All right, everyone, we're going to go ahead and get started. My name is Brian Peterson. I'm the Application Software Analyst here at Raymond James. Very happy to have BigCommerce back at the conference this year. Daniel Lentz, CFO. Tyler Duncan, VP of Finance and Investor Relations. Sorry, first one of the day for me. So, guys, very happy to have you back. Wanted to start on some of the Black Friday, Cyber Monday trends, some really strong results for you guys. Maybe give us some perspective on what you guys saw over the holiday shopping period.
It was off to a good start, is the way I would start it with. I think we were up 26% year over year in the low 40s, I think, in Europe. So, I mean, I would say, I mentioned this last week, that I found them to be encouraging results. I'd say so far, in line with what we expected for the quarter, maybe a little bit better. But it's early to say. We'll see where it lands by the end of the holiday period. But I think it really shows, though, that our customers are doing really well on the platform, and holiday seems off to a really good start, broadly speaking.
That's good to hear. And maybe just sticking on the platform, what do you guys see as the key differentiators for you guys? Talking to agency partners, I hear a lot of good things about the product. But would love to understand what you guys see as the primary differentiators.
I think the key to understand where BigCommerce is at is who we're trying to be for and the audience that we're really going after. And to be blunt, I don't think this is an area that we've always done a really great job explaining or articulating. I'll do my best. Tell me after if I do any better this time than I've done this in the past. I don't know that I've always done an amazing job here. But if you think about where we are within kind of the spectrum of competitors within the space, we're going after professional e-commerce practitioners. We're going after businesses that have grown-up issues with complexity. We like to say internally quite a bit that launching a business is hard and scaling a business is even harder.
We're after customers that are looking for a platform partner, whether that's on omnichannel solutions or the way that you're doing visual design and editing on the side or the way that you're conducting commerce, where you are having to tackle scaling problems. You've got complex catalogs. You have complex needs, whether you're trying to have one common back end serving multiple sites and region. My daughter asks me sometimes, she's like, "Dad, when am I going to start hearing BigCommerce ads on Spotify? Because I'm tired of hearing ads for your competitors." And my answer is usually, if you ever hear, and if you, my 16-year-old daughter, ever hear an ad, I'm going to be really ticked off. She shouldn't hear it because she's not a target audience, right? I'm not after entrepreneurs in that respect.
So, I think if you look at where we are kind of from an ethos point of view, the way that we approach the market is we are opinionated about the way that we think that customers can be most successful in commerce. We have reference architectures where we're going to say, this is the right combination of branded solutions and partner solutions that are going to make you effective. But we're going to deliberately build the architecture in such a way that you can swap out and customize and do what you want on top of that. So if you are a complex B2B business, we have a buyer portal that we've designed that allows you to have a separate buying experience for each individual customer that you have in adherence with whatever the custom contracts you may have. But that's an open-source thing.
And so if you want to completely change the way that you have that buyer experience, we're going to provide the tools that enable our customers to make those changes on their own. Because again, we're going after professionals in the commerce space. If you're just looking for the fewest clicks to launch and get something up and running easy, but you may have much more limited functionality, I think there's other competitors maybe on the lower end of the small business space that in some ways may be a better fit for that use case than BigCommerce.
So I love the messaging. How do you get that out? I know Travis is coming in. You're making some go-to-market changes. Maybe talk about some of the things that you're trying to do on the go-to-market side.
Yeah. So there's been some things that I would argue we probably should have done a couple of years ago that we're tackling now. And I may be slightly strange from a CFO perspective in that I'll talk as openly about the areas where I think that we've made mistakes as the areas where I think that we've been really successful. I just think it's important for investors to understand how we're thinking about the problems that we're tackling. And to be frank, we haven't had the shareholder returns over the course of the last few years that we really need to and that I think ultimately the company and the product is capable of. I could give you some examples of the things that we're doing. For example, we bought Feedonomics about three years ago, never fully integrated that asset. And there were good reasons for that.
