Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

CAT - Catapult Group International

Jump to new
Klogg said:
That's what I thought, but I can't find much information on their website about pricing or product usage.
Given there's an Intangible for Distributor Relationships ($382.5k as at 1 July 2015) and another for Distributor Contracts ($48k as at 1 July 2015), I assume that I have to go through a distributor, although that could be as a result of the GPSports acquisition.
Click to expand...

You buy direct from them. There are some distributor relationships that came along with GPS Sports and are in emerging markets. GPS is the more basic product which has broader appeal at the semi-pro/elite amateur level, whereas the Catapult product really means you have a team of sports scientists or tech guys who work with the product. It's not designed to be sold at the retail level, or amateur, so that's why you'll struggle to find pricing and product info. Although that makes it difficult when trying to research the investment!:)

Klogg said:
I would be curious to know what information you can get from the product without any analytics/software. I can't imagine a huge data dump from the device is exactly user friendly nor useful, except to those with the means to pick it apart (in which case, it'd be more economical to just subscribe and access the software platform).
Click to expand...

The analytics come with the wearable. It's up to the user to opt for the SaaS option or the static version, either way there is always software to drive it. Catapult OpenField is much more advanced more customisable than GPS Spi IQ which is basically an off the shelf standard set of analytics. The real kicker is that CAT owns the data that their clients upload to the cloud which will make it very difficult for clients to leave because they'll be starting from scratch.
 
Thanks for the product info. I have emailed them for more information, but doubt I'll get it... Will figure out a way though :D

McLovin said:
The real kicker is that CAT owns the data that their clients upload to the cloud which will make it very difficult for clients to leave because they'll be starting from scratch.
Click to expand...

The prospectus is not very clear in this. It states:

Under its standard commercial arrangements with clients, Catapult retains the right to utilise data obtained from its products on a de-identified basis for a range of commercial applications.

It doesn't actually say anything about who owns the data, only that Catapult can use it at any point in time, so long as the athlete/team is not identified.
Does that then mean it must provide a data dump to the client at the end of the period? If not, I can see how that would be extremely useful... They'd really need to stuff up to lose a subscription client.
 
Klogg said:
Thanks for the product info. I have emailed them for more information, but doubt I'll get it... Will figure out a way though :D



The prospectus is not very clear in this. It states:

Under its standard commercial arrangements with clients, Catapult retains the right to utilise data obtained from its products on a de-identified basis for a range of commercial applications.

It doesn't actually say anything about who owns the data, only that Catapult can use it at any point in time, so long as the athlete/team is not identified.
Does that then mean it must provide a data dump to the client at the end of the period? If not, I can see how that would be extremely useful... They'd really need to stuff up to lose a subscription client.
Click to expand...

Maybe a poor choice of words. They don't "own" the data, but as I understand, without the CAT software the data is meaningless, and a team's data isn't deleted once they no longer are on contract. Remember the AFL clubs earlier in the year had a big blow up about the change to Champion Data by the league because they would lose all their years worth of data.

THE AFL has ignored a unanimous vote from all 18 clubs and ditched long-time GPS contractor Catapult Sports for a data provider it part owns.

Team bosses believe they are at risk of losing years worth of player tracking data after being told by the AFL to switch GPS systems from 2017.

...

“The view is the clubs haven’t been considered in the decision-making process and that is certainly frustrating,” the club official said.

“All 18 clubs voted for Catapult. Switching systems means the historical GPS data will be useless. They (systems) are not compatible.

“Every AFL club has collected player data in regards to injury history, running loads, everything. But we are now being asked to use a different system and that means starting again.

“It’s a lot of work and takes a lot of time.”

A separate insider said: “It was a fairly thorough (review) process and perhaps the AFL shouldn’t bother wasting club personnel time if they are going to dismiss it anyway.
Click to expand...
 
