Veeva Systems: The Vertical SaaS Champion

I. Introduction & The Big Question

Picture this: It's October 2013, and Wall Street watches as a six-year-old software company rings the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange. The company, Veeva Systems, had raised just $7 million in venture capital—less than what most Silicon Valley startups burn through in a single quarter. Yet here they were, pricing their IPO at $20 per share, watching it soar 85% on the first day to close at $36.70. The market cap that day: $4.4 billion.

Today, that same company commands a $46 billion market capitalization, making it one of the most valuable vertical software companies ever built. It dominates life sciences technology with over 1,400 customers, including 18 of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies globally. Its founder-CEO Peter Gassner still runs the company, a rarity in an industry where founders typically cash out or get pushed aside.

The central question that defines this story isn't just how two guys who had never met before founding the company built such a massive business. It's more profound: How did Veeva Systems become the most capital-efficient vertical SaaS company in history, turning $7 million of venture capital into a $46 billion empire while every other enterprise software company was raising hundreds of millions? The story of Veeva is counterintuitive at every turn. When venture capitalists told them focusing on a single industry was "crazy," they doubled down. When competitors raised massive war chests, they stayed lean. When platform partnerships were gospel in enterprise software, they built on Salesforce—then, fifteen years later, shocked the industry by announcing they'd leave.

This isn't just another SaaS success story. It's a masterclass in how to build a dominant vertical software company by ignoring virtually every piece of conventional Silicon Valley wisdom. With fiscal year 2024 revenues of $2,363.7 million and subscription services revenues of $1,901.6 million, Veeva has proven that sometimes the best strategy is to zag when everyone else zigs.

What makes this journey remarkable isn't just the outcome—it's the path. This is the story of how two strangers built the most important software company you've probably never heard of, unless you work in pharmaceuticals. It's about choosing focus over breadth, efficiency over growth at all costs, and patience over speed. Most importantly, it's about understanding that in enterprise software, the biggest opportunities often hide in the most specialized corners of the economy.

As we unpack this story, we'll explore how Veeva became the indispensable technology backbone for an industry that literally saves lives, why they're betting their entire future on leaving their biggest partner, and what their journey teaches us about building enduring value in vertical markets. The lessons here apply far beyond software—they're about contrarian thinking, strategic patience, and the power of saying no.

↑ Back to Top

II. Origins: The Perfect Storm

The story begins not in a Silicon Valley garage, but with a phone call between two strangers in 2007. Peter Gassner actually didn't know Matt Wallach before starting Veeva, yet together they would build one of the most valuable vertical software companies in history.

Peter Gassner brought the technical DNA. The son of Swiss immigrants who grew up in Portland, Oregon, he discovered computing through a high school math teacher's recommendation. His journey through enterprise software read like a tour of the industry's evolution: IBM's Silicon Valley Lab working on DB2, nine years at PeopleSoft as Chief Architect and General Manager of PeopleTools, then Senior Vice President of Technology at Salesforce. Each stop prepared him for what was coming—understanding databases, building platforms, and witnessing the cloud revolution firsthand.

Matt Wallach brought the industry expertise. As general manager of the pharmaceuticals & biotechnology division at Siebel Systems, he had established the company as the market leader in Pharma CRM and clinical trial management systems before its acquisition by Oracle. He understood the unique complexities of life sciences—the regulatory requirements, the long sales cycles, the conservative culture resistant to change. Their founding story is almost comically unconventional: Gassner and Wallach had never met before starting Veeva. They were connected through mutual contacts who saw the complementary skillsets—Gassner more oriented toward the technical side, Wallach toward the business side. Despite living 3,000 miles apart (Wallach in Philadelphia, Gassner on the West Coast), they had immediate chemistry and would speak every day for the next eight-and-a-half years. Veeva grew up distributed from day one.

The timing was everything. In 2007, the pharmaceutical industry was a technological laggard, still heavily dependent on on-premise software systems that were archaic, difficult to use, and poorly suited to the industry's unique needs. The state of software in the life sciences industry back in 2007 consisted of ancient companies making software that was hard to use. Sales representatives were still carrying paper binders to doctor visits. Clinical trials were managed through spreadsheets and email. Regulatory compliance meant rooms full of paper documents.

Gassner saw what others missed. In 2007, he was talking a lot about the fact that industry-specific software would represent the next wave of cloud applications, but he didn't get a lot of buy-in from his peers at that time. His vision was simple yet radical: bring cloud computing to life sciences, but not as a generic horizontal solution. Instead, build something purpose-built for the industry's specific workflows, regulations, and culture.

The strategic choice to focus on life sciences wasn't random. The pharmaceutical industry had several characteristics that made it perfect for vertical SaaS disruption. First, it was massive—companies were spending billions on technology. Second, it was highly regulated, creating natural barriers to entry and switching costs. Third, the industry was conservative and relationship-driven, meaning once you got in, you stayed in. Fourth, pharma companies had complex, industry-specific workflows that generic CRM tools couldn't handle well.

But why start with CRM? This was the genius move. Veeva's CRM solutions, introduced in 2007 and built on the Salesforce platform, help life sciences companies engage with healthcare professionals and healthcare organizations seamlessly across multiple communication channels and plan and execute more effective media and marketing campaigns. CRM was the most visible pain point—every pharmaceutical sales rep struggled with existing tools. By solving this first, Veeva could get a foothold in these massive organizations, prove their value, and then expand.

The early days required navigating a fundamental tension. VCs thought the idea was crazy. "Everyone else was looking at Veeva with a knee jerk reaction: 'This can't be done.' They were forgetting that Peter built the platform and that he knew the details and knew the internals and how to strike the right balance," recalls Gordon Ritter from Emergence Capital. The conventional wisdom was that focusing on a single vertical market was limiting your opportunity. Why constrain yourself to one industry when you could sell to everyone?

