Would Phase Forward consider buying DataTrak for the ClickFind technology? It's not something that I had thought of until I read a post in the Yahoo Finance DataTrak message board.
One "stockpriker" says on the 22nd September 2008:
I don't know who stockpriker is or where he gets his information (or whether he just makes it up) but it did make me think.
i don't know why PFWD IS interested but i was told that they spent more than one day last week looking at the product
On the face of it, InForm is a tremendously successful product and very popular with end users who value it's simplicity and ease of use. Why would Phase Forward consider buying a competitor EDC system to replace or augment InForm?
At the moment we have a two horse race, Medidata and Phase Forward. Medidata has tended to grow organically but it's recent purchase of FastTrack systems may signal a new willingness to buy rather than build. Phase Forward has been acquisitive phase for some time with Lincoln Technologies, Green Mountain and recently Clarix. We should not forget the acquisition that put Phase Forward into a dominant position, the 2001 acquisition of Clinsoft Corporation (formerly Domain).
So Phase Forward has been growing by the accretion of new companies, but what about its EDC product, InForm? The feeling I get from talking to people in the market is that InForm has not been keeping up with other EDC systems. DataTrak and Medidata have multi-project per install systems, support for more languages, built-in data entry systems to handle paper trials and more.
That is not to say that InForm does not have its own advantages but it is conceivable that Phase Forward could seize on the oppportunity that DataTrak currently represents to acquire an EDC system with features that are considered key for an internationally expanding market.
Maybe not likely, but not impossible either.
Posts
2 comments:
eClinical systems technologies, scope and scale have evolved greatly over recent years. 10 years ago, an offline Remote Data Entry product suitable for installation on every client platform was the norm. Today, centralized, multi study, multi client, multi feature solutions are what people are looking for.
PF Inform dates back to the late 90's. Clintrial goes back even further, [although it was revamped in 1998 with a re-write in Powerbuilder].
PF are discovering that although it is possible to market the various solutions they have procured, ensuring they actually all work together in a seamless, efficient fashion is another story. They will have seperate databases, architectures etc.
I also suspect that PF have recognized the challenge of PaaS - Platform as a Service, as per SalesForce.com - adding a new study, or a new client needs to be simple. It simply doesn't work if you need to spend 1-2 days per study/client setting up the hardware and software platform.
From what I have read, the ClickFind product is a next generation technology. It has attempted to bring all the eClinical needs under one technology umbrella. Have they done it well? I have no idea - I have never seen the product.
If PF did go forward with ClickFind / DataTrak, then they would face a similar problem that DataTrak faced - to convince investors and existing clients that the old technology that was great before, is not great now and that they should jump to a whole new platform. They would also have to face their major competitor that already has a fully integrated technology platform.
Post a Comment