VRSK
#I would say that we are investing across all the different verticals that we are in and pretty excited.
International growth is certainly a highlight, as well.
So, I think is pretty broad-based.
We have noted for you all in the past that there is an increasing software intensity to our business, which is essentially another way of saying that we are solutions-oriented company.
And I think that's a true statement.
We have moved into that position over the last couple of years.
I don't know that the relative software intensity is going up from where we are but that's a drum beat inside the business.
I think that best way to think about it is in aggregate.
And there are, as we think about the business and the cost of revenue versus SG&A, sometimes there are things that balance between those depending on where we are in development versus implementation of those solutions.
So, I don't think there's any conclusion to draw from that as you look forward to 2017.
I think that's certainly a starting point.
Again, I think there are a number of things that go on within numbers but that would be the baseline.
I don't think you'll see any grand shifts in that.
Let me start there and then maybe <UNK> will fill in with a little bit of detail around the insurance vertical specifically.
But, at the general level, first of all, we have beefed up our corporate development capability in Europe, and we are in the process of beefing it up in Asia, as well.
So, it's really an around-the-globe view of our opportunities.
That expresses itself both as acquisitions.
You have seen some of that in the more recent acquisitions.
Also partnerships.
We really like both flavors and we will be spending time on both of those flavors.
But I really compliment the question, <UNK>, because it really is the case that if you are a data analytic company, and you take the data dimension of the data analytic agenda seriously, then you have to find a third way to operate basically, if you want to be global, because there's the one form which is you make it wherever ---+ Copenhagen, Detroit, whatever ---+ and you export it around the world.
That tends to relate more to physical goods.
And then there's the second form, which is you become utterly local, completely local, in what it is you do, and the whole really doesn't become greater than the sum of the parts.
If you are a high intellectual property company with a database, you actually have to find a third way, which is, you can manufacturer your methods centrally but ---+ I think in line with what you're trying to get at ---+ you actually have to occupy each marketplace because there is in the world today, and will be in the world increasingly in the future, what I called data nationalism.
Most countries work very hard to make sure their data physically resides in their country.
And, in fact, the follow-on to the Safe Harbor, in the EU, which is just a particular example of the general case where there is just concern about where do our data physically reside.
And so you do actually have to become local in order to have access to the data.
So, you have to be the third way ---+ or, we have to be the third way, anyway.
So, we are working very hard on that.
And that is everything from where we place our people to how we deploy our people.
And so here is where I now want to turn it to <UNK> because he led us through a very significant reorganization towards the end of last year with respect to our go-to-market folks in overseas market.
So, <UNK>, maybe you want to talk about that, including how broadly based this particular program is.
Maybe that's more than you expected, <UNK>, but we really care about this, actually.
You tapped into something that we do a lot of work on.
Yes.
I think we are progressing as expected.
That was really a comment as it related to the revenue that would be received in 2016.
I'm sorry, you cut out for just a second.
We shouldn't expect ---+ could you repeat that part.
I actually think we have expanded ---+ and I know that Steve Halliday spoke about this on investor day ---+ we've actually expanded our customer base fairly significantly through some of the new solutions and companies that we brought into the Wood Mac mix.
So, actually, what we're looking to do is we're looking to grow those customers into broader solution purchases throughout Wood Mac.
I think you have to think about the customer base a little more broadly than just the core you might have thought about when Wood Mac first came into the family.
Let me just put your question in a slightly different context, which is, we continue to feel the proprietary data is an advantage and one that we always pursue.
We recite it as one of the four distinctives.
So, it's always there in our minds.
There are two ways you can build a proprietary data set.
One is, you can have an a priori discussion with the market you are trying to serve and essentially get agreement that, let's all join hands and take the plunge together and start putting our data into one place where we haven't previously put it.
That's the history of our early roots in the insurance industry.
Argus has proven to be very effective at doing that.
Wood Mackenzie is always about proprietary data and it ends up being a consortium.
But want to relate it now to the second way that you can build a data set, which is you can also go customer by customer, and you provide them solutions.
And as a part of having earned their trust, you ask for the opportunity to use and repurpose the data which is flowing through your application.
We do it both ways.
We have always done it both ways.
In some markets, it may be that we can lead straight to the consortium.
Argus has had particular success at that.
And in other markets, whether they are defined by vertical or geography, we may have to do more of the second method, which is on a customer-by-customer basis.
I just want you to have that perspective because we never lose sight of the goal to create proprietary data assets.
It's more a question of how you go about it.
Specific to the insurance industry, what goes on, particularly if you look at especially Europe, is you have got differences in terms of both regulation and market structure.
And, of course, those two things go together.
Regulation has an effect on market structure.
And essentially European primary P&C markets generally tend to be more concentrated.
So, the larger share player is naturally going to say ---+ let me think about it a little bit more before I make my data available.
So, that's really just a condition that we deal with.
But we are not deterred in the least in terms of trying to move towards proprietary data asset.
It's just the pathway may be a little bit different.
No, I would not draw that conclusion.
If you look of the most profitable parts of what we do, whether it's in insurance or other places, there is a very nice mix of businesses which are built on a priori consortium data and businesses which are not built on a priori consortium data.
So, you can get there both ways.
Okay.
Thanks, everybody, for your time and your interest today.
I know that we're going to be following up with several of you even later today.
We're going to have events in the course of the coming months.
Some of you will come see us in the office and we're looking forward to being with you.
So, thanks for your time today.
