole position. So they have an opportunity. So if not, if they don't execute, then there's opportunity. There's not a lot of barriers to entry, vis-a-vis say the CapEx of say a cloud company like AWS. You can't replicate that, Many have tried, but I think you can replicate OpenAI. >> And we're going to talk about that. Okay, so real quick, I want to bring in some ETR data. This isn't an ETR heavy segment, only because this so new, you know, they haven't coverage yet, but they do cover AI. So basically what we're seeing here is a slide on the vertical axis's net score, which is a measure of spending momentum, and in the horizontal axis's is presence in the dataset. Think of it as, like, market presence. And in the insert right there, you can see how the dots are plotted, the two columns. And so, but the key point here that we want to make, there's a bunch of companies on the left, is he like, you know, DataRobot and C3 AI and some others, but the big whales, Google, AWS, Microsoft, are really dominant in this market. So that's really the key takeaway that, can we- >> I notice IBM is way low. >> Yeah, IBM's low, and actually bring that back up and you, but then you see Oracle who actually is injecting. So I guess that's the other point is, you're not necessarily going to go buy AI, and you know, build your own AI, you're going to, it's going to be there and, it, Salesforce is going to embed it into its platform, the SaaS companies, and you're going to purchase AI. You're not necessarily going to build it. But some companies obviously are. >> I mean to quote IBM's general manager Rob Thomas, "You can't have AI with IA." information architecture and David Flynn- >> You can't Have AI without IA >> without, you can't have AI without IA. You can't have, if you have an Information Architecture, you then can power AI. Yesterday David Flynn, with Hammersmith, was on our Supercloud. He was pointing out that the relationship of storage, where you store things, also impacts the data and stressablity, and Zhamak from Nextdata, she was pointing out that same thing. So the data problem factors into all this too, Dave. >> So you got the big cloud and internet giants, they're all poised to go after this opportunity. Microsoft is investing up to 10 billion. Google's code red, which was, you know, the headline in the New York Times. Of course Apple is there and several alternatives in the market today. Guys like Chinchilla, Bloom, and there's a company Jasper and several others, and then Lena Khan looms large and the government's around the world, EU, US, China, all taking notice before the market really is coalesced around a single player. You know, John, you mentioned Netscape, they kind of really, the US government was way late to that game. It was kind of game over. And Netscape, I remember Barksdale was like, "Eh, we're going to be selling software in the enterprise anyway." and then, pshew, the company just dissipated. So, but it looks like the US government, especially with Lena Khan, they're changing the definition of antitrust and what the cause is to go after people, and they're really much more aggressive. It's only what, two years ago that (indistinct). >> Yeah, the problem I have with the federal oversight is this, they're always like late to the game, and they're slow to catch up. So in other words, they're working on stuff that should have been solved a year and a half, two years ago around some of the social networks hiding behind some of the rules around open web back in the days, and I think- >> But they're like 15 years late to that. >> Yeah, and now they got this new thing on top of it. So like, I just worry about them getting their fingers. >> But there's only two years, you know, OpenAI. >> No, but the thing (indistinct). >> No, they're still fighting other battles. But the problem with government is that they're going to label Big Tech as like a evil thing like Pharma, it's like smoke- >> You know Lena Khan wants to kill Big Tech, there's no question. >> So I think Big Tech is getting a very seriously bad rap. And I think anything that the government does that shades darkness on tech, is politically motivated in most cases. You can almost look at everything, and my 80 20 rule is in play here. 80% of the government activity around tech is bullshit, it's politically motivated, and the 20% is probably relevant, but off the mark and not organized. >> Well market forces have always been the determining factor of success. The governments, you know, have been pretty much failed. I mean you look at IBM's antitrust, that, what did that do? The market ultimately beat them. You look at Microsoft back in the day, right? Windows 95 was peaking, the government came in. But you know, like you said, they missed the web, right, and >> so they were hanging on- >> There's nobody in government >> to Windows. >> that actually knows- >> And so, you, I think you're right. It's market forces that are going to determine this. But Sarbjeet, what do you make of Microsoft's big bet here, you weren't impressed with with Nadella. How do you think, where are they going to apply it? Is this going to be a Hail Mary for Bing, or is it going to be applied elsewhere? What do you think. >> They are saying that they will, sort of, weave this into their products, office products, productivity and also to write code as well, developer productivity as well. That's a big play for them. But coming back to your antitrust sort of comments, right? I believe the, your comment was like, oh, fed was late 10 years or 15 years earlier, but now they're two years. But things are moving very fast now as compared to they used to move. >> So two years is like 10 Years. >> Yeah, two years is like 10 years. Just want to make that point. (Dave laughs) This thing is going like wildfire. Any new tech which comes in that I think they're going against distribution channels. Lina Khan has commented time and again that the marketplace model is that she wants to have some grip on. Cloud marketplaces are a kind of monopolistic kind of way. >> I don't, I don't see this, I don't see a Chat AI. >> You told me it's not Bing, you had an interesting comment. >> No, no. First of all, this is great from Microsoft. If you're Microsoft- >> Why? >> Because Microsoft doesn't have the AI chops that Google has, right? Google is got so much core competency on how they run their search, how they run their backends, their cloud, even though they don't get a lot of cloud market share in the enterprise, they got a kick ass cloud cause they needed one. >> Totally. >> They've invented SRE. I mean Google's development and engineering chops are off the scales, right? Amazon's got some good chops, but Google's got like 10 times more chops than AWS in my opinion. Cloud's a whole different story. Microsoft gets AI, they get a playbook, they get a product they can render into, the not only Bing, productivity software, helping people write papers, PowerPoint, also don't forget the cloud AI can super help. We had this conversation on our Supercloud event, where AI's going to do a lot of the heavy lifting around understanding observability and managing service meshes, to managing microservices, to turning on and off applications, and or maybe writing code in real time. So there's a plethora of use cases for Microsoft to deploy this. combined with their R and D budgets, they can then turbocharge more