The Generations Network May Make Acquisitions, Go Public

The Salt Lake Tribune has an article about The Generations Network's new CFO (see the TGN announcement I posted earlier at http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/12/the-generations.html.)

The Tribune's article goes deeper than the original announcement. It quotes The Generations Network CEO Tim Sullivan as saying, "I wouldn't say we have plans to take it public," but he added that making a public offering is part of the expertise the company's owners bring to the Provo-based company. "We're going to do whatever we should do to maximize value for our shareholders and service our members and subscribers," said Sullivan.

Sullivan called the company "extremely profitable," saying it has more than a million paid subscribers to its family history services and $190 million in yearly revenue.

Sullivan and the new CFO Hochhauser said the company's strong financial position, and the fact that the recession has lowered the value of other companies, may allow The Generations Network to make strategic acquisitions that will allow it to continue to grow.

"It's something we want to do if we think there are opportunities," said Sullivan.

You can read more at http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_11130742.

Any bets on who will be acquired?

Comments

[Carlos]

If I were them, I'd make an offer on: 1) Find A Grave 2) Footnote and 3) WorldVitalRecords.com.

I'm not sure any of them are highly profitable, especially Find A Grave, which seems to rely on advertising to cover expenses. However, a lot of data/names/photographs could be assimilated through the purchase of Find A Grave. Additionally, much unique material could be acquired through the purchase of Footnote.

[Steve]

I hope this doesn't happen and the littler guys stay in. There is already limited competition in this space, and Ancestry has proven that they will charge the maximum price possible. If they monopolize the major data sets, it will be bad for consumers.

[Linda]

Find a Grave a a free site with user submitted material. As long as TGN offered it as FREE to non-subscribers, it might work. We need to remember that people submit information to free site with intentions that it will be free for others to use. There is a reason Find a Grave depends on advertising for funding.

In my opinion, TGN should focus on QUALITY in their offerings on Ancestry and in development of Family Tree Maker rather than making acquisitions and spending many dollars on CNN advertising.

[sue maxwell]

I live near ancestry and have a subscription; I don't have much money, and I get a very low price monthly payment world delux sub. I have found so much information on the program that I am literally stuffing it all in my computer room.

While I am generally opposed to monopolies, I would like to mention an experiece that is somwhat relative. My husband was on the committee, years ago, to decide if ATT should be broken up. After a summer of driving to NJ from Md every week, where they studied the possibilities from every angle, their conclusion was that it would not be a good idea. Then we had an offer to work over seas for 10 years. When I came back, the telephone system, which was not multiplied by small ones, was the biggest mess I have ever seen, and I have never quite understood or liked it since then.

Ancestry has so much to offer; if you don't have much money, I think it is the best one to get a subscription to, and I am for them buying up more, so that we can get more on one site rather than subscribing to many. I just found out that one site, that I though I had subscribed to for one month, has been taking money out of my account for a number of months- I was shocked!

My only complaint about ancestry is that they hire foreigners who cannot read English writing and translate names so badly that it is getting harder to find people. I spend equal time correcting errors as I do printing out census and other records. I have even found out more about my own personal family than I knew when I grew up with them!

The only thing I really miss accessing at home is the ProQuest version of the NYTimes. It was my gold mine for one family line.

I have seen many people complain about Ancestry, but I think they offer a great service for a reasonable price. Sue Maxwell

[Elyse]

Ancestry - what a love/hate relationship.

They've proven that they are willing to charge maximum price. I wish that they would focus on making family history better and more accessible instead of focusing on how they can make more money. I understand that they are a company - but I really feel that they are overpriced. It is something that I certainly can't afford.

I don't think they should take a free site over because free sites are meant to stay free.