It is a platform-agnostic omnichannel solution. So we are investing in that product for it to be the omnichannel feed AI solution of choice for Adobe merchants and Salesforce merchants and Shopify merchants and all those things. We'll continue to do that. But in consequence, the fact that we left them fairly separate, we're still on separate CRMs. There were separate marketing teams, separate sales organizations. And because we hadn't done that integration, we weren't getting a lot of the scale that we needed from a cost perspective. But we also weren't getting some of the revenue synergies that we really wanted to see as a part of that asset. And so I think if you look at a lot of the things that we're doing, we're bringing in new leadership from outside the company. Travis is, I think, a great example of that.
We are bifurcating teams, whether it's focused just on new accounts versus expanding the existing base. We're rethinking about how we approach branding to try to get better at stitching the assets together. And then I'd argue probably most importantly, we're actually organizing the business now around offerings, which is something that Travis saw and was very successful at Accenture, where rather than approaching the market from the point of view of different products, where you're really selling to CIOs almost exclusively at different organizations, we're saying, no, we're organizing around a B2B offering or a B2C offering or a small business offering.
That gives us a different way of talking about the products and services that we offer in a way that's much more attuned to either a CMO audience or a CFO audience, where I just don't think we've been speaking to them as well as we could have been and should have been.
And how do we think about kind of that enterprise D2C backdrop in terms of the pipeline of opportunities? I know there's a lot of areas for focus for you guys. But how do you guys view that as we head into 2025?
I think it's getting better. I've been asked this question a lot over the course of the last couple of years. I think I get asked this question a lot, actually, whether or not folks are looking at BigCommerce or competitors or whether or not they're just looking for operator perspective on different demand signals just from a macro basis in general in commerce. And what I've said a lot is there's two areas where I look for demand signals within our business. One is on the consumer spending side of things, which is just the raw consumer demand pull-through. And then the other is the demand on the kind of investment climate. What is actual business investment in software?
I'd say the consumer spending side has been stronger and more resilient over the past couple of years than what we have seen on the business investment side of things. I think that's getting better. I think if you look across the sector, you're starting to see a lot of companies that are starting to look more at this, invest in this. I think we're coming a little bit out. I'm getting cautiously more optimistic as we go into 2025. I think that's true in B2C. I think it's true especially in B2B, where I think B2B in general is a few years behind where B2C is from a replatforming momentum point of view. But just to be clear, going into next year, we're expecting this to be a transition year for the company. We're metabolizing a lot of change that we need to make.
I think it creates a lot of upside from a performance perspective and where our operating results can be. But I'm going into the year assuming that it's going to continue to be challenging until I see a few quarters of evidence to the contrary, and we're going to be really, really tight on our spending and discipline in that backdrop.
Maybe just on a historical perspective, as we kind of double-click on that, you had the consumer comment. But just on kind of the enterprise investment demand maybe not being as strong the last couple of years, do you feel like that's more macro-driven? Or is there anything about e-commerce that is specific there?
I don't think it's specific to commerce. If you think about it from just my own behavior and how I've been thinking about spending within the company, it takes a lot right now, and I'm an example of a CFO buyer. You could talk to a lot of software salespeople in our space that have been quite disappointed at me saying no to a lot of things that they've been pitching us for a long time. That got close to a proceeding that I would kill at the end, so I mean, my own point of view as a CFO buyer is it's taking a lot to convince me to make investments in the space. I want to see consolidation as much as I can between software providers or application instances and things like that because I'm really looking primarily to drive on efficiency.
That said, there's a number of places where we're making very selective large bets that we need to fuel the go-to-market changes we're talking about. That gets into the fact that we just rolled out a master data management tool. We just did a new implementation of Marketo. We are in the midst of CRM consolidation and relaunching our CRM to get everybody into one CRM system, so I'm very willing to invest, but not everywhere, and I think that that's kind of analogous to what I'm seeing kind of in the demand climate. I think that, look, replatforming investment should have a high bar. They should show really strong ROI. There needs to be compelling reasons to do that. I don't know that it's necessarily, in my opinion, that the market got tighter as much as it is.
