Subscribe to DSC Newsletter

Market data providers got it all wrong, big data 2.0

I have seen lots of heated discussion about the development of big data and its potential value generation. It only generates value when you have a holistic view about your client so that the organization can do something about it. It is like asking for a dates, the more you know about the person, the better.

It is true that market data providers such as Bloomberg, Thomson Reuters etc do a good job in opening up the information about your client external to your organization, especially in the financial market. What does it imply for those market data providers who are working so hard to report whats happening in the Economies, stock prices, interest rates, foreign exchange etc? Many vendors miss the whole point of their development and try to keep their program the center of the universe-keeping everything on their platform. When I was talking to vendors about my plan to implement master client view, they are doing something exactly the opposite: trying to build reports on their platform and ask us to upload the sensitive and internal data about our client.

Man, stop wasting your energy:

1. You can never see what we see as there is a strong data privacy law. we can never disclose what the client dealt with us or our company's strategy with each and every single client.

2. The value of data vendor data is their data not the report. If we were data user 1.0, i.e can read data but have no skills in sql to manipulate the data- It is then true that you have to feed us the report. Not now as we are all data savy and can do analysis ourselves as long as the data is detail enough for us to slice and dice as well as aggregating at the view we or management need. No one can be as close as the management as we does. All we ask for is having good data from you as you spent time collecting them and polishing them.

Of the paid data feeders I talked to:

Bloomberg is doomed as all they want is to have you sticking to their terminal so that they can charge you by usage. It is good for end-user but not friendly to Analytic professional;

Bureau van Dijik & Dun & Breadstreet are okay given that their strong application in integrating with client's CRM system. But they lack the view about the macro-economics and how these macro-data are linked to their clients;

Dealogic sucks as they are still fancying users feeding their internal data to their scattered systems, plus the fact that they try to keep building reports for their clients, which is an unnecessary service overtime as they customers gain the capability to use their platform. If such need arise in the future, I suppose it can be provided along consulting services on how to generate deals ideas with proven results;

Factset is catching up as their culture is relatively close-to-client's need;

Thomson Reuter is good given that they have the datafeed functionality to feed you data. I like their breadth and depth of the data.

Get it? It is not about the data quality but about the product philosophy. Data provider only augments companies view about their clients, which is the very core activity of any viable businesses.And this skill has to be internal to the organization.

Given my observation, I foresee that there will be wave of industry consolidation in the market data sector - at the demand of companies to view clients' information in one piece.

Views: 336

Tags: &, Breadstreet, bloomberg, dealogic, dun, factset, reuters, thomson

Comment

You need to be a member of AnalyticBridge to add comments!

Join AnalyticBridge

On Data Science Central

© 2020   AnalyticBridge.com is a subsidiary and dedicated channel of Data Science Central LLC   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service