research, build on it. So I think this gives them a car in the game, Google may have pole position with AI, but this puts Microsoft right in the game, and they already have a lot of stuff going on. But this just, I mean everything gets lifted up. Security, cloud, productivity suite, everything. >> What's under the hood at Google, and why aren't they talking about it? I mean they got to be freaked out about this. No? Or do they have kind of a magic bullet? >> I think they have the, they have the chops definitely. Magic bullet, I don't know where they are, as compared to the ChatGPT 3 or 4 models. Like they, but if you look at the online sort of activity and the videos put out there from Google folks, Google technology folks, that's account you should look at if you are looking there, they have put all these distinctions what ChatGPT 3 has used, they have been talking about for a while as well. So it's not like it's a secret thing that you cannot replicate. As you said earlier, like in the beginning of this segment, that anybody who has more data and the capacity to process that data, which Google has both, I think they will win this. >> Obviously living in Palo Alto where the Google founders are, and Google's headquarters next town over we have- >> We're so close to them. We have inside information on some of the thinking and that hasn't been reported by any outlet yet. And that is, is that, from what I'm hearing from my sources, is Google has it, they don't want to release it for many reasons. One is it might screw up their search monopoly, one, two, they're worried about the accuracy, 'cause Google will get sued. 'Cause a lot of people are jamming on this ChatGPT as, "Oh it does everything for me." when it's clearly not a hundred percent accurate all the time. >> So Lina Kahn is looming, and so Google's like be careful. >> Yeah so Google's just like, this is the third, could be a third rail. >> But the first thing you said is a concern. >> Well no. >> The disruptive (indistinct) >> What they will do is do a Waymo kind of thing, where they spin out a separate company. >> They're doing that. >> The discussions happening, they're going to spin out the separate company and put it over there, and saying, "This is AI, got search over there, don't touch that search, 'cause that's where all the revenue is." (chuckles) >> So, okay, so that's how they deal with the Clay Christensen dilemma. What's the business model here? I mean it's not advertising, right? Is it to charge you for a query? What, how do you make money at this? >> It's a good question, I mean my thinking is, first of all, it's cool to type stuff in and see a paper get written, or write a blog post, or gimme a marketing slogan for this or that or write some code. I think the API side of the business will be critical. And I think Howie Xu, I know you're going to reference some of his comments yesterday on Supercloud, I think this brings a whole 'nother user interface into technology consumption. I think the business model, not yet clear, but it will probably be some sort of either API and developer environment or just a straight up free consumer product, with some sort of freemium backend thing for business. >> And he was saying too, it's natural language is the way in which you're going to interact with these systems. >> I think it's APIs, it's APIs, APIs, APIs, because these people who are cooking up these models, and it takes a lot of compute power to train these and to, for inference as well. Somebody did the analysis on the how many cents a Google search costs to Google, and how many cents the ChatGPT query costs. It's, you know, 100x or something on that. You can take a look at that. >> A 100x on which side? >> You're saying two orders of magnitude more expensive for ChatGPT >> Much more, yeah. >> Than for Google. >> It's very expensive. >> So Google's got the data, they got the infrastructure and they got, you're saying they got the cost (indistinct) >> No actually it's a simple query as well, but they are trying to put together the answers, and they're going through a lot more data versus index data already, you know. >> Let me clarify, you're saying that Google's version of ChatGPT is more efficient? >> No, I'm, I'm saying Google search results. >> Ah, search results. >> What are used to today, but cheaper. >> But that, does that, is that going to confer advantage to Google's large language (indistinct)? >> It will, because there were deep science (indistinct). >> Google, I don't think Google search is doing a large language model on their search, it's keyword search. You know, what's the weather in Santa Cruz? Or how, what's the weather going to be? Or you know, how do I find this? Now they have done a smart job of doing some things with those queries, auto complete, re direct navigation. But it's, it's not entity. It's not like, "Hey, what's Dave Vellante thinking this week in Breaking Analysis?" ChatGPT might get that, because it'll get your Breaking Analysis, it'll synthesize it. There'll be some, maybe some clips. It'll be like, you know, I mean. >> Well I got to tell you, I asked ChatGPT to, like, I said, I'm going to enter a transcript of a discussion I had with Nir Zuk, the CTO of Palo Alto Networks, And I want you to write a 750 word blog. I never input the transcript. It wrote a 750 word blog. It attributed quotes to him, and it just pulled a bunch of stuff that, and said, okay, here it is. It talked about Supercloud, it defined Supercloud. >> It's made, it makes you- >> Wow, But it was a big lie. It was fraudulent, but still, blew me away. >> Again, vanilla content and non accurate content. So we are going to see a surge of misinformation on steroids, but I call it the vanilla content. Wow, that's just so boring, (indistinct). >> There's so many dangers. >> Make your point, cause we got to, almost out of time. >> Okay, so the consumption, like how do you consume this thing. As humans, we are consuming it and we are, like, getting a nicely, like, surprisingly shocked, you know, wow, that's cool. It's going to increase productivity and all that stuff, right? And on the danger side as well, the bad actors can take hold of it and create fake content and we have the fake sort of intelligence, if you go out there. So that's one thing. The second thing is, we are as humans are consuming this as language. Like we read that, we listen to it, whatever format we consume that is, but the ultimate usage of that will be when the machines can take that output from likes of ChatGPT, and do actions based on that. The robots can work, the robot can paint your house, we were talking about, right? Right now we can't do that. >> Data apps. >> So the data has to be ingested by the machines. It has to be digestible by the machines. And the machines cannot digest unorganized data right now, we will get better on the ingestion side as well. So we are getting better. >> Data, reasoning, insights, and action. >> I like that mall, paint my house. >> So, okay- >> By the way, that means drones that'll come in. Spray painting your house. >> Hey, it wasn't too long ago that robots couldn't climb stairs, as I like to point out. Okay, and of course it's no surprise the venture capitalists are lining up to eat at the trough, as I'd like to say. Let's hear, you'd referenced this earlier, John, let's hear what AI expert Howie Xu said at the Supercloud event, about what it takes