I think it got a lot more accountable and a lot more rational, and I think that that's good in a rational interest rate environment where we are like we are right now.
No, that makes sense. And Tyler, I did want to hit on B2B. I know that's been a big opportunity. And where are we in terms of the adoption there? And what are you seeing from customers in terms of potential interest on B2B refreshes?
Yeah, for sure. So the research that we've seen that says about 35% of the market doesn't have an online B2B platform at all. And another 30% of it has a legacy outdated solution that takes a really long time and is very cumbersome. So what we're seeing from the buyer behavior is the buyers are coming and saying they're demanding a fast self-serve online experience that BigCommerce can provide. Not only are buyers demanding it, but then when businesses see that, hey, I can save a lot of time. I can save a lot of cost. I can save a lot of resources. They're saying, oh, well, this is something we actually need to invest our time in. We actually had a merchant in AHP Dental & Medical.
They actually saved about 11,000 hours annually in sales time from switching off their legacy solution onto BigCommerce to get that self-serve demand flow that we could provide.
I think that's interesting. Just to build on this real quick as well, I think that comment about the benefit to that particular customer speaks to why we're approaching this differently between B2C and B2B offerings. If you're having a conversation with a B2B buyer, it's about consolidation of headcount, work process efficiency. How do you make sure that people are seeing everything that's custom to their contract, custom buyer flows? That's very different than B2C, where it's about conversion rates, transaction size, and things like that. And in the past, we have had the same sellers selling to both of those audiences. And we haven't had specialization between the teams. The marketing message is quite the way that we wanted to. And so I look at that and say, on one hand, yeah, I wish we would have probably taken care of that a couple of years ago.
But I still think it creates a lot of potential to get that fixed in a way that I think can be very beneficial to our results.
So how do you think about that split then of the go-to-market resources that would be dedicated to kind of B2B versus B2C? And I know you're looking at other different solutions. But how do you think about allocating those dollars?
I would say that we have been growing disproportionately in B2B over the course of the last couple of years. I anticipate that continuing and kind of getting a disproportionate amount of investment. It's just we see really good indications on pipeline build there. If you think about the audience, again, that I said we're going after, we're going after professional commerce practitioners with really complex problems. That's really well suited in the B2B audience. So I think we'll continue to focus there. But I could go on for 10 minutes on the opportunities I see separately between B2C, B2B, and small business. That's gotten a lot better for us as well. But I do think we're going to be kind of disproportionately focused on B2B.
Just maybe back up a little bit on B2B. I don't know who wants to take this. Just what has been the impediment to adoption? Is it just not knowing that these solutions are out there? As you think about why they're still using these legacy tools?
I can offer you my opinion on this one. That's not an authoritative opinion, just what I see kind of in practice. I think that if you consider the fact that a lot of the B2B replatforming opportunities in a lot of ways are about headcount efficiency, process efficiency, in some cases, there are more impacts to existing organizations by implementing those solutions on the B2B side than sometimes there can be on the B2C side. I think that can sometimes create a little bit of, let's say, resistance to change on the B2B side. Also, I think there's more of a preponderance of custom homegrown solutions on the B2B side than there is on the B2C, at least today. And it takes more selling. I mean, I've spent a lot of years in sales myself.
It's always a little bit harder to displace something that's homegrown when you've kind of convinced yourself you have unique needs that can only be met by something you've custom and designed yourself. Whereas you can look at it and say, listen, you can save so much money at scale by using a different solution. I think it can just take a little bit longer to embrace that type of change.
No, that makes sense. Just looking at it globally, international, this had some strong results that you mentioned in Europe. How are you thinking about the growth opportunities there in a lot of these international markets?