McLovin said:
Maybe a poor choice of words. They don't "own" the data, but as I understand, without the CAT software the data is meaningless, and a team's data isn't deleted once they no longer are on contract. Remember the AFL clubs earlier in the year had a big blow up about the change to Champion Data by the league because they would lose all their years worth of data.
Click to expand...

I read that article, but didn't even put the two together... thanks. Good to know that the precedent has been set.
I guess competitors could bridge the gap by offering to transition data sets for clients, but that becomes a massive cost to gain clients... although that's likely not very economical unless the client is massive.

On a completely separate note, I had a look at the forecast of unit sales for FY16 and the subsequent effect on subscription and 'capital' revenues. Given a large portion drops to the bottom line, the numbers are quite sobering...
That said, I need to get a better handle on the expense side, as employee expenses are hard to judge given the sales push.
 
Further to the data conversation - there's a further reason for customers to remain with CAT. The "Player Load" algorithm is internally developed and many training staff seem to use it as one of the inputs for their decisions. Given the algorithm is not shared, nor is the complete data set, it becomes extremely difficult for a competitor to replicate. As such, moving to a competitor means that even if the data set is handed over, "Player Load" cannot be calculated moving forward...

In summary, the data AND the algorithms each provide a competitive advantage.
 
Have a look at this research report. Of particular interest to me was the Q and A with existing users.

1) How important is wearables technology in your program?
Across 4 sports that I spoke to (AFL, UNION, CRICKET and LEAGUE) the response was “critical”. Nearly
100% of decisions concerning rehab and treatment of players are made using the data from wearables. In
terms of player load management, a similar figure. With regards to use for tactical purposes the response
was varied. Certainly important however at this stage there is an understandable balance between data
overload (too much noise) and traditional coaching. For this reason some organisations I spoke to do not
use live streaming during the game, instead they look at data at half time or post game to best manage
tactical decision making.

2) Could you do without it now that you have used it?
No.
Another unanimous response. To paraphrase one strength and conditioning head – “it would be like not
wearing underpants. Would you use VCR now that you have used a DVD or an Apple 2 now that you have
an iMac?”

3) Are you aware of any comparable offering or technology?
Not domestically. As mentioned previously the two other vaguely comparable offerings (albeit inferior)
are Statsports and Prozone (video based and recently acquired by STATS LLC). Despite a small presence in
NZ Super rugby the Australian market appears to be locked up. The loss of data is a serious impediment
to change.

4) Will you be inclined to purchase more?
Yes but obviously different sports and levels of elitism have different financial capacity to expand usage.
What was very interesting was feedback from a high performance manager who sat across numerous
sports and was responsible for allocation of funds and purchasing decisions. He would be more inclined
to cut back on coaching staff and reallocate funds to expanding number of units. In terms of importance
to his program he saw GPS analytics as critical and ranked at top of requirements for his elite programs.
He also commented that now when hiring new coaching and strength/conditioning staff understanding of
GPS systems was a prerequisite.

5) How long until wearables are standard practice at an elite sporting level?
My question related to CAT comments recently that only 10% of addressable market is using a wearables
solution. At the end of the day, what we all want to get our head around is how quickly this technology
(and by definition CAT) becomes “mainstream” across the globe. I gave two landmarks (if we take current
state of mkt at 10/90) – when is 50/50 and when is 90/10 market penetration? Responses varied
however all saw the usage now past the inflection point of critical mass and accelerating. Most estimated
another 2/3 years until 50/50 and within 5 years 90/10. A couple made the point that although relatively
slow on the uptake, North America would likely see the sharpest explosion in growth given their tendency
for “exuberance” (see also explanation of “breakout football” above).
Click to expand...

http://www.gobarralongcapital.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/CATAPULT.pdf

I didn't speak to as many people in as many sports but I got similar sort of feedback on the system. Number 5 is interesting, and runs along that theme of explosive growth once it catches.
 