to clone ChatGPT. Please, play the clip. >> So one of the VCs actually asked me the other day, right? "Hey, how much money do I need to spend, invest to get a, you know, another shot to the openAI sort of the level." You know, I did a (indistinct) >> Line up. >> A hundred million dollar is the order of magnitude that I came up with, right? You know, not a billion, not 10 million, right? So a hundred- >> Guys a hundred million dollars, that's an astoundingly low figure. What do you make of it? >> I was in an interview with, I was interviewing, I think he said hundred million or so, but in the hundreds of millions, not a billion right? >> You were trying to get him up, you were like "Hundreds of millions." >> Well I think, I- >> He's like, eh, not 10, not a billion. >> Well first of all, Howie Xu's an expert machine learning. He's at Zscaler, he's a machine learning AI guy. But he comes from VMware, he's got his technology pedigrees really off the chart. Great friend of theCUBE and kind of like a CUBE analyst for us. And he's smart. He's right. I think the barriers to entry from a dollar standpoint are lower than say the CapEx required to compete with AWS. Clearly, the CapEx spending to build all the tech for the run a cloud. >> And you don't need a huge sales force. >> And in some case apps too, it's the same thing. But I think it's not that hard. >> But am I right about that? You don't need a huge sales force either. It's, what, you know >> If the product's good, it will sell, this is a new era. The better mouse trap will win. This is the new economics in software, right? So- >> Because you look at the amount of money Lacework, and Snyk, Snowflake, Databrooks. Look at the amount of money they've raised. I mean it's like a billion dollars before they get to IPO or more. 'Cause they need promotion, they need go to market. You don't need (indistinct) >> OpenAI's been working on this for multiple five years plus it's, hasn't, wasn't born yesterday. Took a lot of years to get going. And Sam is depositioning all the success, because he's trying to manage expectations, To your point Sarbjeet, earlier. It's like, yeah, he's trying to "Whoa, whoa, settle down everybody, (Dave laughs) it's not that great." because he doesn't want to fall into that, you know, hero and then get taken down, so. >> It may take a 100 million or 150 or 200 million to train the model. But to, for the inference to, yeah to for the inference machine, It will take a lot more, I believe. >> Give it, so imagine, >> Because- >> Go ahead, sorry. >> Go ahead. But because it consumes a lot more compute cycles and it's certain level of storage and everything, right, which they already have. So I think to compute is different. To frame the model is a different cost. But to run the business is different, because I think 100 million can go into just fighting the Fed. >> Well there's a flywheel too. >> Oh that's (indistinct) >> (indistinct) >> We are running the business, right? >> It's an interesting number, but it's also kind of, like, context to it. So here, a hundred million spend it, you get there, but you got to factor in the fact that the ways companies win these days is critical mass scale, hitting a flywheel. If they can keep that flywheel of the value that they got going on and get better, you can almost imagine a marketplace where, hey, we have proprietary data, we're SiliconANGLE in theCUBE. We have proprietary content, CUBE videos, transcripts. Well wouldn't it be great if someone in a marketplace could sell a module for us, right? We buy that, Amazon's thing and things like that. So if they can get a marketplace going where you can apply to data sets that may be proprietary, you can start to see this become bigger. And so I think the key barriers to entry is going to be success. I'll give you an example, Reddit. Reddit is successful and it's hard to copy, not because of the software. >> They built the moat. >> Because you can, buy Reddit open source software and try To compete. >> They built the moat with their community. >> Their community, their scale, their user expectation. Twitter, we referenced earlier, that thing should have gone under the first two years, but there was such a great emotional product. People would tolerate the fail whale. And then, you know, well that was a whole 'nother thing. >> Then a plane landed in (John laughs) the Hudson and it was over. >> I think verticals, a lot of verticals will build applications using these models like for lawyers, for doctors, for scientists, for content creators, for- >> So you'll have many hundreds of millions of dollars investments that are going to be seeping out. If, all right, we got to wrap, if you had to put odds on it that that OpenAI is going to be the leader, maybe not a winner take all leader, but like you look at like Amazon and cloud, they're not winner take all, these aren't necessarily winner take all markets. It's not necessarily a zero sum game, but let's call it winner take most. What odds would you give that open AI 10 years from now will be in that position. >> If I'm 0 to 10 kind of thing? >> Yeah, it's like horse race, 3 to 1, 2 to 1, even money, 10 to 1, 50 to 1. >> Maybe 2 to 1, >> 2 to 1, that's pretty low odds. That's basically saying they're the favorite, they're the front runner. Would you agree with that? >> I'd say 4 to 1. >> Yeah, I was going to say I'm like a 5 to 1, 7 to 1 type of person, 'cause I'm a skeptic with, you know, there's so much competition, but- >> I think they're definitely the leader. I mean you got to say, I mean. >> Oh there's no question. There's no question about it. >> The question is can they execute? >> They're not Friendster, is what you're saying. >> They're not Friendster and they're more like Twitter and Reddit where they have momentum. If they can execute on the product side, and if they don't stumble on that, they will continue to have the lead. >> If they say stay neutral, as Sam is, has been saying, that, hey, Microsoft is one of our partners, if you look at their company model, how they have structured the company, then they're going to pay back to the investors, like Microsoft is the biggest one, up to certain, like by certain number of years, they're going to pay back from all the money they make, and after that, they're going to give the money back to the public, to the, I don't know who they give it to, like non-profit or something. (indistinct) >> Okay, the odds are dropping. (group talks over each other) That's a good point though >> Actually they might have done that to fend off the criticism of this. But it's really interesting to see the model they have adopted. >> The wildcard in all this, My last word on this is that, if there's a developer shift in how developers and data can come together again, we have conferences around the future of data, Supercloud and meshs versus, you know, how the data world, coding with data, how that evolves will also dictate, 'cause a wild card could be a shift in the landscape around how developers are using either machine learning or AI like techniques to code into their apps, so. >> That's fantastic insight. I can't thank you enough for your time, on the heels of Supercloud 2, really appreciate it. All right, thanks to John and Sarbjeet for the outstanding conversation today. Special thanks to the Palo Alto studio team. My goodness, Anderson, this great backdrop. You guys got it all out here, I'm jealous. And Noah, really appreciate it, Chuck, Andrew Frick and Cameron, Andrew Frick switching, Cameron on the video lake, great job. And Alex Myerson, he's on production, manages the podcast for us, Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and our newsletters. Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at SiliconANGLE, does some great editing, thanks to all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts. All you got to do is search Breaking Analysis podcast, wherever you listen. Publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Want to get in touch, email me directly, david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at dvellante, or comment on our LinkedIn post. And by all means, check out etr.ai. They got really great survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, We'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (electronic music)

