editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Selling What?

Reading Jim Turley’s article about business models got me thinking about FPGA and EDA companies.  

Yeah, I know. What’s new?

We’ve talked a lot about how EDA companies struggle to find a business model that earns them their fair share of the loot that comes from electronics.  The full-fledged, modern EDA industry has been around for about three decades and… they still drive a huge portion of the technology while reaping a tiny fraction of the rewards.

The fundamental reason for this, I believe, is that they’re selling software.  Since software is free to produce (but certainly not to design), there is always the temptation, when faced with competition, to drop the price.  Software development costs are, of course, amortized over the number of copies that are sold.  For EDA, those costs can be high because EDA software is some of the most complex stuff on Earth.  For EDA, the “number of copies” is very low because, compared with the number of people that need “Windows” the number that need post-layout verification for 22nm ICs is, well, zero, really.

As we learned in math class, when the denominator gets close to zero, the result gets big.  What’s more, the cost of developing EDA software is trivial compared with the cost of marketing, selling, and supporting it.  If you want to know why, you can get a glimpse by reading my “Par for the Course” blog post.

So – we have these competitive pressures pushing the selling price down, and this unfortunate ratio of development and marketing costs pushing the cost up.  For those of you without an MBA, hang on here – your engineering math will suffice.  When you subtract the cost from the price, you get – idiots like Carl Icahn knocking on your door saying you don’t know how to run your business.  

EDA companies can keep their prices up to a reasonable level when they have a unique, important technology with no competitor (this never lasts long), or when they, as an industry, can sell a particular product based on fear.  “Don’t want to lose millions of dollars in a re-spin?  Better buy our tool.”  Even though the primary purpose of EDA tools is productivity and higher-quality design, those factors have failed time and time again to extract value from the EDA customer base. 

EDA:  Want to design your next chip five times faster?

Customer:  yawn

EDA:  How about saving 75% on power consumption?

Customer: ZzzzzzzzzZzzzz

EDA:  Hey, if you don’t use our tool, your design will need a re-spin…

Customer:  Whoa!  What?  How much does it cost?  Wait, I don’t care.  Give me six copies, no… seven!  Charge me extra, too, I wouldn’t want it to be my fault for trying to skimp on verification budget.

This happens for several reasons.  First, the budget for engineering salaries in most companies comes from a completely different place than the budget for design tools.  If you can save $1M in engineering time by buying a $100K tool – not interested.  The two budgets are unrelated.  The engineer doesn’t really always want to make his job easier either.  You wouldn’t want to buy a tool that made you redundant.

FPGA companies spend about as much developing EDA tools as EDA companies.  Both Xilinx and Altera are rumored to spend more of their engineering budget on software tool development than they do on FPGA design.  Really? Yep, really.  What’s more, more of their support effort goes to supporting their design tools than their silicon.  Hmmm… what do you call a company that spends most of its engineering and support resources developing and supporting EDA tools?  

I’d call it an EDA company.

What do you call an EDA company that gives its tools away almost for free, and derives its revenue from a percentage of highly-popular high-margin chips?  I’d call that an EDA company with a clever, successful business model.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Dec 1, 2022
Raspberry Pi are known for providing lost-cost computing around the world. Their computers have been used by schools, small businesses, and even government call centers. One of their missions is to educate children about computers and to help them realize their potential thro...
Nov 30, 2022
By Chris Clark, Senior Manager, Synopsys Automotive Group The post How Software-Defined Vehicles Expand the Automotive Revenue Stream appeared first on From Silicon To Software....
Nov 30, 2022
By Joe Davis Sponsored by France's ElectroniqueS magazine, the Electrons d'Or Award program identifies the most innovative products of the… ...
Nov 18, 2022
This bodacious beauty is better equipped than my car, with 360-degree collision avoidance sensors, party lights, and a backup camera, to name but a few....

featured video

Unique AMS Emulation Technology

Sponsored by Synopsys

Learn about Synopsys' collaboration with DARPA and other partners to develop a one-of-a-kind, high-performance AMS silicon verification capability. Please watch the video interview or read it online.

Read the interview online:

featured paper

Algorithm Verification with FPGAs and ASICs

Sponsored by MathWorks

Developing new FPGA and ASIC designs involves implementing new algorithms, which presents challenges for verification for algorithm developers, hardware designers, and verification engineers. This eBook explores different aspects of hardware design verification and how you can use MATLAB and Simulink to reduce development effort and improve the quality of end products.

Click here to read more

featured chalk talk

Key Elements of Indoor Air Quality: Why Do They Matter and Why Do We Detect Them?

Sponsored by Mouser Electronics and Sensirion

Measuring indoor air pollution is a valuable tool to monitor our health and productivity. In this episode of Chalk Talk, Amelia Dalton and Timothy Kennedy from Sensirion discuss the what, how, and why of indoor air quality testing and how the all in one air quality sensor called Sen5X from Sensirion can make measuring our indoor air quality easier than ever before.

More information about Sensirion SEN5x Environmental Sensor Nodes