I bought in today. I think the growth potential of this company is massive and also like the competitive advantage it has. There has definitely been a shift over the years of sporting clubs willing to use more quantitative/science based approaches over more traditional approaches.

Shifting from purchasing outright model to a rent seeking model was a great idea imo and as other posters have mentioned if clubs want to shift to another company they lose all their historical data. You can see AFL wanted a piece of this action as longer clubs continue with CAT harder it is to leave. However, I think the AFL's/Champion Datas product will be vastly inferior so will be interesting to watch this space.

CAT have already got some of the best sporting clubs globally using this product. The real growth will occur when all the feeder competitions start using this product. For example, in AFL we have numerous feeder comps including VFL WAFL SAFL etc. A stock to watch for the future.
 
anyone seen a bulletin board for 88E, I have just signed up to this forum but cant find a board for it.
 
Thinking about CAT – rambling aloud:2twocents.

I suspect control of the data is the only potential robust competitive advantage available. Question is who will achieve control of it? Athlete, Coach, Cub, Code, Device Supplier (CAT)

I think trading could be a good analogy for the end game here. Trading platforms are vital to traders but how locked in are traders to a particular trading platform or do they keep moving to the latest and greatest? How dominant and profitable has any trading platform provider been long term? How vital is the market data? How dominant and profitable have the exchanges been long term?

Without control of the data CAT may still initially achieve large market share and initial success but the money in elite sport for the latest cutting edge will be a double edged sword and without control of the data CAT is going to need a big R&D budget to defend market share and margins I suspect.

So who’s going to control the data? I don’t suspect CAT could ever achieve ownership of the data, as the other potential owners of the data you would have to be mad to let that happen but can CAT achieve pseudo ownership by interpreting and presenting in a unique way that provides them switching barriers as if they owned the data or can they maintain cutting edge through R&D?

Notice they are in a trading halt (transaction)
 
craft said:
Thinking about CAT – rambling aloud:2twocents.

Data (transaction)
Click to expand...

I dare say the reason they started the software side of things was because they could see that the unit side of things is effectively a commodity (everything has GPS, accelerometers etc).

From memory the main reason for the AFL complaints was that the new system would be incompatible with the old data, nothing was mentioned about ownership (may be going on behind the scenes though) and I guess that the compatibility could be overcome.

The AFL partnership is one of the oldest so maybe they have rejigged the ownership/retriction of the data since then, would be interesting to know. As I understand the teams own the data and CAT (outside of the direct athlete monitoring service) have anonymised use of the data for their own purposes, which in the future they raise the idea of providing that data to fans, but currently guess they are using it to better define their algorithms. How restricted the sharing of data is I don't know.

The adavantage they have is the pile of data headstart they have on competitors. If competitors are able to get access to the data (even from a couple of teams) they may be able to develop competitive software, but if the data is restricted then it will be hard for them to offer a competitive/refined software package from the get go. It does seem as though it takes a while to get on top of the data as Ive read a coupld of interviews with coaches who said it took a while to identify the important variables. Like most things these days its not getting the data its knowing what to do with it.

Once people have their head around the variables which contribute the most to injuries then cheaper units will be almost as effective with less sensors (eg 80% of injuries reduced just from acceleration monitoring). That would create competition in less wealthy leagues/sports but I gather the top tier will always pay for the bells and whistles especially given the relative cost compared to salaries.
 
well the AFL contract is sorted. will be interesting to see how the presentation of data to fans/viewers develops, might give an indication as to what to expect overseas.
 
omac said:
well the AFL contract is sorted. will be interesting to see how the presentation of data to fans/viewers develops, might give an indication as to what to expect overseas.
Click to expand...
That is very interesting, as discussed when it was announced that they first "lost" the contract, the AFL clubs themselves clearly weren't happy.