>>From the cube studios in Palo Alto, in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from the cube and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave ante. >>When Frank sluman took service, now public many people undervalued the company, positioning it as just a better help desk tool. You know, it turns out that the firm actually had a massive Tam expansion opportunity in it. SM customer service, HR, logistics, security marketing, and service management. Generally now stock price followed over the years, the stellar execution under Slootman and CFO, Mike scar Kelly's leadership. Now, when they took the reins at snowflake expectations were already set that they'd repeat the feet, but this time, if anything, the company was overvalued out of the gate, the thing is people didn't really better understand the market opportunity this time around, other than that, it was a bet on Salman's track record of execution and on data, pretty good bets, but folks really didn't appreciate that snowflake. Wasn't just a better data warehouse that it was building what they call a data cloud, and we've turned a data super cloud. >>Hello and welcome to this. Week's Wikibon cube insights powered by ETR in this breaking analysis, we'll do four things. First. We're gonna review the recent narrative and concerns about snowflake and its value. Second, we're gonna share survey data from ETR that will confirm precisely what the company's CFO has been telling anyone who will listen. And third, we're gonna share our view of what snowflake is building IE, trying to become the defacto standard data platform, and four convey our expectations for the upcoming snowflake summit. Next week at Caesar's palace in Las Vegas, Snowflake's most recent quarterly results they've been well covered and well documented. It basically hit its targets, which for snowflake investors was bad news wall street piled on expressing concerns about Snowflake's consumption, pricing model, slowing growth rates, lack of profitability and valuation. Given the, given the current macro market conditions, the stock dropped below its IPO offering price, which you couldn't touch on day one, by the way, as the stock opened well above that and, and certainly closed well above that price of one 20 and folks express concerns about some pretty massive insider selling throughout 2021 and early 2022, all this caused the stock price to drop quite substantially. >>And today it's down around 63% or more year to date, but the only real substantive change in the company's business is that some of its largest consumer facing companies, while still growing dialed back, their consumption this past quarter, the tone of the call was I wouldn't say contentious the earnings call, but Scarelli, I think was getting somewhat annoyed with the implication from some analyst questions that something is fundamentally wrong with Snowflake's business. So let's unpack this a bit first. I wanna talk about the consumption pricing on the earnings call. One of the analysts asked if snowflake would consider more of a subscription based model so that they could better weather such fluctuations and demand before the analyst could even finish the question, CFO Scarelli emphatically interrupted and said, no, <laugh> the analyst might as well have asked, Hey Mike, have you ever considered changing your pricing model and screwing your customers the same way most legacy SaaS companies lock their customers in? >>So you could squeeze more revenue out of them and make my forecasting life a little bit easier. <laugh> consumption pricing is one of the things that makes a company like snowflake so attractive because customers is especially large customers facing fluctuating demand can dial and their end demand can dial down usage for certain workloads that are maybe not yet revenue producing or critical. Now let's jump to insider trading. There were a lot of insider selling going on last year and into 2022 now, I mean a lot sloop and Scarelli Christine Kleinman. Mike SP several board members. They sold stock worth, you know, many, many hundreds of millions of dollars or, or more at prices in the two hundreds and three hundreds and even four hundreds. You remember the company at one point was valued at a hundred billion dollars, surpassing the value of service now, which is this stupid at this point in the company's tenure and the insider's cost basis was very often in the single digit. >>So on the one hand, I can't blame them. You know what a gift the market gave them last year. Now also famed investor, Peter Linsey famously said, insiders sell for many reasons, but they only buy for one. But I have to say there wasn't a lot of insider buying of the stock when it was in the three hundreds and above. And so yeah, this pattern is something to watch our insiders buying. Now, I'm not sure we'll keep watching snowflake. It's pretty generous with stock based compensation and insiders still own plenty of stock. So, you know, maybe not, but we'll see in future disclosures, but the bottom line is Snowflake's business. Hasn't dramatically changed with the exception of these large consumer facing companies. Now, another analyst pointed out that companies like snap, he pointed to company snap, Peloton, Netflix, and face Facebook have been cutting back. >>And Scarelli said, and what was a bit of a surprise to me? Well, I'm not gonna name the customers, but it's not the ones you mentioned. So I, I thought I would've, you know, if I were the analyst I would've follow up with, how about Walmart target visa, Amex, Expedia price line, or Uber? Any of those Mike? I, I doubt he would've answered me anything. Anyway, the one thing that Scarelli did do is update Snowflake's fiscal year 2029 outlook to emphasize the long term opportunity that the company sees. This chart shows a financial snapshot of Snowflake's current business using a combination of quarterly and full year numbers in a model of what the business will look like. According to Scarelli in Dave ante with a little bit of judgment in 2029. So this is essentially based on the company's framework. Snowflake this year will surpass 2 billion in revenues and targeting 10 billion by 2029. >>Its current growth rate is 84% and its target is 30% in the out years, which is pretty impressive. Gross margins are gonna tick up a bit, but remember Snowflake's cost a good sold they're dominated by its cloud cost. So it's got a governor. There has to pay AWS Azure and Google for