Gassner never listened. In his view, the negativity was just proof that he was doing something that nobody else was doing. "I wasn't [ever] discouraged. I was encouraged. If you are doing something that most people think is impossible, but you think it could be possible...then you are ahead of the game."

The founding team's approach to building the company was methodical. They didn't rush to hire. They didn't chase vanity metrics. With Veeva, Peter was focused on building a lasting company, and a lasting company "needs a good profit margin." So he set running a profitable business as an immutable parameter and built around it. This financial discipline would become one of Veeva's defining characteristics.

From the beginning, they targeted the largest pharmaceutical companies as initial customers. This was counterintuitive—most startups start with smaller, more agile customers. But Gassner and Wallach understood that winning a Pfizer or Merck would validate their platform in a way that a hundred small biotech wins never could. If you could handle the complexity and scale of Big Pharma, everyone else would follow.

The perfect storm that created Veeva wasn't just about timing or technology. It was about two strangers who shared a vision for what vertical cloud computing could become, who understood an industry's pain points deeply, and who had the patience to build something transformative rather than something merely profitable. As we'll see, this foundation of technical expertise, industry knowledge, and financial discipline would enable them to make their next brilliant move: leveraging the Salesforce platform to accelerate their market entry.

↑ Back to Top

III. The Salesforce Platform Play

The decision to build on Salesforce's Force.com platform wasn't just strategic—it was audacious. Here was Gassner, who had literally helped build the Salesforce platform from 2003 to 2005, deciding to leverage his insider knowledge to create what could have been seen as a competitor. It was like a master chef opening a restaurant using his former employer's kitchen.

Building on top of Force.com provides Veeva a leg up on our competition in the Pharma CRM market, Gassner explained in 2010. The genius of this approach was multifaceted. First, it gave Veeva instant credibility with enterprise customers who already trusted Salesforce's security and infrastructure. Second, it dramatically reduced the time and capital needed to bring a product to market. Third, it allowed Veeva to focus all their engineering resources on building industry-specific features rather than reinventing basic infrastructure. The partnership terms between Veeva and Salesforce were unique. In June 2008, Emergence Capital Partners invested $4 million in Veeva's Series A round. Gordon Ritter, founder of Emergence, saw what others missed. "Peter and the team had a unique way of mitigating those risks," he said. The investment would generate one of venture capital's greatest returns—a 300-fold return when Veeva went public, with Emergence's stake worth more than $1.2 billion on a $4 million investment.

The arrangement with Salesforce was mutually beneficial but complex. Veeva became Salesforce's premier Independent Software Vendor (ISV) partner for sales force automation in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology segment. For the past 10 years, Veeva has been Salesforce's preferred worldwide CRM provider for the pharmaceutical and biotech industry. In exchange for using the platform, Veeva paid Salesforce fees as customers used the infrastructure, while Salesforce agreed not to compete in the life sciences vertical.

The constraints of building on someone else's platform were real. Veeva couldn't control everything about the user experience. They had to work within Salesforce's technical limitations. They were dependent on Salesforce's uptime and performance. Critics said this would limit their ability to scale or exit. One potential customer even stood up in an early meeting and said, "we have more people in this meeting than you have in your company. Why are we even talking?"

But Gassner understood something the critics didn't: constraints breed creativity. By not having to worry about infrastructure, Veeva could focus entirely on understanding pharmaceutical workflows. They could iterate quickly on features specific to drug sales, compliance tracking, and physician engagement. They could hire industry experts rather than infrastructure engineers.

The early customer wins validated the approach. Veeva had dozens of customers ranging from the world's largest pharmaceutical companies with thousands of users to emerging biotechs commercializing their first products. By 2010, Veeva CRM was in use by over 50 biopharmaceutical companies worldwide, running on multiple mobile devices such as Apple iPhone, Apple iPad, BlackBerry Smartphones, Windows Mobile, and Tablet PCs.

The product-market fit was immediate and obvious. Pharmaceutical sales reps who had been lugging around paper binders could now access everything on an iPad. Marketing teams could track physician engagement in real-time. Compliance officers could ensure every interaction was properly documented. The switching to Veeva resulted in 30%-40% cheaper total cost of ownership versus legacy solutions.

What made this platform play brilliant was its timing. The iPad launched in 2010, creating the perfect device for pharmaceutical sales reps. Cloud computing was becoming acceptable even in regulated industries. Salesforce had proven enterprise cloud security. Veeva rode all these waves simultaneously.

The financial discipline during this period was extraordinary. Despite having raised $7 million total (including $3 million from angels), Veeva only used about $3 million of it. Peter later reflected: "We raised $7M, we only used $3M. Despite investor pressure to 'spend more, spend more, spend more,' I refused. I was the guy who just didn't get it. I was too conservative. But you have no chance for being great if all you're doing is following the herd."

This capital efficiency wasn't accidental. It came from four core principles that Gassner had established: Be frugal with capital and selective with who is hired, get the product out quick, sell product at a good price to as big of a customer as possible, and don't give away professional services. These weren't just platitudes—they were operational imperatives that shaped every decision.

By 2013, this platform strategy had helped Veeva achieve something remarkable: $129.5 million in revenue, over 650 employees, and profitability for three consecutive years—all before going public. The Salesforce platform had been the perfect launching pad, providing enterprise-grade infrastructure while allowing Veeva to focus on what mattered most: building the best possible software for life sciences.

But even as they succeeded on the platform, the seeds of future independence were being planted. The question wasn't if Veeva would eventually outgrow Salesforce, but when and how they would make that transition.

↑ Back to Top

The Capital Efficiency Masterclass

"Cash generating businesses are always valuable to somebody, at some point a loss making business isn't valuable to anybody," Peter Gassner once said, crystallizing the philosophy that would make Veeva one of the most capital-efficient companies in software history.