CAT themselves clearly have a fair bit of bargaining power in the current sporting paradigm, but as craft mentions in his post above, it is fairly hard to work out how it all plays out and if this can be maintained in the face of new entrants. Head starts are great, but if they only make it to say $50m-100m revenue before a competitor caught up there's still assumedly a major slice of the pie exposed that will cost a lot more in incremental investment to claim.

I know CAT isn't a cloud offering, but similar to a lot of the cloud SaaS products in lots of different industries, there is the issue of "data lock-in" or "data portability" (in this case, presumably none at all).

If there is no competition (or you have the best product by miles) clients do not seem to worry as much about having no data portability, but when competition exists, clients seem to get fairly picky about how much flexibility they give away with, what is from their perspective, their data.

For instance, certain accounting software packages have no way of data extraction to other formats from the cloud. Some accountants get really antsy about it at seminars etc.

It's an interesting debate. Just google "data portability" "data lock in", if interested.
 
The following line caught my attention in today's announcement:

"The Agreement also ensures Catapult will receive an annual subscription payment plus a share of new revenue generated from any commercial applications of wearable data."

How could AFL make revenue off this data? Or, does it imply that AFL will brand and sell some of their products retail?

I hold, my valuation is based on professional market (sports clubs) only. The potential of a retail offering opens a much bigger market.

I also think first mover advantage applies here to some extent. If, in the future, when signing a new player, you also get their biometric stats, it would be easier if there was an industry standard format. This will make clubs reluctant to change to a competitor, unless it is significantly better.
 
KnowThePast said:
How could AFL make revenue off this data? Or, does it imply that AFL will brand and sell some of their products retail?
Click to expand...
TV Networks, the media in general and fans (think fantasy footy especially) love being bombarded with mountains of stats to discuss during the telecast. The AFL (and a lot of other Australian leagues) have never really opened stats up to the public outside of the basic stuff like possessions, scores and a few other basic stats. There's still a wealth of information behind the veil (so to speak) that could be monetised like it similarly is in a lot of sports leagues overseas.
 
KnowThePast said:
The following line caught my attention in today's announcement:



How could AFL make revenue off this data? Or, does it imply that AFL will brand and sell some of their products retail?
Click to expand...

I think the idea would be a subscription service for fans to get access to performance data to go with the match. How much they show who knows? but i guess the idea is to have a richer experience for fans eg live access to distance covered or some such, obviously the teams wont want everything being made available.
 
Has anyone looked into dorsaVI (DVL). Looks like a potential competitor to CAT.
They have 'movement monitoring IP'. Not sure if their products are complementary to CAT or in direct competition, so a little more research needed.
It's interesting to see that they are not only targeting elite sporting area, but also workplace health and safety.

A quick look at the accounts shows they are certainly not ahead of CAT in terms of commercial success, posting an EBIT loss of $4.6m on revenue of $1.3m.
 
VSntchr said:
Has anyone looked into dorsaVI (DVL). Looks like a potential competitor to CAT.
They have 'movement monitoring IP'. Not sure if their products are complementary to CAT or in direct competition, so a little more research needed.
It's interesting to see that they are not only targeting elite sporting area, but also workplace health and safety.

A quick look at the accounts shows they are certainly not ahead of CAT in terms of commercial success, posting an EBIT loss of $4.6m on revenue of $1.3m.
Click to expand...

i remember looking at them a while ago and it looked like the focus was more physio/rehab/prehab rather than on field sports. it looks like they've increased their scope now though.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/50-tech-superbowl-clyde-hutchinson

This graphic is interesting and still puts dorsavi on the wellness side of things. not sure on the differences in the actual units and how easy it would be for them to spread to analytics. It looks to me like statsports is the main competitor. they have a similar number of employees, their twitter has just as similar number of followers, looks to be big in euro football (twit pics of messi et al) and a number of professional american teams, also have the deal with SAP.
 
Has anyone being following CAT?

it's being moving north very well despite volatile conditions the last two weeks.

CAT reports on Thursday 25th, so hoping for some positive news and good results.


cheers
 
Top