its infrastructure. But high seventies is a, is a good target. It's not like the historical Microsoft, you know, 80, 90% gross margin. Not that Microsoft is there anymore, but, but snowflake, you know, was gonna be limited by how far it can, how much it can push gross margin because of that factor. It's got a tiny operating margin today and it's targeting 20% in 2029. So that would be 2 billion. And you would certainly expect it's operating leverage in the out years to enable much, much, much lower SGNA than the current 54%. I'm guessing R and D's gonna stay healthy, you know, coming in at 15% or so. >>But the real interesting number to watch is free cash flow, 16% this year for the full fiscal year growing to 25% by 2029. So 2.5 billion in free cash flow in the out years, which I believe is up from previous Scarelli forecast in that 10, you know, out year view 2029 view and expect the net revenue retention, the NRR, it's gonna moderate. It's gonna come down, but it's still gonna be well over a hundred percent. We pegged it at 130% based on some of Mike's guidance. Now today, snowflake and every other stock is well off this morning. The company had a 40 billion value would drop well below that midday, but let's stick with the 40 billion on this, this sad Friday on the stock market, we'll go to 40 billion and who knows what the stock is gonna be valued in 2029? No idea, but let's say between 40 and 200 billion and look, it could get even ugly in the market as interest rates rise. >>And if inflation stays high, you know, until we get a Paul Voker like action, which is gonna be painful from the fed share, you know, let's hope we don't have a repeat of the long drawn out 1970s stagflation, but that is a concern among investors. We're gonna try to keep it positive here and we'll do a little sensitivity analysis of snowflake based on Scarelli and Ante's 2029 projections. What we've done here is we've calculated in this chart. Today's current valuation at about 40 billion and run a CAGR through 2029 with our estimates of valuation at that time. So if it stays at 40 billion valuation, can you imagine snowflake grow into a 10 billion company with no increase in valuation by the end, by by 2029 fiscal 2029, that would be a major bummer and investors would get a, a 0% return at 50 billion, 4% Kager 60 billion, 7%. >>Kegar now 7% market return is historically not bad relative to say the S and P 500, but with that kind of revenue and profitability growth projected by snowflake combined with inflation, that would again be a, a kind of a buzzkill for investors. The picture at 75 billion valuation, isn't much brighter, but it picks up at, at a hundred billion, even with inflation that should outperform the market. And as you get to 200 billion, which would track by the way, revenue growth, you get a 30% plus return, which would be pretty good. Could snowflake beat these projections. Absolutely. Could the market perform at the optimistic end of the spectrum? Sure. It could. It could outperform these levels. Could it not perform at these levels? You bet, but hopefully this gives a little context and framework to what Scarelli was talking about and his framework, not with notwithstanding the market's unpredictability you're you're on your own. >>There. I can't help snowflake looks like it's going to continue either way in amazing run compared to other software companies historically, and whether that's reflected in the stock price. Again, I, I, I can't predict, okay. Let's look at some ETR survey data, which aligns really well with what snowflake is telling the street. This chart shows the breakdown of Snowflake's net score and net score. Remember is ETS proprietary methodology that measures the percent of customers in their survey that are adding the platform new. That's the lime green at 19% existing snowflake customers that are ex spending 6% or more on the platform relative to last year. That's the forest green that's 55%. That's a big number flat spend. That's the gray at 21% decreasing spending. That's the pinkish at 5% and churning that's the red only 1% or, or moving off the platform, tiny, tiny churn, subtract the red from the greens and you get a net score that, that, that nets out to 68%. >>That's an, a very impressive net score by ETR standards. But it's down from the highs of the seventies and mid eighties, where high seventies and mid eighties, where snowflake has been since January of 2019 note that this survey of 1500 or so organizations includes 155 snowflake customers. What was really interesting is when we cut the data by industry sector, two of Snowflake's most important verticals, our finance and healthcare, both of those sectors are holding a net score in the ETR survey at its historic range. 83%. Hasn't really moved off that, you know, 80% plus number really encouraging, but retail consumer showed a dramatic decline. This past survey from 73% in the previous quarter down to 54%, 54% in just three months time. So this data aligns almost perfectly with what CFO Scarelli has been telling the street. So I give a lot of credibility to that narrative. >>Now here's a time series chart for the net score and the provision in the data set, meaning how penetrated snowflake is in the survey. Again, net score measures, spending velocity and a specific platform and provision measures the presence in the data set. You can see the steep downward trend in net score this past quarter. Now for context note, the red dotted line on the vertical axis at 40%, that's a bit of a magic number. Anything above that is best in class in our view, snowflake still a well, well above that line, but the April survey as we reported on May 7th in quite a bit of detail shows a meaningful break in the snowflake trend as shown by ETRS call out on the bottom line. You can see a steady rise in the survey, which is a proxy for Snowflake's overall market penetration. So steadily moving up and up. >>Here's a bit of a different view on that data bringing in some of Snowflake's peers and other data platforms. This XY graph shows net score on the vertical axis and provision on the horizontal with the red dotted line. At 40%, you can see from the ETR callouts again, that snowflake while declining in net score still holds the highest net score in the survey. So of course the highest data platforms while the spending velocity on AWS and Microsoft, uh, data platforms, outperforms that have, uh, sorry, while they're spending velocity on snowflake outperforms, that of AWS and, and Microsoft data platforms, those two are still well above the 40% line with a stronger market presence in the category. That's impressive because of their size. And you can see Google cloud and Mongo DB right around the 40% line. Now we reported on Mongo last week and discussed the commentary on consumption models. >>And we referenced Ray Lenchos what we thought was, was quite thoughtful research, uh, that rewarded Mongo DB for its forecasting transparency and, and accuracy and, and less likelihood of facing consumption headwinds. And, and I'll reiterate what I said last week, that snowflake, while seeing demand fluctuations this past quarter from those large customers is, is not like a data lake where you're just gonna shove data in and figure it out later, no schema on, right. Just throw it into the pond. That's gonna be more discretionary and you can turn that stuff off. More