The numbers tell a story that seems impossible in today's venture capital environment. CEO Peter Gassner raised just $7M of venture funding before taking Veeva to IPO in 2013 at a value of $4.4bn, six years after founding the company. Even more remarkable: The Mercury News reports that Veeva has turned a profit each of the last three years to generate $27 million in revenue during that time, with net income growing to $18.8 million in 2012 compared with $4.2 million the year prior.

The VCs who passed on Veeva had their reasons. Like many other capital efficient success stories, Veeva was initially written off by VC's over a perceived small market. At the time Veeva had a single CRM product for a single industry. Vertical SaaS was a 'niche' with no potential for outlier outcomes at the time. The consensus view was that focusing on life sciences—just one vertical—fundamentally limited the company's potential. Why build for thousands of customers when you could build for millions?

But Gassner saw limitation as liberation. By focusing exclusively on life sciences, Veeva could charge premium prices that horizontal competitors couldn't justify. A pharmaceutical company running a clinical trial worth hundreds of millions of dollars wouldn't balk at paying more for software that understood their specific workflows, compliance requirements, and industry terminology. The ROI was obvious when you were automating processes for thousands of employees and reducing the risk of regulatory violations that could derail drug approvals.

Gassner claims that he aimed at the outset to 'build a profitable lemonade stand' with Veeva. All spend in the company was ruthlessly prioritized. Spend needed a tangible link to product or customer, or else it was cut or not approved. This wasn't typical Silicon Valley frugality—it was an operating system.

The company's approach to planning exemplified this discipline. In the first year, Veeva had no plans extending beyond 90 days. "Six months from now, we could be out of business. Why do you even want to think about that?" Gassner reasoned. Only after proving product-market fit did they graduate to annual plans, then three-year plans, and finally "the vaguest of five-year plans."

Every principle reinforced capital efficiency. Veeva also takes hiring very seriously. Gassner claims that 'every single hire needs to be massively value additive'. Very few companies would say anything else, but Veeva walks the walk — their revenue per employee trended steadily upwards before settling consistently above $200k/head. This wasn't achieved through overwork but through focus—hiring only when absolutely necessary and promoting from within.

The decision NOT to raise more money became a competitive advantage. While competitors were diluting themselves and building bloated organizations, Veeva maintained discipline. Investors would pressure them to "spend more, spend more, spend more," but Gassner refused. "I was the guy who just didn't get it. I was too conservative. But you have no chance for being great if all you're doing is following the herd."

This capital efficiency created a virtuous cycle. Because they weren't burning cash, they didn't need to raise more money. Because they didn't raise more money, they maintained control and could make long-term decisions. Because they could make long-term decisions, they could focus on profitability over growth. Because they focused on profitability, customers trusted them more—a profitable vendor wouldn't disappear overnight.

The professional services strategy was particularly clever. Unlike most enterprise software companies that give away services to win deals, Veeva charged for everything. This forced customers to have skin in the game and self-select for those who were serious about implementation. It also meant every customer interaction was profitable, not a cost center hoping for future subscription revenue.

The company's timing was bang on — at a time where cloud software was permeating every sector and displacing legacy on-prem solutions. Veeva's model was efficient to its core, focusing on one heavily regulated sector and adjusting best in class horizontal solutions for the demands of it. They weren't trying to boil the ocean; they were perfecting a single recipe.

The irony wasn't lost on anyone: Ironically, it was, the combination of high revenue growth, profit and not having to raise a lot of capital that drove the company to go public, the executives say. Most companies go public because they need capital. Veeva went public because they didn't.

By the time of IPO, Veeva had achieved something virtually unheard of in enterprise software: sustainable profitability, rapid growth, and minimal dilution. The company that VCs thought was thinking too small had built one of the most valuable vertical software companies ever created. But this was just the foundation. The real test would come when Veeva decided to expand beyond CRM into becoming a true multi-product company.

↑ Back to Top

V. The Multi-Product Transformation

The year 2010 marked a crossroads. Veeva had proven it could build a successful CRM product on Salesforce's platform. They were profitable, growing rapidly, and had won major pharmaceutical customers. But Gassner faced a fundamental question: "Do we really want to become a multiproduct company?"

In 2011, the company introduced Veeva Vault, a content management system for the life sciences industry. This wasn't just another product launch—it was an existential bet on Veeva's future. Building Vault meant creating their own platform from scratch, parallel to their successful Salesforce-based CRM business.

The decision to build Vault was driven by a simple observation: pharmaceutical companies were drowning in documents. Clinical trials generate thousands of pages of documentation. Regulatory submissions require perfect version control. Quality processes demand audit trails for every change. Yet most companies were managing this critical content with generic document management systems or, worse, network file shares and email.

Veeva Vault is a cloud-based content management platform and suite of applications that provides life sciences companies a single source of truth to reduce complexity and increase business agility. Veeva Vault not only manages regulated documents, but also tracks critical information from product development to commercialization.

The architecture decision was crucial. A distinguishing aspect of Vault's architecture is that it manages unstructured content and structured data together natively. This meant pharmaceutical companies could manage documents alongside the metadata about those documents—who approved them, which clinical trial they belonged to, what regulatory submissions they were part of. It sounds simple, but no one else was doing it.

Building a new platform while maintaining a successful product on someone else's platform created unprecedented complexity. Gassner later reflected: "When you decide 'I really want to make something big and different'... you're breaking apart your product processes from your company processes, and that's super, super, super hard. It took Veeva about three or four years." He knew it would be hard but not that hard.

The risk was enormous. Veeva was essentially funding R&D for an entirely new platform while their competitors could focus all resources on features. They had to maintain two separate development teams, two technology stacks, two sets of infrastructure. Customers wondered why Veeva was splitting focus. Investors questioned the strategy.

But Vault represented something bigger than just product diversification. It was Veeva's declaration of independence—proof they weren't just a one-trick pony riding Salesforce's coattails. Supporting life sciences with 50+ applications in a secure, high performance, validated environment. The platform would eventually become the foundation for applications outside CRM.

