Finland Tech Competitive Analysis

Part
01
of six
Part
01

Finland Tech Overview

All requested details regarding overview, history, products, claims, team members of Finland Tech has been provided in column C of the attached spreadsheet.

Overview

  • Finland Tech Solutions is an IT company based in Chicago.
  • It provides IT support, IT management, and consulting services to businesses throughout the downtown and Greater Chicago land area.

History

  • Finland Tech is a privately held company with no acquisitions and was founded in 2015 in Chicago, Illinois.
  • The company is composed of 2-10 employees only.
  • Finland Tech has partnered with many companies including Cisco Meraki, Carbonite, Cloud Ally, Code Two, and WP Engine.

Products

  • Finland Tech doesn't provide any product rather it only provides services to its clients that include :
    • 1) IT Support Management- It includes 24/7 desktop support, server maintenance, and monitoring, data recovery, and network security services.
    • 2) Strategy & Consulting Services- It includes Virtual CIO services that guide businesses in strategic planning and migrations.
    • 3) Cloud Solutions- Finland Tech provides an optimized stable IT environment for businesses equipped with modern tools like Office 365, antivirus, and VOIP solutions.
    • 4) Point of Sale- Finland Tech provides a mobile POS solution (called Lavu iPad) to food businesses to manage complex orders.

Claims

Team


Research Strategy

We commenced our research by first conducting a direct search for the requested information. We reviewed the official website of Finland Tech including its blog posts, about section, and other sources. Through this search, we were able to determine almost every requested information except data related to funding and the launch date of the first product. There doesn't appear to have been any change in the senior leadership team. Also, no information was found in any of the several sources showing any acquisition made by the company. During our search, we came to know that Finland Tech doesn't provide any product rather it provides only services to its clients.

To determine the launch date of the first service/product, we then searched through private companies' databases including Crunchbase, Bloomberg, and PR Newswire. Unfortunately, none of the databases contained any information regarding the company. Thirdly, we looked for any mention of the launch date on the company's social media and business accounts including Facebook and LinkedIn. From these sources, we could only gather the date the company was founded with no mention of any launch date of the first product/service.

For the funding information, we first looked for the annual reports and press releases of the company. Unfortunately, the company didn't publicize any annual report. None of the above sources discussed any funding received.
We then looked for the amount raised by Finland Tech per year since its inception. We were hoping to add all the amounts to get the total funding value. Following the same approach, we searched through news journals, magazine articles, and private companies' databases including Forbes, PR Newswire, Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others. Unfortunately, none of the above databases contained any information regarding the Finland Tech company.
As none of the above strategies yielded any positive result, we then looked for the investors of Finland Tech. We were hoping to search through each investor's website and reports to see the amount they have invested in Finland Tech to triangulate the total funding amount from all investors. We searched through the company's official website and every available section along with several other sources. Through this research, we were able to determine some partners of Finland Tech including Cisco and others, but none of the sources yielded any information about the investors of Finland Tech. Hence, none of the searches yielded any further results. The most likely reason for the non-availability of such information could be the size of the company as the company is composed of only 2 employees.
Part
02
of six
Part
02

Finland Tech Competitors

Nine companies that would be considered as competitors to Finland Tech are TechMD, Caserta, SADA Systems, Tru Advantage, SWC Technology Partners, General Networks, Mindsight, Predica, and eMazzanti Technologies. All requested details for each company have been provided in columns D to L in the attached spreadsheet.

1) TechMD

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is an award-winning IT company based in Los Angeles, California.
  • It provides IT support services, strategy consulting, and network security services to businesses which are the same services as offered by Finland Tech. Hence, TechMD can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

2) Caserta

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a strategic consulting IT company based in New York and a leading strategic technology consulting firm.
  • It provides IT consulting services, blockchain-based services, artificial intelligence, and cloud consulting services to businesses.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

3) SADA Systems

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a software consultancy firm and top based in Los Angeles.
  • It provides IT consulting services, cloud-based solutions, systems integration, and IT management services to businesses in different fields.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

4) TruAdvantage

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a security-focused IT company based in California which provides IT managed services, cloud consulting services, and IT strategic consulting services to its clients.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

5) SWC Technology Partners

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is an Illinois based award-winning IT company specialized in technology solutions that matches the needs of businesses including IT support, IT managed services, IT strategy consulting, and cloud-based services to businesses.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

6) General Networks

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a California based IT consultancy company that provides a wide range of business-oriented IT solutions to improve business operations.
  • It provides IT managed services, cloud consulting services, disaster recovery, and infrastructure services to businesses.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

7) Mindsight

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a full service IT company based in Illinois which works to solve the toughest technology challenges for businesses.
  • It provides custom and cost-effective IT managed services, cloud consulting services, data recovery, disaster recovery, and IT strategic consulting services to businesses.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.