likely. Now you, you bring data into the snowflake data cloud with the intent of driving insights, which leads to actions, which leads to value creation. And as snowflake adds capabilities and expands its platform features and innovations and its ecosystem more and more data products are gonna be developed in the snowflake data cloud and by data products. >>We mean products and services that are conceived by business users. And that can be directly monetized, not just via analytics, but through governed data sharing and direct monetization. Here's a picture of that opportunity as we see it, this is our spin on our snowflake total available market chart that we've published many, many times. The key point here goes back to our opening statements. The snowflake data cloud is evolving well beyond just being a simpler and easier to use and more elastic cloud database snowflake is building what we often refer to as a super cloud. That is an abstraction layer that companies that, that comprises rich features and leverages the underlying primitives and APIs of the cloud providers, but hides all that complexity and adds new value beyond that infrastructure that value is seen in the left example in terms of compressed cycle time, snowflake often uses the example of pharmaceutical companies compressing time to discover a drug by years. >>Great example, there are many others this, and, and then through organic development and ecosystem expansion, snowflake will accelerate feature delivery. Snowflake's data cloud vision is not about vertically integrating all the functionality into its platform. Rather it's about creating a platform and delivering secure governed and facile and powerful analytics and data sharing capabilities to its customers, partners in a broad ecosystem so they can create additional value. On top of that ecosystem is how snowflake fills the gaps in its platform by building the best cloud data platform in the world, in terms of collaboration, security, governance, developer, friendliness, machine intelligence, etcetera, snowflake believes and plans to create a defacto standard. In our view in data platforms, get your data into the data cloud and all these native capabilities will be available to you. Now, is that a walled garden? Some might say it is. It's an interesting question and <laugh>, it's a moving target. >>It's definitely proprietary in the sense that snowflake is building something that is highly differentiatable and is building a moat around it. But the more open snowflake can make its platform. The more open source it uses, the more developer friendly and the great greater likelihood people will gravitate toward snowflake. Now, my new friend Tani, she's the creator of the data mesh concept. She might bristle at this narrative in favor, a more open source version of what snowflake is trying to build, but practically speaking, I think she'd recognize that we're a long ways off from that. And I also think that the benefits of a platform that despite requiring data to be inside of the data cloud can distribute data globally, enable facile governed, and computational data sharing, and to a large degree be a self-service platform for data, product builders. So this is how we see snow, the snowflake data cloud vision evolving question is edge part of that vision on the right hand side. >>Well, again, we think that is going to be a future challenge where the ecosystem is gonna have to come to play to fill those gaps. If snowflake can tap the edge, it'll bring even more clarity as to how it can expand into what we believe is a massive 200 billion Tam. Okay, let's close on next. Week's snowflake summit in Las Vegas. The cube is very excited to be there. I'll be hosting with Lisa Martin and we'll have Frank son as well as Christian Kleinman and several other snowflake experts. Analysts are gonna be there, uh, customers. And we're gonna have a number of ecosystem partners on as well. Here's what we'll be looking for. At least some of the things, evidence that our view of Snowflake's data cloud is actually taking shape and evolving in the way that we showed on the previous chart, where we also wanna figure out where snowflake is with it. >>Streamlet acquisition. Remember streamlet is a data science play and an expansion into data, bricks, territory, data, bricks, and snowflake have been going at it for a while. Streamlet brings an open source Python library and machine learning and kind of developer friendly data science environment. We also expect to hear some discussion, hopefully a lot of discussion about developers. Snowflake has a dedicated developer conference in November. So we expect to hear more about that and how it's gonna be leveraging further leveraging snow park, which it has previously announced, including a public preview of programming for unstructured data and data monetization along the lines of what we suggested earlier that is building data products that have the bells and whistles of native snowflake and can be directly monetized by Snowflake's customers. Snowflake's already announced a new workload this past week in security, and we'll be watching for others. >>And finally, what's happening in the all important ecosystem. One of the things we noted when we covered service now, cause we use service now as, as an example because Frank Lupin and Mike Scarelli and others, you know, DNA were there and they're improving on that service. Now in his post IPO, early adult years had a very slow pace. In our view was often one of our criticism of ecosystem development, you know, ServiceNow. They had some niche SI uh, like cloud Sherpa, and eventually the big guys came in and, and, and began to really lean in. And you had some other innovators kind of circling the mothership, some smaller companies, but generally we see sluman emphasizing the ecosystem growth much, much more than with this previous company. And that is a fundamental requirement in our view of any cloud or modern cloud company now to paraphrase the crazy man, Steve bomber developers, developers, developers, cause he screamed it and ranted and ran around the stage and was sweating <laugh> ecosystem ecosystem ecosystem equals optionality for developers and that's what they want. >>And that's how we see the current and future state of snowflake. Thanks today. If you're in Vegas next week, please stop by and say hello with the cube. Thanks to my colleagues, Stephanie Chan, who sometimes helps research breaking analysis topics. Alex, my is, and OS Myerson is on production. And today Andrew Frick, Sarah hiney, Steven Conti Anderson hill Chuck all and the entire team in Palo Alto, including Christian. Sorry, didn't mean to forget you Christian writer, of course, Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight, they helped get the word out. And Rob ho is our E IIC over at Silicon angle. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcast, wherever you listen to search breaking analysis podcast, I publish each week on wikibon.com and Silicon angle.com. You can email me directly anytime David dot Valante Silicon angle.com. If you got something interesting, I'll respond. If not, I won't or DM me@deteorcommentonmylinkedinpostsandpleasedocheckoutetr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Valante for the insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching. And we'll see you next week. I hope if not, we'll see you next time on breaking analysis.

