Wow - who’d of thunked it...

While the whole stock market continues on it’s downward spiral — typefonts gained .05 this week

Thanks Sii

and no - I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole.

“Monotype Imaging Holdings (Nasdaq: TYPE) is not a very sexy company. It’s a leader in a dull business — fonts.”

I disagree with the second part of that statement.

When I look at Monotype I don’t see a company worth investing in. Monotype’s business model seems to be focused on selling old type, not developing new type. I realize that there’s some new stuff coming out of Linotype and some of the other foundries Monotype has purchased, but it’s not the great stuff coming out of the indie foundries, and the promotion of these new typefaces is not nearly as good as Veer or Fontshop. While having thousands of old fonts to milk is by no means a bad business model, it is not one that can grow enough to justify investing in the company.

I think they are interested in developing new type. But, overall they have SO MUCH type in their library now it is going to take a lot more than a few email blasts to make some noise about the new type. Carl Crossgrove is proof that they are interested in creating new type. (To mention only one person.)

They need a good dusting off. So many people still love the old classics which they have, me included, it is unfair to say they aren’t worth investing in.

A minor correction: Carl Crossgrove and Sebastian Lester are interested in creating new type. Monotype Imaging Holdings doesn’t give a hoot.

I wouldn’t go that far, their ITC and Linotype labels are turning out a fair amount of work, and indies are being signed up on Fonts.com at a fair rate.

But consider the coolest, hippest, most cutting edge device to hit the streets in years - the iPhone. Reports suggest it includes twelve type families - 11 of which are all old-fonts from the Monotype, ITC, Linotype or Microsoft libraries (the twelfth is Marker Felt - don’t know who did that one). So can you blame any company (public or private) from following the money and promoting their existing stuff?

On the investment front, I like to think that if you own some TYPE shares you’re owning a tiny piece of Helvetica, or Gill Sans. :-)

“On the investment front, I like to think that if you own some TYPE shares you’re owning a tiny piece of Helvetica, or Gill Sans. :-)”

Eeuw. If you own MS stock then, do you own a little piece of Cosmic Sans? Or worse...?

On the investment front, I like to think that if you own some TYPE shares you’re owning a tiny piece of Helvetica, or Gill Sans. :-)

And Arial ;b

>Or worse?

Bitstream shares?

> ITC and Linotype labels are turning out a fair amount of work

Most of that stuff doesn’t really count, does it?

Ok, that was needlessly flippant. My point was that the bright stars of type design that I see from this organization are Lester and Crossgrove and, given its size, I wish there were more.

And when I say Monotype Imaging Holdings doesn’t give a hoot about type design, I am referring to an ownership that wants to make money, but doesn’t care much about its legacy. I am referring mostly to ITC, a collection that is — as anyone who has followed it in the last 7 years would agree — a sad shadow of its former self. Nothing remarkable has come from the library since Monotype acquired them in 2000. Click “New Fonts” at itcfonts.com and see a page filled with very few actually new designs (Swank? Baylac?). The only genuinely new typefaces I can find in 06-07 are ITC Outpost, ITC Aram, ITC Kloegirl, ITC Anima, ITC Jante Antiqua, and ITC Vellvé. Only two of those are interesting.

The day U&lc died I started to worry about ITC. The day Monotype bought ITC, I said a sad goodbye.

Linotype, on the other hand, has clearly been producing great work with Kobayashi/Frutiger/Zapf. And both Mono and Lino are valiantly OpenTypifying their libraries, which consumes a lot of resources and isn’t recognized by the general public, but is a worthwhile effort.

There are great people at Monotype who are passionate about type and they do fine work: Lester, Crossgrove, Allan Haley, Delve Withrington and their custom type team.

I just wish the ownership recognized what they acquired in ITC and gave it a new life rather than letting it sputter and die. They certainly have the money to do great things. Revive U&lc! Rehire Berry and Van Bronkhorst! Think of the good will from the design community that single act would generate.

You’ve all glossed over the most significant piece which is not font releases for retail consumers but the very big business of licensing to big corporations . . . Those are the things investors look for when determining the financial health of a company, cashflow, cash on hand, revenue streams, etc . . . I would guess retail revenue accounts for 40% of the total revenue of Monotype.

While I’m not any closer to knowing what really goes on behind closed doors than the rest of you, I do know so far the only commentary about this has been from a font designers perspective and not an investors perspective. Follow the money trail backwards and it’ll become quite clear retail releases really don’t affect the bottom line at this level.

My 2¢
Stuart :D

You’ve all glossed over the most significant piece which is not font releases for retail consumers but the very big business of licensing to big corporations . . .

Retail consumers are extremely important to the corporate license business. Corporations license fonts with great forethought, usually by consulting or staff designers. If those designers are not being actively targeted by Monotype marketing they end up recommending fonts from other vendors. I have no doubt that the intense promotional activities of foundries like House Industries, Veer, and Fontshop have a tremendous influence on corporate font licensing. This is why I don’t see Monotype’s business model as well-focused on growth, at least not enough to justify sinking money into it.

This will be especially important eight years from now when the elder designers and corporate executives of the baby boom are retiring in great numbers. Designers used to those classic Linotype faces will be heading off to the beaches, executives who expect to see those fonts and dislike newer stuff will do the same, and suddenly a portfolio of great twentieth-century typefaces won’t be a great investment.

> I do know so far the only commentary about this has been from a font designers perspective and not an investors perspective.

You’re right. I admit I’ve gone off-topic a bit. But this is, after all, a typography forum.

Jpad, Keep in mind so long as independent font designers continue distributing fonts via Fonts.com, Monotype is expressly allowed to enter OEM licensing agreements using these fonts. So I’m not worried that the well of font designs will ever run dry for them . . . This holds true for the fonts being added to the Linotype Font Explorer store as well . . .

Also, it should be noted that most often corporate buyers will go first to existing vendors before digging in to find the original designer of a typeface so even if its a font Monotype doesn’t offer, they may be approached first being they are the approved vendor for font purchases.

No slight to the thoughts being shared by the group or your commentary Steve, my comment was focused on how Monotype makes money which is different than how we as designers and consumers perceive their income streams.

It is eye opening to say the least!

Stuart :D

Does anyone know the relative amount of money TYPE spends on lawyers to protect their trademarks and other intellectual property assets, compared with the amount of money they spend on developing new fonts?

I have had some dealings with them in various different capacities, and, while I remain on cordial terms, I have chosen not to deepen my relationship with them in any way.

Once a company reaches a certain size, and particularly if it has shareholders and a board of directors rather than being owned by a single person or small group of like-minded creative people, the bottom line is the ONLY thing that matters. This applies to type foundries, software developers, everybody. You can’t expect innovation and creativity from large companies except as a coincidental byproduct when they’re going through one of their “oh, we’ve got to make a better product” phases. Such phases occur only when the big cheeses determine that, for a while, a better product will increase profit. Then follows the “resting on our laurels” phase.