Monday 23 July 2012

Open letter to 'Brian' Mukherjee, the new CEO of Blinkx

20th July 2012

Dear Mr. Mukherjee
As a long-term shareholder of Blinkx (I bought in about 6 months after the IPO) I am writing to congratulate you on your appointment as CEO of the company, and to highlight what I and other shareholders regard as Chandratillake's major failings and where, as shareholders, we would like to see the company make major changes/improvements in the future. For me, these changes fall under several headings:

1/ Comms/PR/IR/presentation. To date Blinkx's corporate comms has been utterly appalling. RNSs are released for seemingly trivial deals, and big news is released not at all or badly - why two days to release an RNS about the AOL deal (and even then only because news of the deal had leaked online)? I and other shareholder have actually had the phone put down on us by Blinkx staff when we have called to ask questions and identified ourselves as shareholders - such behaviour is completely unacceptable and would not be necessary if the company released news in a consistent and competent manner. In my opinion one of the worst aspects of Chandratillake's time as CEO was his paranoid secrecy - often, I suspect, to cover up his failures. I very much hope that this changes going forward. 

2/ Advertising. I work in the IT industry Mr Mukherjee - and yet nobody I talk to, either in work or outside it, has ever heard of Blinkx. Rather strange, don't you think, for "the world's largest video search engine"? If indeed that claim is true, how much truer would it be if word of Blinkx spread virally among users? I've long thought that an occasional TV ad campaign in the UK and US could pay massive dividends in driving traffic to the site, raising the company's profile among the public and with potential partners, and reassuring shareholders. Assuming of course that Blinkx's search technology is really as good as shareholders have been told for the last 5 years. 

3/ App strategy. Blinkx's app strategy to date - if you can call it a strategy - has been at best disorganised and at worst completely insane. Apps have been made for platforms whose users can be counted in the tens of thousands, yet no apps have been made for popular platforms. Why no Blinkx iOS app? - if there is a reason, then the company should state what that reason is, because otherwise it just looks like rank incompetence. And if Blinkx is going to create apps, they should advertise (see my point 2 above) to let people know they are there. The Blinkx app on Android OS has been downloaded 5,000-10,000 times - and yet according to Wikipedia Android has an installed base of c.331 million units! Why so few downloads? Because nobody knows who Blinkx are or what they do!

4/ Product strategy. Throughout Blinkx's life products have been developed which have been trumped as the Next Big Thing, only to disappear without trace or explanation. Transaction Hijacking was mentioned in the IPO prospectus as a source of future revenue - it never appeared. Cheep was in beta for 2 years, before the beta ended and it too vanished (so far as shareholders know), without a word of explanation. I'm sure you're aware that 2 years is longer than Instagram took to be created, grow its team to a dozen people, get 20 million users, and be bought by Facebook for $1bn. Which brings me nicely onto:   

5/ Lack of strategic, transformational deals; moving too slowly. One simple question to ask about Blinkx is this: if the technology is really so great, why does the company need to create apps at all, why isn't its search technology being integrated into, for example, the Samsung Smart TV OS? Or Facebook? Or Yahoo!? AOL was a good start (although shareholders still don't know what it will mean to the bottom line), but the IT sector - let alone the online video sector - is moving at hyperspeed, yet Blinkx seems to be moving at a snail's pace (as I mentioned above - 2 years in beta for Cheep before disappearing without trace? Really?). Why, for example, isn't Blinkx doing something like Zeebox (social TV)? Why did Blinxk take so long to bring an action that the passing off case against Blinkbox was thrown out? The company needs to move much faster, be much more nimble and agile so it can respond to a very rapidly-changing environment: and it needs landmark, transformational deals or partnerships.  

6/ Alignment of interests. Underpinning most of the problems I outline above is one fundamental issue: Chandratillake never bought any shares in Blinkx with his own money and held them for any length of time. He had share options, of course, which he exercised whenever he thought the share price had got ahead of itself; but he never once, so far as I am aware, bought any shares in the open market with his own money. As a consequence there was always a suspicion that his interests were not aligned with those of shareholders and it was that lack of focus which was behind so many of the other issue. I would urge you and the rest of the senior management team to purchase a significant stake in Blinkx with your own money so that shareholders can be assured that the interests of management are directly aligned with those of shareholders.   

I'm sure I'm not the only shareholder who wants to see an end to what I and many other shareholders regard as the cackhanded, incompetent mismanagement of Blinkx that characterised Chandratillake's period as CEO. I hope that you will rapidly move to stamp your own authority on the company and usher in a new era of much more open communications with shareholders and the City,  faster product development and better product delivery, more and better strategic deals in a very fast-moving environment, and as a consequence of all that far better delivery of shareholder value - a concept that seemed to be totally alien to Chandratillake (but then as I mention above, he wasn't a shareholder).

I wish you the very best of luck with what will I'm sure be a very difficult task.

Yours sincerely,

Simon Merlini

No comments:

Post a Comment