Creative by The Numbers

We'll start with Creative's financial/business situation first, as it will help us paint the picture of their overall health and market status.

Creative first went public in 1992, listing their shares on the NASDAQ stock exchange. It's important to note however that Creative is not an American company but rather a Singapore company; so the NASDAQ listing was followed 2 years later with a listing on the Singapore Exchange, a result of their desire to tap the richer American IPO market. Creative Labs as we commonly refer to them by is actually the American subsidiary of Creative Technology Ltd.

If a stock is the best way to measure the health of a company, then Creative is about as sick as they come. Creative's lowest stock price ever was in 1996, where the stock hit a mid-day price for three days straight of $3.50, closing slightly higher than it each time. Following that low point Creative has seen numerous high-flying years, since then, peaking at nearly $40 in 2000. However the good times for Creative took a hit following the general economic downturn of 2001 and the company has never quite recovered. This has culminated in a near-continuous slide since the start of 2005, and nearly 3 whole years later the company's stock price is now flirting with the all-time low. On August 22nd of this year they briefly traded at $3.58, a mere $0.08 above their all-time low. Although they are now back up above $4 at $4.08, by this standard Creative is still in very, very poor shape.


Stock history courtesy of Yahoo! Finance

Furthermore as of the start of September, Creative has ceased listing its stock on the NASDAQ, now focusing on trading it exclusively over the Singapore Exchange, with some trading still taking place as Over The Counter trades in the United States. Creative has cited the reason for the move as being two things: 1) Most of the trading of the stock these days is done over the Singapore Exchange making the NASDAQ listings redundant and 2) They were dissatisfied with the reporting requirements for companies listed on American exchanges, which requires a level of detail and work not required for the Singapore Exchange. In other words, the reporting requirements enforced upon them to be listed on the NASDAQ weren't worth the limited trading business it was bringing them. To be fair to Creative, this announcement was made on June 14th, more than two months before they scraped the bottom, but it still has happened at a bad time for them.

To understand why their stock price is so low, we'll next take a look at their revenue, which for obvious reasons greatly influences their stock price. Creative uses a modified fiscal year calendar, with their fiscal year ending on June 30th of the year (the end of the second quarter on the traditional calendar). For the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2007 (Q4FY07, aka Q2'07) final quarter they had a revenue of $165mil, with an operating expense of $183mil, putting them in the red for the quarter to the tune of $18mil. After other income and losses (taxes, interest, etc) they lost just shy of $20mil for the quarter.

Their entire year is a brighter story, with revenue of $915mil and a final net income of $28mil. However these numbers look better for Creative than they actually are, due to the fact that in FY2007 they received a very large one-time payment for $100mil. In 2005 Creative was awarded a user interface patent for MP3 players, they promptly turned around and went after Apple with it, as Apple controls the lion's share of the MP3 player market. In August of 2006 Apple and Creative settled the matter with Apple paying Creative $100mil to drop all legal suits against Apple (with Steve Jobs saying "Creative is very fortunate to have been granted this early patent").

It's because of that $100ml payment that Creative was able to turn a profit for FY2007, and while we can't calculate what their exact income would have been for FY2007 without it, all other things held the same they would have had a sizable loss for the year. We would need to go back to FY2004 to find the last time Creative turned a real profit, when that year they pulled in $134mil. FY2005 was effectively break-even with a very slight profit of $590,000, and FY2006 saw a loss of a massive $118mil. This roughly correlates with Creative's stock price slide; they haven't turned a significant profit since FY2004 and haven't seen their stock price go up for any significant period of time since January 2005. As a result, at this point Creative is by no means destitute, thanks in large part to their settlement with Apple, but the immediate outlook isn't good, with no immediate sign that they'll be able to turn a profit in the near future.

Wrapping up Creative's financial situation, Creative includes some very interesting statistics with their fiscal reports: revenue as a share of location, and revenue as a share of product type. If you're in the Americas and you've ever felt that Creative doesn't seem very active here, you're not alone; the percentage of revenue coming from the Americas has shrunk over the past year from nearly half of all of Creative's revenue (46%) to less than a third (30%). Europe is now Creative's largest source of revenue at 47%, and Asia rounding things out at 23%.

As for the product situation, Creative has for years relied on portable media players for the majority of its revenue. This peaked in the later part of 2006, where such devices were 70% of their revenue, while this has since dropped a bit to 57% as of the end of Q4FY07. This market has a large reliance on new product releases making it volatile, but it still represents a general trend for Creative in the reduction of revenue coming from portable media players. No other product segment from Creative is nearly as big; audio, speakers, and everything else are all fairly close in size, although Creative is going to have to rely on these more and more as their portable media player revenue continues to slide.