Yeah, the international community. I mean, we have a great team over there. We have a great product-market fit over there. Things like our multi-storefront capabilities that say you're a European merchant sitting in London and you want to go sell into Germany and Spain and all these other things. We have a solution that can, through our multi-product solution, that can say, all right, you can have one landing page that's in German, one that's in Spanish, one that's in English, with one common backend that you can utilize to manage all your orders. We have a really strong product-market fit there and a really strong team. So I can see EMEA being a disproportionate grower in the next year or two as well.
Are you guys continuing to invest in those markets and pushing the go-to-market as you guys have kind of retargeted some things?
Yes. But I think the how matters a lot. I think if you look back two or three years ago, we really were expanding aggressively internationally, which I think was the right decision, but tough from a timing perspective. I think when we started really doubling down on international expansion, within six months of that decision, interest rates started moving another way. Not a great time to be taking on a three-year payback, three or four-year payback on international expansion. So I think as I think about where we're going over the next couple of years in international, I've said this in a couple of places, though it kind of sounds ridiculous. If I could win an award for good executor and most boring CFO of the year award, I would go for that award. That's kind of as I think about this.
I want us to be highly efficient in the markets where we already are. I want us to be scaling the headcount support model in those locations so that we can grow there more efficiently. We had a lot of localized resources and things. That makes a lot of sense. But in a, I'd say, an easier demand environment, I think you can scale that better. So I think we're going to be focused on the markets we're already in. I think in the future, as we further expand outside of Western Europe, I think we'll probably be a little bit more VAR-centric than where we've been in the past in direct selling. But that's not our primary concern over the course of the next 12-18 months.
We've got a lot of change that we need to push through on where we already are and get execution where it needs to be on the growth side.
And there are certain things, maybe like SMB, that are getting a little bit less emphasis. But you can kind of have a product-led growth side of things. So how do you think about the SMB opportunity?
What's happened in the small business offering over the course of the last year and a half has been really deliberate and very encouraging. We really focused less on small business for, I think I didn't do a great job explaining the why on this, and I think it left an impression a little bit that we were de-emphasizing small business. Really, it was more of an issue where I think we were taking a little bit of a pause on it while we got the underlying unit economics into a more sustainable and scalable place. If you go back a couple of years ago, we had sales reps getting commissioned selling $100 a month plans. That does not pay out. We needed to take pricing. We didn't have as many product-led growth avenues to expand those customers once they were in the door.
And if you look at some of our competitors that I would argue have pursued a little bit more of a, call it a vertical integration strategy in small business, you land 100 accounts, you churn 70, but you expand the other 30 so much you can make the numbers work. We just weren't set up in that environment. I think that we are never going to vertically integrate. We're always going to be a partner-first company. But where there are opportunities to expand our offering, to deepen our relationship with customers also in a way that creates self-serve ways for customers to grow and expand, we have tens of thousands of merchants on the platform in the upper end of small business and mid-market. Those are great accounts today that we think we can expand.
That I think even makes small business something that I think can stabilize and even modestly grow over the next year as I now see investable economics in that I think can be potentially very beneficial to the business.
I know we had a multi-storefront. But headless has been kind of a key theme over the last few years. Can we talk about where we are on the adoption? How important is that to customers as we think about some key product decisions?
Headless is a use case of composable architecture. And I think we have talked about the use case more than the ethos that it's a representative example of and how we think about designing the product. We are not trying to build a one solution for everybody type of product. We're trying to be kind of somewhere in between extremely composable and monolith, where we want to say, OK, if you want to take the out-of-the-box configuration of the product and use exactly the ways it's kind of recommended with these certain partners that are optimized for our checkout, you can absolutely do that. But if you want to just completely build your own checkout and plug that directly in and swap it out, you can do that. That's composability, is taking the different pieces and swapping them in and out for whatever is right for your business.
