Print article

The venture-backed, capital-light software business is dead. RIP.

Peter Singlehurst, Partner, Head of Private Companies

Key Points

  • The Private Companies Team invests in companies that are upfront about their need for capital and use it to build businesses with a focus on efficiency and returns
  • Rising costs challenge the perception of software businesses as capital-light
  • Costlier ongoing software development, higher wages and renumeration-focused cultures hinder profitability

Your capital is at risk. For professional audiences only. It is not intended for use by retail clients.

One of the great misnomers of the investing world today is that software businesses are ‘capital light’, meaning they do not have the high start-up costs and ongoing costs that businesses with a more extensive physical footprint might have. This may have been the case 10 years ago when companies could expand rapidly from a low-cost base but it is seldom true today.

There is a trivial truth behind this: software companies do not need to spend money on sinking metal and concrete into the ground to build factories.

Suppose we measure capital intensity as the amount of money that needs to go into a business relative to the amount of profit that may come out. In that case, we cannot conclude that all software companies of the last 15 years are genuinely capital-light.

Billions of dollars have been raised and deployed across the industry. In some cases, large revenue bases have been built, but the amount of actual profit flowing back has frequently been woeful. Operational spending on headcount can kill profitability in the venture-backed consumer software industry. 

Software businesses currently face two problems when it comes to generating profit. One is structural, the other is cultural.  

Starting with the structural, the idea of software businesses being capital-light stems from the theoretical leverage that can come once you have sunk a certain amount of money into the salaries and options needed for the engineers to write the code.

Once you've done this, the theory goes, your marginal cost associated with each sale is close to zero and profit flows. This held in the early days of software, but things have changed.

Software has become unimaginably complex, and the pace of technological development alongside ever-rising user expectations means it needs to be updated almost the moment it has shipped. This blows the idea of a modest fixed cost base out of the water. The upfront cost is higher, and the ongoing need for continuous upgrades is never-ending.

At the same time, developer costs have skyrocketed. This is particularly true for the technology hub of the Bay Area, San Francisco, where many high-tech companies reside. ITPro reported that principal engineers at Facebook’s Menlo Park offices could earn over $1m, including salary, bonuses and stock options, with other companies not far behind. Software businesses still look 'high margin' because old-fashioned accounting treatment allocates very little of this cost to the ‘Cost of Goods Sold’ line.

Below gross profit, things get ugly. The sprint to stand still can be seen in inflated ‘Research & Development’ (R&D) lines, replacing the depreciation of ‘Property, Plant & Equipment’ in the old world.

We've been lulled into thinking that R&D lays the foundations for future growth and profitability. In reality, it is often an entirely necessary spend for maintaining relevance and sales under the forward march of technological development.

Profit-crushing ‘Sales & Marketing’ spending replaces physical distribution costs. But because these are annually expensed people costs and not a capital investment in the traditional sense, we persist in telling ourselves that these are capital-light businesses.

But the capital gets spent either way. The sucker punch comes when companies point us towards adjusted numbers for profitability that do not reflect the economic cost of shareholder dilution from employees' option packages. Thereby glossing over that this is a substitute for cash compensation that reduces the value accruing to every shareholder.

The second problem is a cultural one. Venture-backed software companies often have no culture of building toward profitability.

Success for the last 10 years has been defined by raising more capital at ever higher valuations to pour into salaries to grow a revenue base. All of which can then be poured back into wages, which, until very recently, have been something that can only go up.

Why have these costs risen? When companies rightly flipped away from the Friedman doctrine of maximising shareholder value at all costs, the pendulum for tech companies did not come to rest at a more plural approach to stakeholder value. Instead, it became magnetically pulled towards delivering value for employees.

Shareholder monism was replaced by employee monism. The need to retain the best software engineers, who attained almost godlike status, led to egregious pay and options packages absorbing much of the growth being delivered.

As the cost of writing and maintaining code of ever greater complexity has grown and wages have risen, the capital needed to build software companies has spiralled out of control.