Revenue By Geographical Region
Q4FY2007 Q3FY2007 Q4FY2006
Americas 30% 32% 46%
Europe 47% 49% 37%
Asia & Other 23% 19% 17%
.


Revenue By Product Category
Q4FY2007 Q3FY2007 Q4FY2006
Portable Media Player 57% 52% 65%
Audio 15% 17% 13%
Speakers 18% 21% 13%
Other 10% 10% 9%
.
Index Creative’s Technology
Comments Locked

95 Comments

View All Comments

  • Sunrise089 - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    I'm no expert, but it seems like there are three things they could do to turn thing around:

    1) Market their MP3 players better. I know several people who aren't in the "anything but apple" crowd, but who insist everything other than styling and interface is better in the Creative MP3 players. I'm sure more than 4% of the market would choose better audio quality if they could get it, so that's what Creative needs to be advertising.

    2) Make the X-fi's cheaper, and market them to gamers. The serious music crowd already has an X-fi if they want one. Gamers however like extra FPS, and I've seen plenty of benches showing decent gains for add-on audio. At the very least gamers should buy an X-fi before a RAID0 setup.

    3) Move into the on-board market. Creative still has a better association with quality than Realtec. So I'd have to think there would be some potential for moing the low-end of their soundcard market from discreet to integrated options.
  • heated snail - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    Back in 1999-2000, two Soundblaster Live audio boards completely failed to work with my via-based AMD platform running first Windows 98, then ME, then 2000. Sound was present but there were regular blue-screens caused by the audio driver. Creative first denied any problem, then blamed VIA's PCI latency issues. Those issues were true, but the daily crash was still in Creative's drivers. Further customer service (or even official response to the issue on their joke of a support website) was nonexistent.

    Since that time I have eagerly hoped for other consumers to see through Creative's blend of extremely heavy advertising budget and extremely lightweight customer service and support. Their formula worked for years, and now maybe it's almost finished. Creative, rest in pieces.
  • DigitalFreak - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    Good riddance to bad rubbish. If it wasn't for almost exclusive support of EAX in games, their soundcard division would have died a long time ago. Now all we need is a positional sound open standard (OpenAL is still a Creative controlled standard).

    As much as I dislike Vista, I have to give props to Microsoft for single handedly killing EAX. :0)
  • cambit69 - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    in some ways, Creative Labs reminds us of Eastman Kodak company. They missed the boat on digital cameras because they refused to acknowledge that digital would replace film (film was what the company was knwon to have pioneered). THe same way how Creative Labs just sat on their tried and true Sound Blaster brand and refused to put R&D into newer technologies and branch out.

    creative put 7% of their total revenue into R&D, that doesnt sound a lot to me for a business that relies on technology and it makes me wonder where the other 93% of their revenue is going.
  • The Boston Dangler - Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - link

    your analogy would better fit Polaroid. Eastman Kodak is alive and very well, Polaroid would be dead if it weren't for a couple industrial things going on.
  • strikeback03 - Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - link

    Kodak is alive, very well is a different story. Almost all of their products compete at the low end of the point&shoot market, where the competition is fierce and margins small. It is analogous to the segment of the MP3 player market Creative competes in. Kodak's last adventure with a dSLR did not go well, and if they were to re-enter that market it would likely need to be as a partner to someone, as they don't have their own line of lenses and other accessories, which are where the real money is in the dSLR world.
  • Duwelon - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    I haven't read much on UAA, why does the article say the sound card is going away and won't be coming back?

    What is UAA that it makes hardware based positional audio obsolete?
  • saratoga - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    I'm no expert on it (never did any Windows driver development), but its basically a standard for audio cards that moves most of the processing into standard Windows components that run in user mode.

    The upside of this is that sound cards will be able to work correctly and provide a high degree of functionality (5.1, etc) with no extra drivers at all (think how USB flash drives work without a driver disk). Additionally, since they run in user mode, bad drivers will no longer be able to BSOD Windows, at worst the app would crash to the desktop. Presumably, the ultimate goal is for MS to move audio processing over to more standard multicore and onboard accelerators (built in GPUs/PPUs/etc) rather then expensive and less functional proprietary PCI devices.

    This really screws over Creative of course, since effectively MS is putting their sound card business out to pasture. I can't say I blame them though. After all the stuff Creative's pulled, MS clearly wants to get them as far from their OS as possible.
  • leexgx - Wednesday, October 3, 2007 - link

    quote:

    is UAA that it makes hardware based positional audio obsolete


    it can still be done in hardware but its more standardised


    there drivers still suck and thay Refuse to support OEM sound cards that CAN ONLY be made by creative (it be like nvidia saying we not going to support an BFG NVida video card coes it has an badge on it that says BFG)
  • EarthsDM - Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - link

    ...fast enough. The soon they are gone, the better. They started a real revolution, and then drove their popularity into the ground.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now