The expansion strategy was methodical. Veeva offers a suite of Vault applications (collectively called Veeva Development Cloud) for key domains in R&D and quality, all built on the common Vault Platform. The major Vault modules include: Vault Clinical: Applications for clinical trials – e.g. managing trial master files (eTMF), clinical data (EDC/CDMS), study start-up, CTMS, etc. Vault Quality: Applications for quality management and documentation – such as Vault QualityDocs for controlled GxP documents and Vault QMS for quality processes (deviations, CAPA, change control). Vault Safety: Applications for pharmacovigilance and adverse event management. Vault Safety enables end-to-end case processing – from intake of adverse events to regulatory reporting – in one system for both safety data and content.

Each new application solved a specific pharmaceutical workflow problem. Clinical trials needed electronic trial master files (eTMF). Regulatory teams needed submission management. Quality departments needed deviation tracking. Safety groups needed adverse event management. Rather than building generic tools, Veeva created purpose-built applications that understood the unique requirements of each function.

The validation and compliance features were critical. Every release is Installation Qualification (IQ) and Operational Qualification (OQ) validated and delivers a comprehensive validation package that substantially reduces your validation effort. Audit trails, e-signatures, validation processes, and configurable business logic are all designed in a strict change control environment. This meant pharmaceutical companies could use Vault for their most critical, regulated processes without extensive custom validation work.

By 2023, the transformation was complete. 18 of the top 20 pharma companies were using Veeva eTMF. The Development Cloud had become the de facto standard for clinical trials and regulatory management. What started as a side project had become equal to, if not more important than, the original CRM business.

Veeva is the first and only company to offer unified suites of applications that are connected on a single cloud platform. This enables organizations to centralize content and data across global departments for greater efficiency and compliance. This wasn't just marketing speak—it represented a fundamental advantage. While competitors offered point solutions, Veeva provided an integrated suite where data flowed seamlessly between applications.

The multi-product transformation taught Veeva crucial lessons. First, vertical depth beats horizontal breadth—by focusing exclusively on life sciences, they could build features no horizontal player would ever prioritize. Second, platform control matters—having their own platform gave them the flexibility to innovate without constraints. Third, patience pays off—the four-year investment in Vault created a moat competitors couldn't cross.

Most importantly, it proved that Veeva wasn't dependent on any single product or platform. They had evolved from a CRM company built on Salesforce to a comprehensive life sciences platform company. This transformation would prove prescient, setting the stage for one of the most successful tech IPOs of the decade.

↑ Back to Top

VI. The IPO and Public Market Success

October 16, 2013. The New York Stock Exchange opening bell rang, and with it, a six-year-old company that had raised just $7 million was suddenly worth billions. The shares began trading on the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 16, 2013 under the symbol "VEEV."

The pricing journey itself told the story of investor hunger for profitable, growing SaaS companies. The Pleasanton, CA-based company originally planned to offer shares at $12-$14. Then they raised it to $16-$18. Finally, they priced at $20 per share. Even that proved conservative—Veeva jumped from $20 to $36.70 as soon as it hit the market, closing at $37.16, up 85.8%.

Veeva Systems, which provides cloud-based CRM software solutions for the life sciences industry, raised $261 million by offering 13.045 million shares (25% insider) at $20, above its upwardly revised $16-$18 range. The market's reaction was immediate and dramatic. Veeva stock closed up 86% at the end of trading, giving the cloud company a market cap of nearly $5 billion.

The road show had been "incredibly productive," CFO Tim Cabral recalled. Investors were fascinated by a company that defied every rule of Silicon Valley. Here was a vertical SaaS company, focused on a single industry, that had achieved profitability while growing over 100% year-over-year. "Veeva has only 170 customers, yet it's crossing over $200 million a year in revenue in 2013 and growing 100 percent year-over-year. It did all of this on one institutional round of $4 million," one analyst wrote.

Standing on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange were CEO Peter Gassner, CFO Tim Cabral and Veeva's original 10 employees, who were all still at the company. The symbolism wasn't lost on anyone—in an industry known for high turnover and quick flips, Veeva had retained its founding team through six years of building.

The IPO wasn't driven by need for capital. The company had $38.6 million in cash before the offering and was generating positive cash flow. Instead, it was about achieving a different kind of currency—credibility. Being public gave Veeva the gravitas to compete for the largest pharmaceutical contracts. It made recruiting easier. It provided liquidity for early employees and investors who had bet on the contrarian vision. The public market performance vindicated every contrarian decision. If you could get your hands on the stock at that price on its opening day, a $10,000 investment would've yielded 500 newly minted Veeva shares. Those shares have compounded at 29.8% per year. The original pricing range evolution tells the story: from $12-14 to $16-18 to the final $20, each increase reflecting growing investor appetite for a profitable, fast-growing vertical SaaS company.

Market cap growth from $4.54B in 2013 to $46.14B today represents a 915% increase, with a compound annual growth rate of 21.61%. This wasn't just paper gains—the company continued executing, growing revenue from $200 million in 2013 to over $2.3 billion today, while maintaining industry-leading margins.

The discipline that characterized the private company continued as a public entity. Unlike many newly public companies that immediately went on acquisition sprees or ramped spending, Veeva maintained its capital efficiency principles. They continued to prioritize profitability alongside growth, a balance that seemed impossible to most observers but natural to Gassner and his team.

In February 2021, Veeva made another unprecedented move. With today's shareholder approval, Veeva will become a public benefit corporation on Feb. 1, 2021, making it the first publicly traded company and largest-ever to convert to a PBC. The vote was overwhelming—99% of voting shareholders supported the proposal, including the vast majority of Veeva's largest shareholders.

As a PBC, Veeva will remain a for-profit corporation but will be legally responsible to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders, including customers, employees, partners, and shareholders. It will also broaden its certificate of incorporation to include a public benefit purpose, 'to help make the industries it serves more productive and create high-quality employment opportunities.'

