There was a time when the idea of seeing Jurgen von Hollen and Nadav Goshen, respective CEOs of Ultimaker and MakerBot, sat across a desk from one another would have raised more than a few eyebrows. Both established goliaths in the polymer 3D printing space, founded just two years apart, the two companies have often been considered direct competitors in the desktop fused deposition modelling market with similar trajectories that have seen their technologies embraced by makers and industrial users alike. But, in a surprising turn of events last month which has brought the CEOs across a table from one another in the Netherlands today, the two announced a business combination that will see them merge to form a ‘comprehensive desktop 3D printing ecosystem.’
“In the last 12 months, I don't know how many times it's been escalated that we have a competition with MakerBot, it's very seldom so it's very complementary,” von Hollen told TCT. “It almost feels like we're playing in different segments or positions in the market. So, for me, it's not cannibalising anything, it's actually complementary and I think that makes it much simpler to communicate, to control and to integrate.”
According to von Hollen, discussions started at the back end of last year while the Netherlands-based Ultimaker was in the midst of an equity raise process. Stratasys (MakerBot’s parent company following a $400 million acquisition back in 2013) and NPM Capital are among existing investors backing the business combination, with an additional $62.4 million investment set to ‘fuel innovation and expansion into new markets’ per a joint announcement.
“Both of us are striving to take additive manufacturing and make it easy to use at a professional grade,” Goshen explained. “I think this is the overarching theme for this merger and we know that we want to do that by maturing the industry to move out of the confusion into more solution and customer [orientated] offerings. I think both of us share the same thing and I think together, we can achieve it better.”
There are benefits for both sides, according to Goshen and von Hollen. For Ultimaker, the aim is to use this injection of capital to grow the business, particularly in the U.S. market where the Brooklyn-based MakerBot already has a large presence, and then onto Asia Pacific. The two also have different go-to market strategies; whereas von Hollen describes Ultimaker’s as ‘channel orientated,’ he notes MakerBot’s ‘hybrid’ approach which he hopes Ultimaker will now be able to leverage.
“By combining the two roadmaps together, we actually have the ability to deliver something that's pretty unique and accelerates the go to market from that perspective,” von Hollen commented.
Goshen added: “The combination of product portfolios together allows us to cover a wider spectrum of customer needs. I think we have complementary ecosystems […] we come to the same market but with a different approach, and are really kind of growing the market in that regard.”
The plan is for Goshen and von Hollen to act as co-CEOs, with Goshen managing operations and R&D and von Hollen managing commercial functions, with the new company maintaining headquarters in both the Netherlands and New York. But what might this new ‘complementary ecosystem’ be called going forward? While celebrity couple names have been floated around the community from ‘MakerMaker’ to ‘UltiBot’, which Goshen says he’s keeping an eye on, the companies are not ready to announce any major rebrand just yet.
“I think you'll come back to us and we can tell you in the future,” Goshen said. “But we are considering all of these options that were suggested by the community [...] I definitely like the 'MakerMaker' thing!”
But perhaps the biggest question mark from the community hangs over Cura, Ultimaker’s popular open-source slicing platform. Ultimaker has remained steadfastly open source with its materials ecosystem and software, and recent figures show Cura to have more than 600,000 active users per month, with around 2 million print jobs prepared with the tool per week. MakerBot, however, famously went from an open to closed model with the launch of its Replicator 2 printer back in 2012, a move that was met with criticism from the 3D printing community, though it has made moves to open up its platform since with the commercial launch of its Experimental Extruder. Additionally, Thingiverse, MakerBot’s design community and 3D printable file sharing platform, could also stand to benefit from the investment and Goshen says the merger will enable the two to ‘expand and invest more' into both products.
On Cura’s future, Goshen is clear: “Currently there are no plans to change any of the open source licensing that are out there. On the contrary, we want to make sure that these two communities, Cura and Thingiverse, have more to offer to wider industry users.”
Von Hollen chimes in: “Thingiverse, it immediately pops in our minds. […] I think when we look at 3D printing, it's very fragmented, the workflow, the process, and I would say probably 80-90% of Ultimaker employees go to Thingiverse to grab a design, and then go back into Cura. So, it's actually there already. And it's such a perfect fit, actually. We have a very similar vision about where we want to go, and what we need and ecosystem is one of those things that I think by bringing the two companies together, we create something pretty unique out there.”
Goshen doubles down: “There is no intention to change the Cura licensing model, there is no intention to do anything for that. Thingiverse and Cura are kind of a sibling that were separated at birth so they really fit well together. And our goal as part of this merger is to really find what that future of Thingiverse and Cura looks like.”
Von Hollen adds: “If we can invest in the right things and make both Thingiverse and Cura the leading, let's say, solutions out there and platforms, it can only benefit the business itself, but also the industry. I also think one of the key parts of this is that integrated workflow, it is very fragmented. And I think one of those things is what we have to think about over the next weeks and months is, how do we make that customer journey just very easy? And I think that's the part we have to get to, whether it's people privately using those platforms, but also in businesses, we want to empower and enable people to be able to use the technology for what they need it for.”
For their machine portfolios, the CEOs believe these will be similarly complementary. While both MakerBot and Ultimaker systems function on similar extrusion-based processes, both leaning towards professional user markets in recent products offerings, counting brands like L’Oreal and Heinekin amongst Ultimaker’s customers, and Arash Motor Company and Lockhed Martin amongst MakerBot’s, the CEOs believe both product lines are well positioned to sit alongside one another.
“We have very different product characteristics,” Goshen explained. “Method and the S line are very different, they're serving different customer needs. So in that regard, I think we're just having more options for customers to choose from. There is a big opportunity for us to streamline the workflow. MakerBot has a cloud offering, which is easy to use, there are some areas around that that we can streamline the same workflow for different products. The idea is, once we get more mature as one company, new innovations will come from the people that work in both companies. They are probably the most experienced in 3D printing in the industry so I think this is something that we're looking forward to bring to the market at later stages.”
While much of the focus appears to be on industry, Goshen notes MakerBot’s success in the education sector and how a similar 'full solution' approach could be taken for other industries.
“Education is a very strong offering that we have because we focused on the full solution that this customer type requires," Goshen said. “So I think by looking at that aspect of our products or market, then we can really combine the two company portfolios and really build solutions that are really tailored to each customer needs. So this is the way we want to drive the market. And I think this is, again, a great opportunity for the market to really kind of grow up and move to solution and customer focused offerings.”
The transaction is subject to consultation of appropriate employee representative bodies and regulatory approvals, and is expected to close over the course of the second or third quarters of 2022. The next step is to start internal processes to bring teams together and ‘build a new code’ for this new entity. While at that stage we don’t have more details about what those conversations will sound like or the structure of the team going forward, Goshen says the plan is to communicate with staff, partners and customers and ‘accelerate as quickly as we can’.
“I think first of all, [the teams] were kind of surprised by the news […] but we know that they are communicating between them, asking questions, kind of brainstorming,” Goshen shares of the reaction internally. “The engineers are thinking about what we can do together so I think that's something that is very exciting, from both sides.”