8) Predica

9) eMazzanti Technologies

  • Its website can be reached here.
  • It is a New York-based IT consulting company that works with businesses to help them grow through the use of intelligent technology tools.
  • It provides IT managed services, IT strategy consulting, custom software development services, and cloud consulting services to businesses.
  • Since it provides services most similar to Finland Tech, it can be considered a competitor to Finland Tech in the same IT landscape.


Research Strategy

To determine nine companies that can be considered as competitors to Finland Tech, we first reviewed several private companies' databases including Crunchbase, DB Hoover, and Craft.co as these databases are most likely to contain such information. Unfortunately, none of the above databases contain any record or data for Finland Tech.

We then attempted to look for those companies that lie in the same space in which Finland Tech lies which is the Information Technology sector. We searched through several sources targeting businesses in the IT space such as The Manifest sorted out those companies that offer the same services as by Finland Tech. Since Finland Tech and the gathered companies work in the same space and also provide the same services, they can be considered as competitors to Finland Tech.
Part
03
of six
Part
03

Competitors 1

All requested details regarding the companies provided in columns D, E, and F have been provided in the attached spreadsheet.

1) TechMD

  • TechMD is a privately held company founded in 2003 in Los Angeles, California.
  • TechMD has acquired StoneHill Technical Solutions on November 11, 2016.
  • No change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception. The estimated annual revenue of TechMD is $7.7 million.
  • Some of its services include cloud solutions, managed cybersecurity, and managed IT services.
  • TechMD has not received any funding to date.
  • C-Suite members include Sabastian Igreti (CEO), Jason Gimeno (COO), and others.

2) Caserta

  • It is a privately held company having a team of nearly 100 employees and was founded in New York.
  • Caserta has $12 million as an estimated annual revenue and it has partnered with many industry leaders including Alation, Alooma, AWS, Cloudera, and Collibra.
  • Some of its services include Big Data, Modern Data Architecture, and Data Visualization.
  • Some of the current leadership team members include Joe Caserta (President) and Bob Eilbacher (Executive VP and General Manager).

3) SADA Systems

  • It is a privately held company with more than 350 employees and was founded in Los Angeles in 2000.
  • It was acquired by Core BTS on March 1, 2019, and has $15 million as an estimated revenue.
  • Some of its services include cloud consulting, cloud migration, and others.
  • Some of the current leadership team members are Tony Safoian (President, CEO) and Dana Berg (COO).

Research Strategy

We were able to determine almost all the requested information except the launch date of the first product and funding information for most of the companies. Also, there doesn't appear to have been any change in the senior leadership team for all the three companies. Through our research, we came to know that all three companies only provide services to their clients and don't possess any kind of product. We applied three strategies to find the launch date of the first service. Firstly, we searched through the official websites of the three companies to see if they have mentioned any date regarding their services' inception. Unfortunately, none of the companies publicize any such mention. Secondly, we looked for news journals, magazine articles such as Forbes, Investopedia, and others to see any such mention but this research too didn't yield any positive result. Thirdly, we reviewed several private companies' databases including Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others for such information. These databases only mentioned the founding date of the companies with no hint regarding the launch date of first service/product.

Funding information for most of the companies doesn't appear to exist in the public domain. For finding total funding of the given companies, we approached in three different ways. Firstly, we first looked for the annual reports and press releases of the companies. Unfortunately, the companies didn't publicize annual reports most likely because these are private companies. The press releases seem to focus on partnerships or tips and ideas with no mention of any funding received.

Secondly, we looked for the amount raised by these companies per year since their inception. We were hoping to add all the amounts to get the total funding value. Following the same approach, we searched through news journals, magazine articles, and private companies' databases including Forbes, PR Newswire, Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others. The majority of the databases yielded information regarding the estimated revenue, IT spend and others but none of the above databases contained any information regarding the funding raised in any year.