More money is going in, and less is coming out than ever before. The idea of the capital-light software business in the venture ecosystem is dead. RIP.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence are already transforming the coding process and may reduce these costs. Will the bottleneck that has been the availability and cost of coding talent diminish as software becomes essentially self-coding? Where will the next bottlenecks appear, and what will the effect on returns be? Will the capital and rewards flow toward hardware or semiconductor businesses instead?

Understanding these dynamics means we don’t idolise pure software companies. They have a role in our portfolio, but we don’t place them on a pedestal as many of our peers do.

This, in turn, makes us more willing to back companies that are upfront about their need for capital. Companies such as Northvolt, Solugen or PsiQuantum, where our clients’ capital goes directly into building industrial capacity in the shape of battery production plants, bioforges or quantum computers. These are competitive moats that can’t simply walk across the road to the start-up next door.

Where we invest in pure software companies, we leverage our experience from public markets to ensure that we fully understand the incentive structures and governance. That includes considering how success will fairly reward founders, investors and employees.

We also look for companies that have evaded the venture capital game and bootstrapped their way to genuine capital efficiency, such as Wise, Grammarly or Bending Spoons. Interestingly, these three examples come from Estonia, Ukraine and Italy, respectively, areas which have not been awash with venture cash.  

Beyond the Bay Area, coding talent can be available for a fraction of the cost of that in Silicon Valley. This, and a culture of business building, often leads to a greater focus on efficiency and returns and so to interesting and attractively valued investment opportunities.

These are topics that we will return to in future communications.  

Risk factors

The views expressed should not be considered as advice or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold a particular investment. They reflect opinion and should not be taken as statements of fact nor should any reliance be placed on them when making investment decisions.

This communication was produced and approved in October 2023 and has not been updated subsequently. It represents views held at the time of writing and may not reflect current thinking.

This communication contains information on investments which does not constitute independent research. Accordingly, it is not subject to the protections afforded to independent research, but is classified as advertising under Art 68 of the Financial Services Act (‘FinSA’) and Baillie Gifford and its staff may have dealt in the investments concerned.

All information is sourced from Baillie Gifford & Co and is current unless otherwise stated.

The images used in this communication are for illustrative purposes only.

Important information

Baillie Gifford & Co and Baillie Gifford & Co Limited are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Baillie Gifford & Co Limited is an Authorised Corporate Director of OEICs.

Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited provides investment management and advisory services to non-UK Professional/Institutional clients only. Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is wholly owned by Baillie Gifford & Co. Baillie Gifford & Co and Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited are authorised and regulated by the FCA in the UK.

Persons resident or domiciled outside the UK should consult with their professional advisers as to whether they require any governmental or other consents in order to enable them to invest, and with their tax advisers for advice relevant to their own particular circumstances.

Financial Intermediaries

This communication is suitable for use of financial intermediaries. Financial intermediaries are solely responsible for any further distribution and Baillie Gifford takes no responsibility for the reliance on this document by any other person who did not receive this document directly from Baillie Gifford.

Europe

Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited provides investment management and advisory services to European (excluding UK) clients. It was incorporated in Ireland in May 2018. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited is authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland as an AIFM under the AIFM Regulations and as a UCITS management company under the UCITS Regulation. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited is also authorised in accordance with Regulation 7 of the AIFM Regulations, to provide management of portfolios of investments, including Individual Portfolio Management (‘IPM’) and Non-Core Services. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited has been appointed as UCITS management company to the following UCITS umbrella company; Baillie Gifford Worldwide Funds plc. Through passporting it has established Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited (Frankfurt Branch) to market its investment management and advisory services and distribute Baillie Gifford Worldwide Funds plc in Germany. Similarly, it has established Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited (Amsterdam Branch) to market its investment management and advisory services and distribute Baillie Gifford Worldwide Funds plc in The Netherlands. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited also has a representative office in Zurich, Switzerland pursuant to Art. 58 of the Federal Act on Financial Institutions (“FinIA”). The representative office is authorised by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). The representative office does not constitute a branch and therefore does not have authority to commit Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited, which is wholly owned by Baillie Gifford & Co. Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited and Baillie Gifford & Co are authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Conduct Authority.

