But instead, and despite Allplan?s internally established engineering, Scia and the associated investment / acquisition went to integration with Allplan, while the other two lonely sods go wanting. They could have dropped Scia?s hefty price tag and grown its subscriptions massively from the paltry 5 to 8 thousand it currently has. And imagine the reciprocal growth integrated engineering would have brought to ArchiCAD and Vectorworks. Imagine the market for Scia or a similar investment had it been integrated with ArchiCAD and Vectorworks. They've been going nowhere for the last six and thirteen years respectively, gaining no BIM connections on that tree while Allplan continues to integrate with acquired products on the opposite branches in aid of its growth. Allplan is already internally across architecture, engineering, build and manage, while alongside it you?ve got ArchiCAD and Vectorworks perched like a pair of internationally established golden egg laying geese in Nemetschek?s corporate tree. Take a look a Nemetschek?s portfolio graphic and consider the distorted development picture it presents. Allplan?s comparative growth path is exponential however, when you consider it includes acquisitions being integrated to roll into a united BIM force. And it would most likely focus development on ?new and shiny? marketable attributes, as opposed to solid development, in order to stimulate the sales needed to grow investment. That can still freeze hiring and limit development, even if a subsidiary?s revenue relative to its operating cost is extraordinary. The policy Tanja Tamara Dreilich thought worthy of promoting to the annalists in the conference call linked above, requires year over year revenue ?growth? at the subsidiaries to obtain further investment. Revenue growth is revenue growth, right? But the long-term BIM picture for the secondary brands remains BIM isolation without any major investment or avenues aimed at maturing them into vertically integrated BIM solutions. If the internationally established subsidiaries deliver Nemetschek?s mandated yearly growth in revenue, they get to grow incrementally at no expense to Nemetschek?s revenue stream. BIM is still an infant growing into the next generation of professionals and Allplan is still crawling its way out of Europe. Nemetschek didn?t acquire the competing brands to lose money, rather, the objective appears aimed at isolating them from alternate BIM destinies while returning their revenue to Nemetschek during Allplan?s international expansion. Nemetschek?s policy appears to have two alternate avenues for its acquisitions one promotes growth for, and with, Allplan via integration into the ?Allplan section? of the group the other isolates acquisitions from integration and predicates growth solely on their existing capacity to deliver increasing revenue to Nemetschek year over year. Reece, how does this fit with you speculations?

Nemetschek allplan vs revit