This wasn't virtue signaling. "PBCs did not exist when he founded the company, so Veeva became a traditional for-profit corporation focused on shareholders. Peter was never comfortable with that, so he tried to align our values and our decisions with our employees and customers," explained Paul Shawah, EVP of commercial strategy.

The PBC conversion formalized what Veeva had been doing all along—making decisions that balanced multiple stakeholder interests rather than optimizing solely for shareholder returns. It gave them legal protection to think long-term, to invest in employee success, to prioritize customer outcomes even when it might hurt short-term margins.

The market's reaction was telling. Rather than punishing the stock for potentially diluting shareholder primacy, investors recognized that the PBC structure aligned with what made Veeva successful in the first place. The company that had defied conventional wisdom by focusing on one industry, staying capital efficient, and prioritizing profitability was now defying conventional wisdom about corporate governance.

"I'm proud to be part of a company that has a broader purpose and isn't only about the money," said Sayaka So, engineering manager at Veeva Systems. This sentiment, echoed throughout the organization, explained why Veeva had retained so much of its talent through the years.

The public company discipline extended to communication and expectations management. Veeva became known for conservative guidance that it consistently beat, for transparent communication about challenges, and for thinking in decades rather than quarters. In 2023, they announced that they did not foresee layoffs in the next three years—an almost unheard-of commitment in tech.

By any measure, the IPO and subsequent public market journey had been a triumph. The company that raised just $7 million had created over $45 billion in market value. The vertical SaaS model that VCs thought was too limited had proven more valuable than most horizontal plays. The capital efficiency that seemed like unnecessary constraint had become a competitive advantage.

But the biggest test of Veeva's public market mettle was yet to come. In December 2022, they would announce a decision that shocked the industry: after fifteen years, they were divorcing Salesforce.

↑ Back to Top

VII. The Salesforce Divorce

December 1, 2022. During Veeva's Q3 earnings call, CEO Peter Gassner dropped a bombshell that reverberated through the enterprise software industry: In its Q3 earnings call for 2022, Veeva announced that it will not renew its Salesforce partnership when it expires in September 2025.

The announcement wasn't entirely unexpected to industry insiders who had been watching Veeva's steady investment in the Vault platform. But the timing and decisiveness shocked everyone. After fifteen years of partnership, after building a $30+ billion company on Salesforce's infrastructure, Veeva was walking away.

The reasons were multifaceted but came down to control, cost, and customer experience. Veeva will be able to offer a better end-to-end experience to its customers with all the solutions and applications (ranging from the clinical and R&D areas to sales and marketing) hosted on a common Veeva Vault Platform. Platform maturity had reached a point where Vault could handle the scale and complexity of CRM workloads.

The financial mathematics were compelling. In 2022, this cost was equal to 12% of the total annual revenue. Along with Amazon's AWS cloud platform, cost of subscription services was $65.7 million in the last quarter alone. Moving to a single vendor architecture would not only reduce costs but also simplify operations.

But the deeper issue was strategic sovereignty. Veeva, with its dependence on third-party IT infrastructure (Salesforce and AWS) for Veeva CRM, has always been wary of the risks associated with the partnership structure. Both AWS and Salesforce have "experienced significant service outages in the past." Every outage affected Veeva's customers, damaged Veeva's reputation, yet was entirely outside Veeva's control.

The risk to Salesforce was existential in a different way. Other platform companies might follow Veeva's lead. If Veeva—the poster child for building on Salesforce—could successfully migrate off, what would stop others? The fear wasn't just about losing Veeva's revenue (less than 1% of Salesforce's total). It was about the precedent.

The migration plan was ambitious yet pragmatic. With the agreement's five-year wind-down period, existing customers can continue with Veeva CRM on the Salesforce platform through September 2030. This gave pharmaceutical companies—notoriously conservative about technology changes—ample time to plan their transition.

The technical challenges were immense. Data Complexity: Life sciences companies deal with vast amounts of complex and sensitive data. Migrating this data from legacy systems to new CRM platforms requires careful planning and execution to ensure data integrity, consistency, and security. Every customer relationship, every interaction history, every compliance record had to move flawlessly.

Early customer feedback was cautiously optimistic. Pharmaceutical companies understood the strategic rationale—having all applications on a single platform would simplify their IT landscape. But they also worried about the transition. Integration and Interoperability: CRM systems often need to integrate with multiple other applications and databases within the organization's ecosystem. Would Vault CRM integrate as seamlessly with third-party tools as the Salesforce-based version?

The competitive dynamics shifted immediately. After September 2025, Salesforce could choose to become a competitor and design its own custom CRM and data management products for life sciences. Salesforce announced partnerships with IQVIA, signaling its intent to compete directly in pharmaceutical CRM. The cozy duopoly was over—the pharma CRM war had begun.

For Veeva, the divorce represented the ultimate bet on vertical integration. They were wagering that controlling the entire stack—from infrastructure to application—would deliver better outcomes for customers than leveraging best-of-breed platforms. It was the same contrarian thinking that had driven them to focus on a single industry, to prioritize profitability, to go public early.

Gassner's communication about the split was characteristically measured. Beyond 2025, Gassner hopes Salesforce and Veeva will continue to collaborate since they have many joint customers and complementary cloud products. But everyone understood this was corporate diplomacy. The partnership that had defined both companies' trajectories in life sciences was ending.

The market's reaction was telling. Rather than punishing Veeva's stock for the risk of migration, investors largely supported the move. They understood that platform independence would give Veeva more control over its destiny, better margins, and the ability to innovate without constraints.

The announcement also validated Veeva's decade-long investment in Vault. What had started as a content management system had evolved into a platform capable of supporting the company's most critical application. The multi-product strategy hadn't just been about diversification—it had been about building the foundation for independence.