from the cube studios in palo alto in boston bringing you data driven insights from the cube and etr this is breaking analysis with dave vellante earnings season has shown a conflicting mix of signals for software companies well virtually all firms are expressing caution over so-called macro headwinds we're talking about ukraine inflation interest rates europe fx headwinds supply chain just overall i.t spend mongodb along with a few other names appeared more sanguine thanks to a beat in the recent quarter and a cautious but upbeat outlook for the near term hello and welcome to this week's wikibon cube insights powered by etr in this breaking analysis ahead of mongodb world 2022 we drill into mongo's business and what etr survey data tells us in the context of overall demand and the patterns that we're seeing from other software companies and we're seeing some distinctly different results from major firms these days we'll talk more about [ __ ] in this session which beat eps by 30 cents in revenue by more than 18 million dollars salesforce had a great quarter and its diversified portfolio is paying off as seen by the stocks noticeable uptick post earnings uipath which had been really beaten down prior to this quarter it's brought in a new co-ceo and it's business is showing a nice rebound with a small three cent eps beat and a nearly 20 million dollar top line beat crowdstrike is showing strength as well meanwhile managements at microsoft workday and snowflake expressed greater caution about the macroeconomic climate and especially on investors minds his concern about consumption pricing models snowflake in particular which had a small top-line beat cited softness and effects from reduced consumption especially from certain consumer-facing customers which has analysts digging more deeply into the predictability of their models in fact barclays analyst ramo lenchow published an especially thoughtful piece on this topic concluding that [ __ ] was less susceptible to consumption headwinds than for example snowflake essentially for a few reasons one because atlas mongo's cloud managed service which is the consumption model comprises only about 60 percent of mongo's revenue second is the premise that [ __ ] is supporting core operational applications that can't be easily dialed down or turned off and three that snowflake customers it sounds like has a more concentrated customer base and due to that fact there's a preponderance of its revenue is consumption driven and would be more sensitive to swings in these consumption patterns now i'll say this first consumption pricing models are here to stay and the much preferred model for customers is consumption the appeal of consumption is i can actually dial down turn off if i need to and stop spending for a while which happened or at least happened to a certain extent this quarter for certain companies but to the point about [ __ ] supporting core applications i do believe that over time you're going to see the increased emergence of data products that will become core monetization drivers in snowflake along with other data platforms is going to feed those data products and services and become over time maybe less susceptible and less sensitive to these consumption patterns it'll always be there but i think increasingly it's going to be tied to operational revenue last two points here in this slide software evaluations have reverted to their historical mean which is a good thing in our view we've taken some air out of the bubble and returned to more normalized valuations was really predicted and looked forward to look we're still in a lousy market for stocks it's really a bear market for tech the market tends to be at least six months ahead of the economy and often not always but often is a good predictor we've had some tough compares relative to the pandemic days in tech and we'll be watching next quarter very closely because the macro headwinds have now been firmly inserted into the guidance of software companies okay let's have a look at how certain names have performed relative to a software index benchmark so far this year here's a year-to-date chart comparing microsoft salesforce [ __ ] and snowflake to the igv software heavy etf which is shown in the darker blue line which by the way it does not own the ctf does not own snowflake or [ __ ] you can see that these big super caps have fared pretty well whereas [ __ ] and especially snowflake those higher growth companies have been much more negatively impacted year to date from a stock price standpoint now let's move on let's take a financial snapshot of [ __ ] and put it next to snowflake so we can compare these two higher growth names what we've done here in this chart has taken the most recent quarters revenue and multiplied it by 4x to get a revenue run rate and we've parenthetically added a projection for the full year revenue [ __ ] as you see will do north of a billion dollars in revenue while snowflake will begin to approach three billion dollars 2.7 and run right through that that four quarter run rate that they just had last quarter and you can see snowflake is growing faster than [ __ ] at 85 percent this past quarter and we took now these most of these profit of these next profitability ratios off the current quarter with one exception both companies have high gross margins of course you'd expect that but as we've discussed not as high as some traditional software companies in part because of their cloud costs but also you know their maturity or lack thereof both [ __ ] and snowflake because they are in high growth mode have thin operating margins they spend nearly half or more than half of their revenue on growth that's the sg a line mostly the s the sales and marketing is really where they're spending money uh and and they're specialists so they spend a fair amount of their revenue on r d but maybe not as high as you might think but a pretty hefty percentage the free cash flow as a percentage of revenue line we calculated off the full year projections because there was a kind of an anomaly this quarter in the in the snowflake numbers and you can see snowflakes free cash flow uh which again was abnormally high this quarter is going to settle in around 16 this year versus mongo's six percent so strong focus by snowflake on free cash flow and its management snowflake is about four billion dollars in cash and marketable securities on its balance sheet with little or no debt whereas [ __ ] has about two billion dollars on its balance sheet with a little bit of longer term debt and you can see snowflakes market cap is about double that of mongos so you're paying for higher growth with snowflake you're paying for the slootman scarpelli execution engine the expectation there a stronger balance sheet etc but snowflake is well off its roughly 100 billion evaluation which it touched during the peak days of tech during the pandemic and just that as an aside [ __ ] has around 33 000 customers about five times the number of customers snowflake has so a bit of a different customer mix and concentration but both companies in our view have no lack of market in terms of tam okay now let's dig a little deeper into mongo's business and bring in some etr data this colorful chart shows the breakdown of mongo's net score net score is etr's proprietary methodology that measures the percent