China

Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Shanghai) Limited 柏基投资管理(上海)有限公司(‘BGIMS’) is wholly owned by Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited and may provide investment research to the Baillie Gifford Group pursuant to applicable laws.  BGIMS is incorporated in Shanghai in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’) as a wholly foreign-owned limited liability company with a unified social credit code of 91310000MA1FL6KQ30. BGIMS is a registered Private Fund Manager with the Asset Management Association of China (‘AMAC’) and manages private security investment fund in the PRC, with a registration code of P1071226.

Baillie Gifford Overseas Investment Fund Management (Shanghai) Limited柏基海外投资基金管理(上海)有限公司(‘BGQS’) is a wholly owned subsidiary of BGIMS incorporated in Shanghai as a limited liability company with its unified social credit code of 91310000MA1FL7JFXQ. BGQS is a registered Private Fund Manager with AMAC with a registration code of P1071708. BGQS has been approved by Shanghai Municipal Financial Regulatory Bureau for the Qualified Domestic Limited Partners (QDLP) Pilot Program, under which it may raise funds from PRC investors for making overseas investments.

Hong Kong

Baillie Gifford Asia (Hong Kong) Limited 柏基亞洲(香港)有限公司 is wholly owned by Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited and holds a Type 1 and a Type 2 license from the Securities & Futures Commission of Hong Kong to market and distribute Baillie Gifford’s range of collective investment schemes to professional investors in Hong Kong. Baillie Gifford Asia (Hong Kong) Limited 柏基亞洲(香港)有限公司 can be contacted at Suites 2713-2715, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. Telephone +852 3756 5700.

South Korea

Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is licensed with the Financial Services Commission in South Korea as a cross border Discretionary Investment Manager and Non-discretionary Investment Adviser. 

Japan

Mitsubishi UFJ Baillie Gifford Asset Management Limited (‘MUBGAM’) is a joint venture company between Mitsubishi UFJ Trust & Banking Corporation and Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited. MUBGAM is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Australia

Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited (ARBN 118 567 178) is registered as a foreign company under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and holds Foreign Australian Financial Services Licence No 528911. This material is provided to you on the basis that you are a “wholesale client” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“Corporations Act”).  Please advise Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited immediately if you are not a wholesale client.  In no circumstances may this material be made available to a “retail client” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act.

This material contains general information only.  It does not take into account any person’s objectives, financial situation or needs.

South Africa

Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is registered as a Foreign Financial Services Provider with the Financial Sector Conduct Authority in South Africa.

North America

Baillie Gifford International LLC is wholly owned by Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited; it was formed in Delaware in 2005 and is registered with the SEC. It is the legal entity through which Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited provides client service and marketing functions in North America. Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is registered with the SEC in the United States of America.

The Manager is not resident in Canada, its head office and principal place of business is in Edinburgh, Scotland. Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is regulated in Canada as a portfolio manager and exempt market dealer with the Ontario Securities Commission ('OSC'). Its portfolio manager licence is currently passported into Alberta, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Newfoundland & Labrador whereas the exempt market dealer licence is passported across all Canadian provinces and territories. Baillie Gifford International LLC is regulated by the OSC as an exempt market and its licence is passported across all Canadian provinces and territories. Baillie Gifford Investment Management (Europe) Limited (‘BGE’) relies on the International Investment Fund Manager Exemption in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. 

Israel

Baillie Gifford Overseas Limited is not licensed under Israel’s Regulation of Investment Advising, Investment Marketing and Portfolio Management Law, 5755-1995 (the Advice Law) and does not carry insurance pursuant to the Advice Law. This material is only intended for those categories of Israeli residents who are qualified clients listed on the First Addendum to the Advice Law.

Ref: 62140 10037541

Author

Peter Singlehurst

Partner, Head of Private Companies

Peter is the head of Private Companies. He joined the firm in 2010 and became a partner in May 2022. He is also manager of the Schiehallion Fund, our first dedicated private companies fund. Prior to joining the team, he spent time working in our Credit, UK Equities and Global Discovery teams. He moved to our Long Term Global Growth Team in 2014, becoming the first investment manager at Baillie Gifford to work exclusively on private company research. 

Back to top