As 2025 approaches, the industry watches closely. The Veeva-Salesforce split is a significant event that requires life sciences companies to rethink their CRM approaches strategically. Will Veeva successfully migrate hundreds of customers? Will Salesforce become a formidable competitor? Will other vertical SaaS companies follow Veeva's lead?

What's certain is that the comfortable partnership that had defined life sciences CRM for fifteen years is over. In its place, competition, innovation, and uncertainty—exactly the kind of environment where Veeva has always thrived.

↑ Back to Top

VIII. Modern Era & Market Position

Today, Veeva stands as the undisputed leader in life sciences technology. The company serves more than 1,000 customers, ranging from the world's largest pharmaceutical companies to emerging biotechs. With 7,291 total employees and fiscal year 2025 revenues of $2.747 billion, a 16.2% increase from 2024, Veeva has proven that vertical focus can create horizontal-scale outcomes.

The scale of Veeva's dominance is staggering. The company has 1,477 customers including Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Merck & Co., Novartis, Alkermes plc, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, bluebird bio, and Idorsia. Every major pharmaceutical company depends on Veeva for critical business processes—from managing clinical trials to tracking regulatory compliance to orchestrating sales operations.

Operating across 150+ countries, Veeva has achieved the kind of global reach typically reserved for horizontal platforms. But unlike those platforms, every feature, every workflow, every line of code is optimized for life sciences. This laser focus has created switching costs so high that replacing Veeva would be like performing heart surgery on a running patient—theoretically possible but practically unthinkable.

The modern Veeva operates across two main clouds. The Commercial Cloud continues to dominate pharmaceutical CRM, even as it transitions from Salesforce to the Vault platform. The Development Cloud has become the standard for clinical and regulatory operations. Together, they form an integrated suite that touches every aspect of bringing a drug to market—from initial research to post-market surveillance.

Veeva announced Veeva AI, a major new initiative that adds AI to the Veeva Vault Platform and Veeva applications to help life sciences companies automate tasks and improve employee productivity using AI Agents and AI Shortcuts. Veeva AI will work in all Veeva applications across all major areas, including clinical, regulatory, safety, quality, medical, and commercial.

The AI strategy is characteristically Veeva—practical, industry-specific, and focused on immediate value. Veeva AI is agentic AI in the Vault Platform and industry-specific application agents in all Veeva applications. Veeva AI Agents operate within Veeva applications and have deep application-specific prompts and safeguards and execute in-context with deep access to data, documents, and workflows. Rather than generic AI tools, they're building agents that understand pharmaceutical workflows, regulatory requirements, and industry terminology.

CRM Bot embeds the large language model (LLM) of your choice into Vault CRM to enable a wide range of context-driven tasks including pre-call planning, suggested actions, recommended content, and context-specific learning. Planned for availability in late 2025, CRM Bot is included in Vault CRM for no additional charge and requires the Vault Direct Data API. This isn't AI for AI's sake—it's AI that helps pharmaceutical sales reps be more effective in their customer interactions.

The competitive landscape has shifted dramatically post-Salesforce split. Its primary competitor for its customer relationship management software is Salesforce, which is partnered with IQVIA. Salesforce has announced its strategic global partnership with IQVIA to enhance the capabilities of its Life Sciences Cloud. The Salesforce-IQVIA partnership marks a significant move in Salesforce's commitment to delivering robust life sciences customer engagement solutions.

The IQVIA-Salesforce alliance represents the most serious threat to Veeva's CRM dominance in years. Salesforce is seeking to replace the royalty revenue it will lose from Veeva in launching its Pharma CRM with IQVIA — right after Veeva's exclusive 10-year contract with Salesforce ends in September 2025. Salesforce also announced general availability of its Life Sciences Cloud including applications for clinical operations in June 2024.

But Veeva has structural advantages that will be hard to overcome. Salesforce's lack of focus on the industry remains skeptical for success in life sciences. Another edge for Veeva is that its key competitors are not focused on life sciences software. IQVIA is focused on the life sciences industry but is not known as a software developer. While competitors must balance multiple industries and priorities, Veeva wakes up every day thinking only about life sciences.

The recent resolution of legal disputes has cleared another cloud. The resolution of the eight-year legal battle between Veeva Systems and IQVIA in August 2025 marks a seismic shift in the healthcare cloud CRM landscape. This partnership, which eliminates data restrictions and fosters collaboration across clinical and commercial operations, not only de-risks Veeva's data ecosystem but also unlocks a new era of growth for cloud integration in life sciences.

The Public Benefit Corporation structure continues to differentiate Veeva in meaningful ways. As a Public Benefit Corporation, Veeva is committed to balancing the interests of all stakeholders, including customers, employees, shareholders, and the industries it serves. This isn't just corporate virtue signaling—it provides legal protection to make long-term decisions that might not optimize for short-term profits.

The employee-centric culture has created remarkable retention and productivity. The company's commitment to remote work—announced permanently even before the pandemic—has helped attract top talent globally. The no-layoffs commitment through 2026 stands in stark contrast to the hire-and-fire cycles plaguing the rest of tech. Revenue per employee consistently above $200,000 proves this isn't charity—it's smart business.

Looking at the financial trajectory, the numbers tell a story of consistent execution. Veeva Systems annual revenue for 2025 was $2.747B, a 16.2% increase from 2024. Veeva Systems annual revenue for 2024 was $2.364B, a 9.68% increase from 2023. Veeva Systems annual revenue for 2023 was $2.155B, a 16.44% increase from 2022. This isn't hypergrowth, but it's the kind of steady, profitable expansion that compounds into enormous value over time.

The subscription model provides incredible revenue visibility. Subscription services revenues were $1,901.6 million in fiscal 2024, representing over 80% of total revenue. These aren't month-to-month SaaS subscriptions that can churn at any moment—they're multi-year enterprise agreements with the world's largest pharmaceutical companies, embedded deeply into mission-critical workflows.