Again, we're after professional commerce practitioners as our target audience. Headless is a great example of that. And if you look at what we're doing with the Catalyst initiative, it is basically finding a way. It's oversimplified, saying it's like finding a way to democratize composability. So it's a much lower cost to implement with much better visual design tools on top of that, which is why we bought Makeswift. But this is something that we are aiming to have ready even to demo by NRF to be able to show that we're going to have kind of a hosted version of Catalyst for small business available early next year, where we really think what we're doing in composability is differentiating for the audience within commerce that we're really focused on.
I was going to ask you on the early feedback on Catalyst and kind of thinking about that rollout.
It's been really good so far. I mean, if you look at, we have some accounts that have done full implementations and migrations. I think Bealls Florida implemented in three months on a fully hosted Catalyst solution or a Catalyst solution. So there's a lot of things that we have a long way to go still in terms of product development, things that we're releasing. But the feedback we've gotten from our partners, particularly from the agency side, has been really outstanding.
That's great.
We have a lot of work to do still.
I'll be at NRF, so I'll be checking it out. So Tyler, just on pricing, I know that's something that's come up across the industry, but how do we think about pricing as a growth lever longer term?
Yeah, for sure, so let me touch on our three different products that we have in-house and how we're thinking about pricing for each one of those three, so our first one is our platform product, so for our platform product right now, we price it based on order count. So it's volume based on order as the variable that we want to do, which is great. Differentiates us, gives us an opportunity to go to our merchants and say, we can base you on this instead of on what other legacy providers might price you on. But in some cases, it might be too differentiated. We might be, when we go up against.
Meaning confusing.
Meaning confusing, right? That's a better way to put it. So what happens is when we go up against some of our larger competitors, we know that we have a total cost advantage. But when we're going up and pricing against somebody who might be based on GMV or based on something else, it's not as clear to our merchants. So our sales teams having to do a lot of mapping and discussing and coaching on why we're a better fit for them cost-wise. So what we're exploring is we're looking at ways that maybe we have an offering, a pricing offering that will give our merchants an option that's easier to compare to our competition so that our total cost of ownership is more clear to those people when we're pitching in those kind of deals. The second one would be our Feedonomics solution.
Our Feedonomics solution is primarily focused on the larger merchants. We don't really have a downmarket upper end of small business mid-market product that fits really well. What we're doing is we're creating a self-serve product. That self-serve product will be available in the BigCommerce control panel so that our tens of thousands of merchants who are right now on the upper end of small business on the BigCommerce platform can utilize and take advantage of our best-in-class Feedonomics solution. And then our third one is going to be Makeswift. Daniel's alluded to Makeswift in the past. Our goal with Makeswift here is to get it on to be the default visual low-code, no-code editor for the BigCommerce platform. And then after that, roll it out as a platform-agnostic product that we can go to market with.
So there's three different ways that we can kind of attach pricing to the three different offerings we have.
To build on that a little bit too, part of why we think it's so important to have an investor day in March is there's so many things that are changing in some of the plans that we have. It's hard to get through and explain them in 30 minutes, even in a chat like this. Even if you look at Makeswift, we're going to be building that out as a separately sellable product that will give us the ability to get beachheads and accounts by going after content-only sites, which opens up new TAM for us. Now, is that going to be something in the next year that's going to have a massive change in the growth vector of the business? No. But over a two to three-year arc, it might. So there's a lot of interesting things we're doing.
We're also reevaluating a lot of how we think about ways to increase the depth of our relationship with customers through the solutions we have and how we price them, everything from partner solutions, like how we think about payments and our payments offering, what we're doing in terms of all the different financial products that go underneath that. There's just a lot of things that we're really looking at this. And I'm very keen to understand how can we better broaden our relationship with our customers in ways that can create upside for us financially, but more importantly, make the platform even stickier and end up with just ultimately better dollarized gross retention.
It's always going to, I guess it's a good question on cross-sell. But as you think about that kind of cross-sell go-to-market motion over time, is that going to get increased emphasis? I know you're starting on that effort now. But how do we think about cross-sell as part of that growth algorithm, maybe longer term?