As none of the above strategies yielded any positive result, we then looked for the investors of these companies. We were hoping to search through each investor's website and reports to see the amount they have invested to triangulate the total funding amount from all the investors. We looked for investor relations reports and every available section on homepages of the given companies along with several other sources. Unfortunately, none of the three companies have mentioned any financial report or investor report. Though we were able to determine some partners of the given companies, but none of the sources yielded any information about the investors or any investment. Hence, none of the searches yielded any further results.
Part
04
of six
Part
04

Competitors 2

All requested details regarding the companies provided in columns G, H, and I have been provided in the attached spreadsheet.

1) TruAdvantage

  • It is a privately held company founded in 2010 in San Jose, California, which now possesses a team of 19 employees.
  • It has neither been acquired nor has made any acquisition to date. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception.
  • The estimated annual revenue of the company is $1.3 million. TruAdvantage has partnered with many technology leaders including Google, Apple, and Cisco.
  • Some of its services are Managed IT, Managed Cybersecurity, and Managed Compliance.
  • Some of the current leadership team members are Kayvan Yazdi (Co-Founder) and Iman Oskoorouchi (Co-Founder).

2) SWS Technology Partners

  • It is a privately held company founded in 1980 in Oak Brook, IL which now possesses a substantial team of about 250 employees.
  • It was acquired by BDO USA on July 10, 2018. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception.
  • It has an estimated annual revenue of $30.7 million. SWC partnered with Hermanson to build better IT with Microsoft cloud solutions.
  • Some of its services are Automation of Business Processes and Communication & Collaboration.
  • Some of the current leadership team members are Bob Knot (President), Adam Ferguson (Senior VP for Client Engagement), and Ric Opal (VP).

3) General Networks

  • It is a privately held company founded in 1984 in Glendale, California, which now possesses a team of nearly 60 employees.
  • It has neither made an acquisition nor it has been acquired. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed.
  • It has an estimated annual revenue of about $5.3 million. It has partnered with Microsoft, Kofax, Sonicwall, Barracuda, and others.
  • It provides two products namely eSignify and SharePoint MetaSearch.
  • Some of the current leadership team members are Todd Withers (President) and David Horwatt (VP of Professional Services).

Research Strategy

We were able to determine almost all the requested information except the launch date of the first product and funding information of the given companies. Also, there doesn't appear to have been any change in the senior leadership team for all the three companies. Through our research, we came to know that except General Networks, none of the remaining two companies possess any kind of product and they seem to provide only IT services to businesses. We applied three strategies to find the launch date of the first service/product. Firstly, we searched through the official websites of the three companies to see if they have mentioned any date regarding their services' inception. Unfortunately, none of the companies publicize any such mention. Secondly, we looked for news journals, magazine articles such as Forbes, Investopedia, and others to see any such mention but this research too didn't yield any positive result. Thirdly, we reviewed several private companies' databases including Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others for such information. These databases only mentioned the founding date of the companies with no hint regarding the launch date of firs service/product.

Funding information for all three companies doesn't appear to exist in the public domain. For finding the total funding of the given companies, we approached in three different ways. Firstly, we first looked for the annual reports and press releases of the companies. Unfortunately, the companies didn't publicize annual reports most likely because these are private companies. The press releases seem to focus on partnerships or tips and ideas with no mention of any funding received.

Secondly, we looked for the amount raised by these companies per year since their inception. We were hoping to add all the amounts to get the total funding value. Following the same approach, we searched through news journals, magazine articles, and private companies' databases including Forbes, PR Newswire, Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others. The majority of the databases yielded information regarding the estimated revenue, IT spend and others, but none of the above databases contained any information regarding the funding raised in any year.

As none of the above strategies yielded any positive result, we then looked for the investors of these companies. We were hoping to search through each investor's website and reports to see the amount they have invested to triangulate the total funding amount from all investors. We looked for investor relations reports and every available section on the homepages of the given companies along with several other sources. Unfortunately, none of the three companies have mentioned any financial report or investor report. However, we were able to determine some partners of the given companies, but none of the sources yielded any information about the investors or any investment. Hence, none of the searches yielded any further results.
Part
05
of six
Part
05

Competitors 3

All requested details regarding the companies provided in columns J, K, and L have been provided in the attached spreadsheet.