The Vault platform migration represents both the biggest risk and opportunity ahead. Successfully moving hundreds of CRM customers from Salesforce to Vault would prove Veeva's platform maturity and unlock significant margin expansion. Failure would damage customer trust and open the door for competitors. Early indicators are positive, but the next two years will be critical.

Market dynamics favor continued growth. The pharmaceutical industry continues to invest heavily in digital transformation, driven by the need for efficiency in drug development and commercialization. Clinical trials are becoming more complex. Regulatory requirements keep expanding. The amount of data generated in drug development doubles every few years. All of this creates demand for sophisticated, industry-specific software—exactly what Veeva provides.

↑ Back to Top

IX. Playbook: Lessons for Founders & Investors

The Veeva story offers a masterclass in contrarian company building. Every major decision—from focusing on a single vertical to staying capital efficient to leaving Salesforce—went against conventional wisdom. Yet these decisions, in aggregate, created one of the most valuable enterprise software companies ever built. Here are the key lessons:

Vertical SaaS Thesis Validation at Scale

Veeva definitively proved that vertical focus doesn't limit outcomes—it amplifies them. By serving one industry exceptionally well, they could charge premium prices, achieve higher retention, and build deeper moats than any horizontal competitor. The key insight: TAM calculations for vertical markets systematically underestimate value creation potential because they miss the pricing power that comes from solving industry-specific problems.

The numbers make the case: Starting with "just" pharmaceutical CRM, Veeva built a $46 billion company. They proved you don't need millions of customers if you have the right hundreds. When your customers are companies spending billions on R&D, with regulatory requirements that make switching costs astronomical, a smaller customer base becomes an advantage, not a limitation.

Capital Efficiency vs. Growth at All Costs

Veeva's $7 million journey to a $4.4 billion IPO should be taught in every business school. They proved that capital efficiency isn't about being cheap—it's about understanding the true drivers of value creation. Every dollar spent had to directly impact product or customer success. No vanity metrics, no growth theater, no blitzscaling.

This discipline created a virtuous cycle: Because they were profitable, they didn't need to raise money. Because they didn't raise money, they maintained control. Because they maintained control, they could make long-term decisions. Because they made long-term decisions, they built a better business. The irony is that by not optimizing for growth, they achieved more sustainable growth than their cash-burning competitors.

Platform Partnerships: When to Leverage, When to Leave

The Salesforce partnership strategy was brilliant in its sophistication. Veeva used Salesforce's platform to accelerate time-to-market, then spent fifteen years building their own platform in parallel. When they finally left, they did so from a position of strength, with a proven alternative and a patient migration plan.

The lesson for founders: Platform partnerships can be powerful accelerants, but only if you maintain optionality. Build on others' platforms, but always invest in your own capabilities. The best time to leave a platform partnership is when you don't have to—when you're strong enough to manage the transition on your terms, not when you're forced to scramble.

Going Against the Grain as Competitive Advantage

Veeva's greatest strategic asset was their willingness to be different. When VCs said focusing on one industry was crazy, they saw opportunity. When competitors raised hundreds of millions, they stayed lean. When everyone preached "growth at all costs," they prioritized profitability. When platform lock-in was considered permanent, they planned their exit.

This contrarian thinking wasn't contrarian for its own sake—it was rooted in first principles thinking about what actually creates value. They understood that in enterprise software, customer success matters more than customer acquisition. That retention matters more than growth. That profitability matters more than revenue. These weren't popular views in Silicon Valley, but they were right.

Industry Expertise as Moat

Veeva proved that deep industry knowledge is one of the few sustainable competitive advantages in software. Their moat wasn't technical—any competent team could build CRM or content management software. Their moat was understanding pharmaceutical industry workflows, regulations, and culture better than anyone else.

This expertise compounds over time. Every customer interaction teaches you something. Every regulatory change deepens your knowledge. Every product iteration makes you more valuable to your customers. Horizontal players can never match this depth because they're spread across too many industries. By the time competitors understand an industry as well as you do, you've moved on to solving the next set of problems.

The Power of Patient Capital and Long-Term Thinking

Veeva's approach to planning evolved from 90-day sprints to five-year strategies, but always with a pragmatic bent. They thought long-term but executed short-term. They built for decades but measured progress in quarters. This temporal flexibility allowed them to be patient when others were impatient and move quickly when others were complacent.

The Public Benefit Corporation conversion crystallized this philosophy. By legally encoding their commitment to multiple stakeholders, they gave themselves permission to think beyond quarterly earnings. This isn't anti-capitalist—it's recognizing that the best way to create shareholder value over decades is to also create value for customers, employees, and society.

Multi-Product Expansion in Vertical Markets

Veeva's evolution from single-product to multi-product company offers a template for vertical SaaS expansion. Start with the most visible, painful problem (CRM for pharma sales). Establish credibility and relationships. Then systematically expand into adjacent problems (clinical trials, regulatory, quality). Each new product strengthens the others, creating a compound competitive advantage.

The key is patience. Veeva waited three years before launching their second major product. They ensured CRM was rock-solid before expanding. This sequential approach might seem slow, but it's actually faster than trying to do everything at once. By the time competitors realize you're building a platform, not just a product, it's too late to catch up.

The Paradox of Focus

Perhaps the most counterintuitive lesson is that extreme focus enables broader success. By limiting themselves to life sciences, Veeva could go deeper than anyone else. This depth created pricing power, which enabled profitability, which funded R&D, which enabled new products, which expanded their addressable market. Constraints bred creativity.

This challenges the Silicon Valley orthodoxy about TAM and market size. Investors love huge markets because they seem to offer more opportunity. But huge markets attract huge competition. Sometimes the best strategy is to dominate a smaller market completely rather than compete for a small share of a huge market. Own a monopoly in a niche rather than be a commodity in a crowd.