[sue maxwell]

I agree that the free sites should stay free; I have benefited from so many, and didn't even know there were so many until I started using mailing lists! I have mostly used libraries, NYGBS, and Ancestry. I keep a list of free sites as I learn about them, in an email folder. I use germangenealogy group alot and have found marriages after 1930, and other vital records- a huge help- I just found out where my grandmother's second marriage took place thanks to their site! But so many of the paid sites overlap in what they offer, or are too limited in what they offer, that the 29 dollars that I pay monthly to Ancestry is worth it. Fortunately I live near two great genealogy libraries, so I can access some paid sites for free, but it so much easier to do it at home, as you have your entire room with you. I have to correct a statement in my last remark- when we came back from living overseas for 10 years, the telephone companies, "which were NOW multiplied" were a mess and I still hate all of these small companies that have terrible service, access, and other problems. A large company can afford to make their service really excellent, and I am not knocking the free sites which are also excellent, but some are lacking in what they offer and their advertising is not always up front. Sue

I wish enough people would complain to Ancestry about their use of foreigners. Some of their translations are so wierd that it makes it nearly impossible to find people; also they list people out of order and leave out wives and husbands and do all sorts of problem causing things. I am tempted to go over and talk to them about it as it is hurting their service, and with the financial circumstances in the country, some Americans could do that service for them, and then they would be helping us more than one way. Sue

[Cathie]

After paying for a 1 year UK version of Ancestry, hoping to find more about Scotland, very few records if any. What a shame. Each time trying to access anything, Ancestry would always say due to the restrictions with the Scotlandspeople site, they did not have access. So many of us have Scottish ancestry. I just wish when thes UK sites including Ancestry UK, would be honest and tell about the limits of Scotlands ancestry. I know Scotland is part of the UK, but not our records.
Cathie

[sue maxwell]

I agree- there is nothing much in those areas and hopefully they will expand that part. We can always encourage them to do this. I have Scottish, English, Irish, Danish, French, German, Dutch, Canadian, and other heritage. I also wish they had more on that. I just found some old notes that I didn't photo copy of what village my Peter Scherrer may have come from in Hesse-Darmstadt! I forgot I found "Germans to America," years ago with this info. I hope that is right, as then I will be able to get someone across the ocean!. It is great for the USA and some limited info on other places. Still can't beat a good library, except for having to search through microfilm. But yearas ago, when I was searching for Peter Scherrer by film in an unindexed year, I found the family of origin of someone on the other side of my family! That led me, eventually to an unknown cousin who had researched that line for 20 years- so there are advantages to both the internet and libraries, etc.! Sue

[Linda Johnston]

In response to Linda's comment about free sites, remaining free, simply because users contributed the data. Remember RootsWeb? That was all free information, at one time. The data was contributed by volunteers, who spent hours inputting data, so it would be available for others. Ancestry came along and bought RootsWeb. They then proceded to "harvest" information and put it on their "subscription sites". RootsWeb is still available, but is no longer getting the enthusiastic contributions it once received. Many people pulled the information that they had contributed BEFORE Ancestry put their harvesting equipment to work and acquired that data.

Today, Ancestry has become TGN and their policies are no different. I do believe that they are seeing the "handwriting on the wall". In these tough economic times, they know that their subscriber base is going to drop, as subscriptions come up for renewal and people make the decision whether to pay their property taxes or resubscribe. Now, they want to go public. Since they ARE the biggest company, offering this information, do they think that they will be eligible for a government bailout when the subscriber base diminishes?

The "powers that be" in the company, should remember promises made, long ago, to subscribers. They were going to reconstruct the 1890 U.S. Census. I'm sure that they have now harvested enough data to do this, but have never come through on that promise. I stopped subscribing, years ago, as I realized that this was only a "tease". It may take me more effort to find my ancestors, but I have established a network of friends and family, with whom I share data and documentation. We have found that we can do very well, without TGN and their FOR PROFIT organization.

Linda Johnston

[Zadruga Guy]

Linda, since you are no longer an Ancestry subscriber, I guess you missed the big announcement about a substantial new amount of content being added last month to the 1890 census reconstruction project. http://blogs.ancestry.com/circle/?p=3063