I would say that I have said this often. We have been disproportionately reliant on new logos as the primary means of driving revenue growth, and there's a lot of reasons for that. None of them are sufficient explanations. It just needs to be fixed. Part of this is our small business roots. We were used to kind of a higher velocity, lower average selling price. We didn't even have existing territories established with account managers that were focused on cross-sell. The different acquisitions we had made, there were still separate sales teams, all made with good reason and good intention, but it really has made it to where we have not gotten the full potential benefit of cross-sell that we should have had, I would argue by this point, so I think that's something that can get a lot, a lot better in the future.
I'd like to see us get to a point to where we're probably half and half between new logo acquisition revenue growth versus expansion. We're probably more like 80/20 new account right now. Frankly, that's just a very expensive way and an inefficient way of growing the revenue in the long run.
So, you guys, margins have been up pretty, so you can quote me on the exact margin number here. But margins up pretty significantly. How do we think about that balance versus growth versus margins going forward?
Yeah, so we went into this year saying that we were aiming for mid-single digit expansion on a four-year basis, and margins, I think, as of, or based on, our latest guide, we're at 700 basis points of expansion. I think that's really notable considering we've also been very public about the fact that we haven't gotten the revenue growth that we wanted going into this year. We have grown, but we wanted to be having better exit velocity from a pipeline build perspective than where we are right now. There's been green shoots in different places, but we haven't been growing the way that we need to, so I think the fact that we're tracking ahead of our goal on profit expansion, despite that on the top line, shows that we're going about efficiency in the right way.
We're not just top lining our way to a better bottom line and then just saying, oops, I'm sorry, I spent way ahead of my revenue growth. I'm not very good at my job. We're saying, no, we're going to be really disciplined about this. I think as I look at next year, we're aiming for mid-single digit expansion again. I think it may not be quite as high as where it was this year because there's some places where we need to invest, particularly on the system side as we're doing some of the consolidation and pulling the teams together, but I still think even with what I would argue are realistic but modest revenue growth expectations that we've been kind of hinting at for next year, and look, we don't even have an internal financial plan approved yet.
So we're trying to be ahead of things here with investors to try to send some signals, at least how we're thinking about our internal plans. We always try to be quite transparent in that. But even with our investing to kind of double our quota carrying capacity, which I think is a great opportunity for us, we still think that we can get an additional, hopefully, mid-single digit expansion in margins for the year. And there may be upside to that if we can do better than what we think on the revenue side. But we'll see as we go. Again, that's internal plans. We'll see what that looks like from a guide perspective once we get to February.
And as you think about kind of hiring those reps, how do you think about the productivity? And are we getting a lot of that done by year end? Or how do we think about that ramp?
Yeah, for sure. So as far as the ramp, we hope to have everybody in seat by about mid-year next year. So that's going to be helped out because we actually have a lot of the quota carrying capacity that we're adding is actually coming from in-house from people moving jobs from one job to another. So that's really helping out. But we have that built in and all the assumptions that we have. I think we're putting a pretty modest and conservative ramp profile together when Daniel talks about our revenue and our profit goals for next year. So I think there's upside if we can get folks in the door and producing.
One comment on that real quick before we move on, just for clarity. Because I think when people listen to this back, they can say, oh, they've made modest assumptions. They've gone ramp and all the rest of it. It's not because we're trying to sandbag growth expectations. It's because we're trying to be conservative given the amount of go-to-market transformation that we're going through. And I think that we are being decisive and urgent in focusing on growth in the company and doing it the right way. We just think it's reasonable and prudent to be careful in the expectations that we're setting in terms of rep productivity and all the rest of it as we're going through and making these changes.
We're fairly far into this presentation. We haven't hit on AI yet. Just curious, I guess both internally, what are you guys doing in terms of driving productivity with AI? And how do you think about AI evolving in the commerce landscape?