1) Mindsight

  • It is a privately held company founded in 2004 under the name Tympani in Downers Grove, Illinois. It has now a team of 65 employees.
  • It has neither been acquired nor has made any acquisition. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception.
  • It has an estimated annual revenue of $16.7 million. Mindsight has partnered with Microsoft, CISCO, NetApp, CITRIX, Pure Storage, and several other bright technology brands.
  • Some of its services include Backup and Disaster Recovery, Cloud Managed Services, and Remote Monitoring and Management.
  • The current leadership team members are Ed Kapelinski (CEO, President) and Dana Bailey (VP of Operations).

2) Predica

  • It is a privately held company founded in 2009 in Warsaw, Poland, which now has a team of about 3 employees.
  • It has neither been acquired nor has made any acquisition. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception.
  • It has an estimated annual revenue of $26 million. Predica has partnered with Microsoft, Omada, Webcon, and others.
  • Some of its services are Managed Services, Azure, and Productivity.
  • The current leadership team members are Tomasz Onyszko (CTO), Pawel Szczecki (COO, General Manager), and Grzegorz Chuchra (CEO).

3) eMazzanti Technologies

  • It is a privately held company founded in 2001 in Hoboken, NJ which now possesses a team of 35 employees.
  • It has neither been acquired nor has made any acquisition. Also, no change in senior leadership has been observed since its inception.
  • It has an estimated annual revenue of $8.7 million. eMazzanti has been ranked as the number-one New York City IT service provider in 2019 by CRN.
  • Some of its services are IT Support, Security & Privacy, and Cloud Services-365.
  • The current leadership team members are Carl Mazzanti (President & Chairman of the Board) and Almi Dumi (CISO).

Research Strategy

We were able to determine almost all the requested information except the launch date of the first product and funding information for the given companies. Also, there doesn't appear to have been any change in the senior leadership team for all the three companies. Through our research, we came to know that none of the three companies possess any kind of product. They are only providing IT services to businesses. We applied three strategies to find the launch date of the first service/product. Firstly, we searched through the official websites of the three companies to see if they have mentioned any date regarding their services' inception. Unfortunately, none of the companies publicized any such information. Secondly, we looked for news journals, magazine articles such as Forbes, Investopedia, and others to see such mention but this research too didn't yield any positive result. Thirdly, we reviewed several private companies' databases including Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others for such information. These databases only mentioned the founding date of the companies with no hint regarding the launch date of the first service/product.

Funding information for all three companies doesn't appear to exist in the public domain. For finding the total funding of the given companies, we approached in three different ways. Firstly, we first looked for the annual reports and press releases of the companies. Unfortunately, the companies didn't publicize annual reports most likely because these are private companies. The press releases seem to focus on partnerships or tips and ideas with no mention of any funding received.

Secondly, we looked for the amount raised by these companies per year since their inception. We were hoping to add all the amounts to get the total funding value. Following the same approach, we searched through news journals, magazine articles, and private companies' databases including Forbes, PR Newswire, Crunchbase, DB Hoover, Craft.co, and others. The majority of the databases yielded information regarding the estimated revenue, IT spend and others, but none of the above databases contained any information regarding the funding raised in any year.

As none of the above strategies yielded any positive result, we then looked for the investors of these companies. We were hoping to search through each investor's website and reports to see the amount they have invested to triangulate the total funding amount from all investors. We looked for investor relations reports and every available section on the homepages of the given companies along with several other sources. Unfortunately, none of the three companies have mentioned any financial report or investor report. However, we were able to determine some partners of the given companies, but none of the sources yielded any information about the investors or any investment. Hence, none of the searches yielded any further results.
Part
06
of six
Part
06

Finland Tech Competitive Analysis Presentation

The full competitive analysis, including Finland Tech's full profile, as well as an analysis of its competitors (TechMD, Caserta, SADA Systems, TruAdvantage, SWC Technology Partners, General Networks, Mindsight, Predica, and eMazzanti Technologies) has been compiled in the attached presentation. Finland Tech Solutions is an IT company based in Chicago that provides IT support, IT management, and consulting services to businesses throughout the downtown and Greater Chicago land area.

Finland Tech Competitive Analysis Presentation

  • The full data from the competitive analysis for Finland Tech and its competitors (TechMD, Caserta, SADA Systems, TruAdvantage, SWC Technology Partners, General Networks, Mindsight, Predica, and eMazzanti Technologies) which has previously been compiled in this spreadsheet, has been summarized in the attached presentation.
  • Finland Tech Solutions is an IT company based in Chicago that provides IT support, IT management, and consulting services to businesses throughout the downtown and Greater Chicago land area.
Sources
Sources