ARCOM New Ownership

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message anon (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, October 05, 2016 - 01:21 pm:    Just received 2 separate emails announcing ARCOM has been acquired by some outfit called Alpine Investors. A new CEO has also been named. Is anyone else a little nervous about this? Anyone have any inside info on what prompted the sale and what we might expect down the road?? James Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: jsandoz Post Number: 198 Registered: 06-2005 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 09:29 am:    Visit Alpine Investors web site. I believe it will tell you all you want to know. Anon2 (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 09:41 am:    I wonder if my fellow anon works for that other company and is trying to simply "scare" up some new business. Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 659 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 12:06 pm:    change in ownership is always a little scary, due to the uncertainty of the change. Don't have to be a competitor to be a little nervous - I was when i saw the email. anon (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 12:18 pm:    Anon2: Anon here. to answer your question: Nope. I work for an architecture firm. We actually subscribe to more than one specification section/writing program/system. I have no ulterior motive in raising the question. I did poke around the Alpine website and also took a look at the info provided about the new CEO. I do have concerns about this. Alpine claims to be a company that buys other companies to make them more profitable. ARCOM boasts that it serves 90% of architects - so Alpine thinks it can grab the rest? Or, more plausible, will it just be raising costs to the 90% already committed to the product? Or massive staff reductions? Or?? Worst case scenario playing out in my head is that they don't make the $$ they expected to and then bail. Maybe CSI will step in and grab it at that point... or Google. ugh. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 222 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 12:45 pm:    While equity investment firms do attempt to increase profits by expanding market share, raising costs, and reducing staff and expenses, many also strive to increase profits by adding services and improving customer experience. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 792 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 12:54 pm:    Please!! It is always profit before people. Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1422 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 01:15 pm:    Not always. Read "Built to Last" by Jim Collins. Although companies need profit to survive, the driving force behind some companies is not always profit. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 223 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 02:01 pm:    Wayne, I know there are rapacious capitalists. Yet I also know many companies that have refused potentially lucrative paths because the opportunities were not safe for or beneficial for their employees, customers, or communities. They realize that there are many paths available, so they look for opportunities that are win-win. These companies profit because they meet the needs of people. I am grateful that I can call some of these companies "client". Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Dave Metzger Senior Member Username: davemetzger Post Number: 661 Registered: 07-2001 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 02:13 pm:    This is a change in ownership of ARCOM, not of MasterSpec. The latter is owned by the AIA; ARCOM publishes, supports and maintains, and sells/markets MasterSpec under contract to the AIA, and has done so since 1995. Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 280 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 02:38 pm:    What about SpecText? CSI used to own it. It has changed hands a couple of times since we let it go, will ARCOM continue the system we started, providing a good solid specification master? Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 930 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2016 - 03:18 pm:    I can't see them changing MasterSpec, but if SpecText isn't bringing in much business or generating much profit, they might spin it off. CSRF owned SpecText, but CSI reviewed and updated it. Greta Eckhardt Senior Member Username: gretaeckhardt Post Number: 47 Registered: 08-2013 Posted on Monday, October 10, 2016 - 01:40 pm:    It is key that AIA is still the owner of MasterSpec. According to one message that I received, ARCOM's partnership with AIA, ACEC and NSPE "remain strong". I hope and expect that AIA's continued oversight means that MasterSpec content will continue to be based on architectural practice and not subservient to other business goals. If Alpine can build on ARCOM's work to advance the user interface and integration with building information through new applications of advanced technology, then I don't think this change needs to be feared. Curt Norton, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: curtn Post Number: 243 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Monday, October 10, 2016 - 06:52 pm:    Maybe they will make SpecBuilder Desktop a worthy competitor to Speclink or e-Specs. There is opportunity out there. Both e-Specs and Speclink have their shortcomings. Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1423 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Monday, October 10, 2016 - 07:09 pm:    SpecBuilder Desktop is being transitioned into a cloud-based collaboration platform called "ARCOM One." You can try it out here: http://arcomone.com/ They only have it available for the Small Project library at the moment, but the other libraries will be available in the near future. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1518 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, October 10, 2016 - 07:51 pm:    Ron, I get an error message when I sign up on the ARCOM site. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1424 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Monday, October 10, 2016 - 08:04 pm:    If you already have an account with ARCOM, use that username and password. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com John Carter (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2016 - 06:52 pm:    I think the buyout is a good thing. ARCOM is committed to continuing the excellence in the MARC review committee, that I know. ARCOM has hinted at involving more SCIP members in the MARC committee so that is not a cost-cutting measure. My opinion only - think they need more cash to complete Spec Builder Desktop and to compete with the obvious competitor. I believe they are committed to continuing the quality of Masterspec and amping it up a little. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1523 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2016 - 03:43 pm:    One of my concerns is that new Arcom management is going to put all of their resources towards Arcom One to compete with SpecLink and very little resources towards their flagship product of MasterSpec. MasterSpec quarterly updates have been issued later and later and have become, in my opinion, less substantive. To date the 3rd quarter update for MasterSpec is over one month late! I called Arcom today and they could not give me an answer when the MasterSpec 3rd quarter update will be available. This gives me the impression that MasterSpec is not a priority with them. MasterSpec is a great product and I would hate to see it fall by the wayside. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1426 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2016 - 08:37 pm:    ARCOM One (i.e., SpecBuilder 2.0) is MasterSpec--it is just another platform for providing the same content. Specification content is developed first (i.e., MasterSpec) and then converted into database form for SpecBuilder. Specification content updates for SpecBuilder has always lagged behind specification content updates for MasterSpec. I know this doesn't explain the delay, but different people work on different things and it is not one group working on both content and application development. The ownership transition process may have had an effect on the issuance of the update, but this is pure speculation. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com Vivian Volz, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 165 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Tuesday, January 31, 2017 - 04:15 pm:    I got an email from InterSpec saying that they'd been purchased by ARCOM. So the interfaces are being consolidated now, too. If I'm wearing my Pollyanna hat, I think this might speed up delivery of the content on the different database platforms. And if I'm wondering about the firm's ability to do the software updates and the content updates, I start shopping for new ways to write specs. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1419 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2017 - 09:05 pm:    Since I'm on the Committee, here is what I know. 1) the timing of the updates: last year, we had actually gotten so far ahead of production that we skipped a committee meeting to allow Arcom to catch up with the editorial content and provide updates. The typical lag time is 6 months from when the committee reviews sections to when the updated content is issued. If other things happen -- like a building code is updated, or major changes/consolidations in various industries, sometimes those dynamic updates take precedence. 2) The Alpine guys seem to be quite aware that Masterspec is a very special thing in its industry, and well regarded. They want to keep that, and also invest in moving the product forward in terms of applications and software. You may remember that Arcom already owned 25% of Interspec, and this just consolidated that ownership. I can say that in the past few months, Arcom has hired more actual content writers and is growing their Product Masterspec base. 3)Arcom conducts the review committee, but it is funded by the AIA. (or at least the core group is AIA funded). There are several attendees who are supported by their various organizations and some spec writers who are self funded just for fun. 4)They (Arcom) are quite committed to a cloud platform. We had some discussion of that, and also the compatibility of the current platform with various office security systems. (I, for example, can run Masterworks perfectly well on my stand alone computer at home; but it is a little buggy on my office platform). I'm not fully onboard with a cloud location yet, and would want it to be able to be locally resident on my computer, based on the way I work. (for instance -- how do you work on a plane if you have to communicate with a cloud?) 5) As for the "less substantive" updates. When I was first on the committee 15 years ago, we completely rewrote sections, re-divided sections, and generally recreated a lot of things. We ripped apart the "green sheets" as well to make them more useful. I would say that now, the content of the sections is fairly stable with the exceptions of accommodating changes in the industry. Most sections are on a 3-year update schedule, and we seem to no longer redline everything as much as before. That shows some stability in both content and approach. 6) And the sections are being asked to accommodate more delivery methods, more sustainability issues, and newer products. 7) We just had some discussion about how to introduce new products into the sections, and also regional issues. We regularly discuss changes in various portions of the industry. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1420 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2017 - 09:10 pm:    Regarding Spectext: Arcom has positioned this product for infrastructure projects, and does not intend for this to compete with Masterspec. I have no idea how the committee structure works for Spectext -- or even if there is a committee to review content. Liz O'Sullivan Senior Member Username: liz_osullivan Post Number: 222 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Wednesday, February 08, 2017 - 09:35 pm:    Anne, thanks for the input! Louis Medcalf, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: louis_medcalf Post Number: 71 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, February 09, 2017 - 11:26 am:    My previous firm bought a site license of SpecText for its infrastructure divisions. It has maintained the legacy of commendable terseness and directness of the old CRSF SpecText for buildings. Louis Medcalf, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: louis_medcalf Post Number: 72 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Thursday, February 09, 2017 - 11:30 am:    BTW, I started a new thread for discussing the ARCOMONE cloud-based system for editing MasterSpec in the "Specifications Discussions" area but so far no takers.