Frequently Asked Questions

At least one of us is very fond of Q&As, so it should be no surprise that we’ll host one here on your behalf. If you’ve got additional questions you’d like answered, just let one of us know.



  1. How long has RedMonk been around?
  2. Is RedMonk incorporated? If so, where?
  3. What’s with the open source claim – how is RedMonk an “open source firm”?
  4. What’s with your motto – what is “analysis for the people, by the people?”
  5. I’m used to dealing with the bigger firms, how does your coverage differ?
  6. Do you do commissioned or prepurchased research?
  7. What about seats, or content permission rights, and so on?
  8. Why do you provide research for free?
  9. How can you provide research for free?
  10. Do you charge for briefings?
  11. Will you sign NDAs?


  1. What do your analysts cover?
  2. Do your analysts publish research agendas?
  3. Where are your analysts geographically located?
  4. How do I decide which analyst I want to work with?
  5. How can I get in touch with your analysts?


  1. What kind of customers do you work with?
  2. If the vendors are the ones paying the bills, shouldn’t we be wary of your analysis?


  1. What does it cost to work with RedMonk?



  1. RedMonk was founded officially in December of 2002, so the best answer is probably “a little while, but not long enough to get stale.” If context is your thing, you can think of it this way: we’re one year younger than Eclipse, two years younger than, and three years older than

  2. RedMonk is indeed incorporated. We’re a US based Limited Liability Corporation (LLC). More specifically, if you’re interested, we’re incorporated in Delaware.

  3. Well, we do spend a lot of time researching and writing on open source technologies, but that’s not all. We make all of our content available for free – our “source” then, such as it is, is open. There are no pay walls within RedMonk (unless you’re looking for consulting).

  4. This may surprise those of you that have dealt with analysts before, but we’re not of the opinion that we have all of the good ideas, or even most of them. A few, we think, but a big part of what we do is leverage and highlight the learning we receive from individual developers, architects and so on – while making stars of them in the process. You can see this process at work in the comments on our blogs; we learn at least as much from our community as they do from us. It would seem unfair, then, to take sole credit for our analysis, because it’s not solely ours.

  5. Glad you asked. We’re very open about the fact that we’re primarily oriented towards bottom up adoption. In practical terms, this means that if your main goal in life is getting on a CIO’s radar, we’re not the firm for you. There are plenty of firms that will (try to) do that for you. Our focus is instead on the grassroots, the bottom up adoption that’s made successes of projects that you may have heard of like Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP. Those projects, in case you hadn’t heard, didn’t get to where they are today by virtue of CIOs. Our primary focus, then, is on the individuals that make things work: the architects, developers, engineers, hackers – call them what you will. The ones that increasingly are making or breaking technologies.

  6. No we do not. Frankly, we don’t place much stock in it either. We maintain absolute editorial control of our work, and what goes out is our opinion and our opinion only. If, after a work is published, someone wishes to purchase it for marketing purposes that can be arranged. But nothing is presold.

  7. Look, we’re not here to nickel and dime you. We don’t enjoy that much, and figure that it’s probably not high on your list either. We don’t have “seats,” we’re not going to tell you how to use the content that you’ve purchased, and you’re not going to get a surprise bill for a five minute phone call.

  8. Well, given that we benefit from open source applications ourselves (we run on the LAMP stack) we feel obligated to give something back wherever we can. But it’s also just good business sense as far as we’re concerned – the benefits of open content are many: immediate and insightful feedback on our research, better visibility and authority on search engines, a more vibrant and engaged community…the list goes on.

  9. By keeping our costs low. Like many small companies, we don’t have any Armani-wearing Ferrari-driving sales reps. We can afford to give content away because it’s never been a key component of our revenue structure; the bulk of our income is from consulting. Many of our competitors have higher cost structures that prohibit this, we do not. We’ve been giving content away for years and are still growing our business (though it’ll be a while before we get our Ferraris).

  10. Never have, never will. Moreover, we’re unclear on how firms that do charge for briefings can feel like they have an accurate picture of the market. Might be a good question to ask in the event that firms try that on you.

  11. The short answer is that yes, we will. Much of the work we do is on a confidential basis, and some of our clients deny us even the ability to comment on what, precisely, we do for them. We’re not reporters looking to break stories – we leave that to the professionals. We know how to keep secrets.

    That said, maintaining NDAs does have an overhead associated with it. Regrettably, the default for many technology firms these days is to NDA everything discussed. We will always respect NDAs, but do reserve the right to refuse briefings because of the aforementioned overhead. It’s also worth mentioning that when material is contained under an NDA, when queried on the subject if we do not have the actual disclosure date handy we may be forced to refuse to comment, thus hindering your press outreach capabilities.


  1. In our software line of business we cover a broad swath of software technologies, covering in detail the better part of the infrastructure software stack, including databases, operating systems, programming languages, application development tools, application and web servers, collaboration tools, and more. We’re also, compared to many analyst firms, further out on the bleeding edge, so we spend a lot of time on macro trends such as open source or Web 2.0.

    Our new line of business, GreenMonk offers advisory services to help a range of organisations better understand how sustainability issues will affect them. Greenmonk will focus on energy demand management (working on the demand side of the equation using sophisticated IT marshalling techniques), Publish and subscribe power networks, and social change through social media for better environmental outcomes. We want to help vendors market more effectively, enterprises to save money and build better alignment between management, business and staff, and individuals to feel they can make a contribution to the huge challenges we all face.

  2. Given that we’re a bit ahead of the curve and tracking developments in real time, we do not. It’s often difficult for us to predict what we’ll be talking about next week, let alone next month. Some markets can (apparently) predict everything that they’ll need to write about for the upcoming year; we just don’t happen to cover any of them.

  3. All over the place. Coté’s based in Austin, James works out of London, Stephen splits time between Denver and Maine and Tom is based in Seville, Spain. We may be small, but we’re multi-national.

  4. Your best bet is to read one of our blogs (see the front page) – they’ll give you an idea of what we cover and, thus, how likely we are to be interested in what you’d like to talk about. Worst case you can email one of us (see the Contact page), but we’d prefer that you look around a bit first.

  5. Easily. We’re available via email, phone and multiple IM channels.


  1. We work primarily with application vendors, and they come in all shapes and sizes. We work with some of the smaller more promising firms in the industry, such as MySQL, MuleSource or Zend, all the way up to industry behemoths such as IBM, Microsoft or Sun. We do work with a couple of the savvier enterprises out there, but the majority of our business is still in vendor consulting.

  2. Absolutely. You should, in our opinion, be skeptical of all of the research you read. We actually tackled just that subject with InformationWeek a while back, and essentially our answer boils down to this: every piece we publish is free to anyone, and every piece will disclaim who’s paying us and who is not. With that kind of transparency, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to display overt biases. But by all means, watch closely for it – odds are good you’ll see us giving even our biggest clients a hard time. That is, after all, what they pay us for. But if not, you can always drop in a comment calling us out. That’s the benefit of being open.


  1. The pricing is covered in more detail on the Services page, but is essentially three tiered. Smaller clients – or Supporters, as we call them – pay a fixed fee of $5,000, while Sponsors pay a minimum of $10,000 and ranges higher. The final client level, Patron, is highly dependent on a number of external varies but involves a much more significant financial commitment.