That's an interesting question. I think, well, let me break it down into kind of what we're offering for customers and how we're approaching it internally. From a customer perspective, it's going to be a combination of branded plus partner solutions. Based on the size of our company, I mean, we're really, really tight partners with Google. I see no reason to reinvent the wheel. We can work with Google and other partners. Again, because we're an open platform, we're a composable platform. We already have many, many different partner AI solutions that can plug directly into the platform. We're going to continue to do that. I don't want to own, I don't want our customers' ability to benefit from the amazing transformations that are occurring in AI to be limited by our internal budget to fund it with a branded solution. So Google's going to come up with solutions.
Others, and it's just going to be one of those things, survival of the fittest, plug right into the platform and let customers decide which ones are the most beneficial. We are also going to be making internal investments specifically and especially in Feedonomics, which is fundamentally an AI product. It's an AI product that's been around for a while that is focused on data transformations so that if you're doing, whether it's marketplace transactions or online advertising, where it optimizes your SKU catalog data so that the receiving algorithms have optimized results. We're going to keep investing there. And I think that's a big area of focus for our customers. But again, not one where I'm wanting to kind of build a walled garden around innovation for our customers when they can benefit from the fact that we are an open partner-first platform.
Where we're using it internally, a lot of different areas, we actually rolled out a tool called Forethought that we're using in the support area probably about a year ago now, where it's built into the control panel where now our customers, before they even call into support, can go directly into that tool. And it's that type of algorithm that they're getting answers directly back. And it's actually had a really material impact on the amount of calls actually going into support, not because we're trying to force people into chatbots. Because of the advancements in AI, they're having such a better experience. They're getting their answers there. And we're going to continue to staff to have really differentiated support.
I mean, a lot of our competitors, I've tried to find 800 numbers to figure out how to call and actually talk to a person, and I cannot find it. Versus I think our average hold time over the holiday period last year was like a minute, less than a minute or something like that. And again, because we are talking to professionals, that's who we are aiming for. And professionals deserve professional support. So there's a lot of different areas that we're looking at that, whether it's building out copy with the marketing organization. I'm interested in what we can do from, there's a lot of interesting things that I've seen about how it can be used in the finance and accounting space. Nothing that I've found persuasive yet, to be blunt. It sounded a little bit hand-wavy to me. But I'm still definitely paying attention.
Once it gets past the point of that, and I feel like it's something that I'm willing to invest in, then we will do so.
It'll be interesting to see how that evolves. Maybe lastly, just I know there's a lot of go-to-market changes, but the agency partners has been an important channel for you over the years. How do you think about that channel as you're thinking about the go-to-market going forward?
It will continue to be our number one focus. I think we back up that statement by the fact that our new CEO comes from an agency background. I think that agencies are our best partner because we are not the best solution for every single commerce implementation. I've talked to Travis about that, where he would say, you know, hey, when he was in the space, he'd say maybe BigCommerce is right for, I'm making up the number, 25% of all the opportunities. If you're looking for just the easiest, not necessarily high functionality, just the fastest, easiest way to get deployed, BigCommerce may not be the best solution for that. If you are scaling your business and you have complexity, absolutely, I think BigCommerce is one of the best solutions out there.
As a result, agencies can customize the product in such a way that we would argue that they actually can have a more profitable services business by partnering with us than other solutions that aren't as fully functional. That's going to keep being a focus. Even as we bring in, with the go-to-market changes that we're making, and there are many, a big part of what we're doing behind that is bringing in new leadership and fresh perspectives, particularly on the go-to-market side. We've brought in three new leaders, one to run strategy, one to run service, one to run partnership, all former colleagues of Travis's. That's a big area of focus for him. We're currently in the midst of a search for CRO, as well as a CMO, and a couple of other leadership roles as well.
I think just for where we are in the transformations that we're going through, the company has tremendous potential. We've had things that we need to get fixed. And I think sometimes it's really, it's a good time to get fresh perspective and lead those types of transformations with folks that have gone through it many times in the past. And that's where we are.