of customers in the etr survey that are adding the platform new that's the lime green at nine percent existing customers that are spending six percent or more on the platform that's the forest green at 37 spending flat that's the gray at 46 percent decreasing spend that's the pinkish at around 5 and churning that's only 3 that's the bright red for [ __ ] subtract the red from the greens and you net out to a 38 which is a very solid net score figure note this is a survey of 1500 or so organizations and it includes 150 mongodb customers which includes by the way 68 global 2000 customers and they show a spending velocity or a net score of 44 so notably higher among the larger clients and while it's a smaller sample only 27 emea's net score for [ __ ] is 33 now that's down from 60 last quarter note that [ __ ] cited softness in its european business on its earning calls so that aligns to the gtr data okay now let's plot [ __ ] relative to some other data platforms these don't all necessarily compete head to head with [ __ ] but they are in data and database platforms in the etr data set and that's what this chart shows it's an xy graph with net score or as we say spending momentum on the vertical axis and overlap or presence or pervasiveness in the data set on the horizontal axis see that red dotted line there at 40 that indicates an elevated level of spending anything above that is highly elevated we've highlighted [ __ ] in that red box which is very close to that 40 percent line it has a pretty strong presence on the x-axis right there with gcp snowflake as we've reported has come down to earth but still well elevated again that aligns with the earnings releases uh aws and microsoft they have many data platforms especially aws so their plot position reflects their broad portfolio massive size on the x-axis um that's the presence and and very impressive on the vertical axis so despite that size they have strong spending momentum and you can see the pack of others including cockroach small on the verdict on the horizontal but elevated on the vertical couch base is creeping up since its ipo redis maria db which was launched the day that oracle bought sun and and got my sequel and some legacy platforms including the leader in database oracle as well as ibm and teradata's both cloud and on-prem platforms now one interesting side note here is on mongo's earning call it clearly cited the advantages of its increasingly all-in-one approach relative to others that offer a portfolio of bespoke or what we some sometimes call horses for courses databases [ __ ] cited the advantages of its simplicity and lower costs as it adds more and more functionality this is an argument often made by oracle and they often target aws as the company with too many databases and of course [ __ ] makes that argument uh as well but they also make the argument that oracle they don't necessarily call them out but they talk about traditional relational databases of course they're talking about oracle and others they say that's more complex less flexible and less appealing to developers than is [ __ ] now oracle of course would retur we retort saying hey we now support a mongodb api so why go anywhere else we're the most robust and the best for mission critical but this gives credence to the fact that if oracle is trying to capture business by offering a [ __ ] api for example that [ __ ] must be doing something right okay let's look at why they buy [ __ ] here's an etr chart that addresses that question it's it's mongo's feature breadth is the number one reason lower cost or better roi is number two integrations and stack alignment is third and mongo's technology lead is fourth those four kind of stand out with notice on the right hand side security and vision much lower there in the right that doesn't necessarily mean that [ __ ] doesn't have good security and and good vision although it has been cited uh security concerns um and and so we keep an eye on that but look [ __ ] has a document database it's become a viable alternative to traditional relational databases meaning you have much more flexibility over your schema um and in fact you know it's kind of schema-less you can pretty much put anything into a document database uh developers seem to love it generally it's fair to say mongo's architecture would favor consistency over availability because it uses a single master architecture as a primary and you can create secondary nodes in the event of a primary failure but you got to think about that and how to architect availability into the platform and got to consider recovery more carefully now now no schema means it's not a tables and rows structure and you can again shove anything you want into the database but you got to think about how to optimize performance um on queries now [ __ ] has been hard at work evolving the platform from the early days when you go back and look at its roadmap it's been you know started as a document database purely it added graph processing time series it's made search you know much much easier and more fundamental it's added atlas that fully managed cloud database uh service which we said now comprises 60 of its revenue it's you know kubernetes integrations and kind of the modern microservices stack and dozens and dozens and dozens of other features mongo's done a really fine job we think of creating a leading database platform today that is loved by customers loved by developers and is highly functional and next week the cube will be at mongodb world and we'll be looking for some of these items that we're showing here and this this chart this always going to be main focus on developers [ __ ] prides itself on being a developer friendly platform we're going to look for new features especially around security and governance and simplification of configurations and cluster management [ __ ] is likely going to continue to advance its all-in-one appeal and add more capabilities that reduce the need to to spin up bespoke platforms and we would expect enhance enhancements to atlas further enhancements there is atlas really is the future you know maybe adding you know more cloud native features and integrations and perhaps simplified ways to migrate to the cloud to atlas and improve access to data sources generally making the lives of developers and data analysts easier that's going to be we think a big theme at the event so these are the main things that we'll be scoping out at the event so please stop by if you're in new york city new york city at mongodb world or tune in to thecube.net okay that's it for today thanks to my colleagues stephanie chan who helps research breaking analysis from time to time alex meyerson is on production as today is as is andrew frick sarah kenney steve conte conte anderson hill and the entire team in palo alto thank you kristen martin and cheryl knight helped get the word out and rob hof is our editor-in-chief over there at siliconangle remember all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen just search breaking analysis podcast we do publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com want to reach me email me david.velante siliconangle.com or dm me at divalante or a comment on my linkedin post and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business this is dave vellante for the cube insights powered by etr thanks for watching see you next time [Music] you