↑ Back to Top

X. Analysis & Investment Case

TAM Expansion: Life Sciences Software Market Growth

The life sciences software market continues to expand, driven by digital transformation, regulatory complexity, and data explosion. But Veeva's real TAM expansion comes from going deeper, not broader. Every new workflow they digitize, every paper process they eliminate, every regulatory requirement they automate expands their addressable market within life sciences.

Consider clinical trials alone. A typical Phase 3 trial generates over 3 million data points. There are approximately 400,000 clinical trials registered globally. The complexity is increasing—precision medicine, real-world evidence, decentralized trials all require new software capabilities. Veeva is positioned to capture value from all these trends without ever leaving life sciences.

Competitive Dynamics Post-Salesforce Split

The Salesforce departure creates both risk and opportunity. Risk because migration is always dangerous, especially for mission-critical systems. Opportunity because owning the full stack enables innovation, integration, and margin expansion impossible as a platform partner.

The IQVIA-Salesforce partnership represents real competition, but with structural disadvantages. They're starting from behind in market share. They're combining two companies with different cultures and priorities. They lack Veeva's singular focus on life sciences. Most importantly, they're fighting the last war—competing for CRM while Veeva has already moved on to owning the entire lifecycle.

Platform Transition Risks and Opportunities

The Vault migration is Veeva's Apollo mission—technically complex, highly visible, with no room for error. The risks are real: data loss, performance degradation, customer defection. But the upside is transformational: complete platform control, unified architecture, and margin expansion from eliminating Salesforce fees.

Early indicators suggest successful execution. Customer feedback has been positive. The five-year migration window provides adequate time for planning. Most importantly, Veeva has been preparing for this for over a decade—Vault wasn't built for this migration; this migration was enabled by Vault's maturity.

Margin Expansion Potential

The financial opportunity from platform ownership is substantial. Eliminating Salesforce fees, which represented 12% of revenue, drops straight to the bottom line. But the real opportunity is in operational efficiency—single platform, unified development, simplified support. Operating margins could expand by 500-1000 basis points over time.

More importantly, platform control enables new revenue streams. AI capabilities can be deeply integrated rather than bolted on. Data products can leverage the full platform. New applications can be developed faster. The compound effect of these improvements could drive sustained margin expansion for years.

Bear Case: Migration Challenges, Competition, Market Saturation

The bear case centers on execution risk. Platform migrations fail more often than they succeed. Even successful migrations often take longer and cost more than planned. Customer patience isn't infinite—if the migration stumbles, competitors will pounce.

Market saturation is a real concern. Veeva already serves most large pharmaceutical companies. Growth must come from expanding within existing accounts, winning smaller companies, or entering adjacent markets. Each path has challenges—enterprise software land-and-expand has limits, smaller companies have different needs, adjacent markets require new expertise.

Competition is intensifying. The IQVIA-Salesforce partnership is just the beginning. Oracle, Microsoft, and Amazon all see opportunity in life sciences. New startups are targeting specific workflows with modern AI-native approaches. Veeva's monopoly position inevitably attracts challenge.

Bull Case: Vertical Dominance, Switching Costs, Regulatory Expertise

The bull case rests on Veeva's entrenched position. Switching costs in pharmaceutical software aren't just high—they're prohibitive. Changing systems during clinical trials risks regulatory compliance. Migrating decades of data risks business continuity. Retraining thousands of users risks productivity. The status quo bias is enormous.

Veeva's regulatory expertise becomes more valuable over time. As regulations become more complex and global, companies need partners who understand compliance across jurisdictions. Veeva has spent seventeen years building this expertise. Competitors can't replicate this overnight—it requires years of experience, relationships with regulators, and trust from customers.

The vertical dominance strategy has barely scratched the surface. Life sciences includes pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, diagnostics, and more. Each segment has unique needs. Each workflow presents opportunity. Veeva could grow for decades just by systematically digitizing every aspect of life sciences operations.

↑ Back to Top

XI. Epilogue & Reflection

Peter Gassner once said the goal was to build a company that could last 100 years. Seventeen years in, Veeva is on track. They've survived the startup phase, navigated the public markets, and managed a platform transition. More importantly, they've maintained their culture, their focus, and their financial discipline.

The transformation from thinking 90 days ahead to building for centuries reflects a maturity rare in technology companies. Most startups optimize for exit—IPO or acquisition. Veeva optimized for endurance. This long-term orientation, encoded in their Public Benefit Corporation structure, enables decisions that compound value over decades rather than quarters.

What Veeva means for the future of vertical SaaS is profound. They've proven that vertical focus doesn't limit outcomes—it amplifies them. That capital efficiency beats growth at all costs. That patient execution beats fast failure. That deep expertise beats broad capability. These lessons challenge much of what Silicon Valley holds sacred.

The biggest surprise in the Veeva story is how unsurprising their success seems in retrospect. Of course a company that deeply understands pharmaceutical workflows would build better pharmaceutical software. Of course focusing on profitability would create a more valuable business than burning cash. Of course owning your platform would be better than depending on others. The surprise is that so few companies follow this playbook.

The counterintuitive insights run deep. Constraints enable creativity. Small markets can create big companies. Saying no is more powerful than saying yes. Moving slowly can get you there faster. Being boring can be revolutionary. These paradoxes explain why Veeva succeeded where others failed—they understood that in enterprise software, different is better than better.

Building enduring value requires a different mindset than building for exit. It means choosing customers over investors, sustainability over growth, depth over breadth. It means having the courage to be misunderstood, the patience to be proven right, and the discipline to stay focused when everyone says you're thinking too small.

The Veeva story ultimately isn't about software or life sciences or platform strategies. It's about the power of focus, the value of expertise, and the importance of solving real problems for real customers. It's about building something that matters, not just something that scales. It's about creating value that compounds over decades, not quarters.

As the life sciences industry continues its digital transformation, Veeva's role will only grow more critical. Every new drug developed, every clinical trial conducted, every regulatory submission filed increasingly depends on Veeva's infrastructure. They've become the nervous system of an industry that literally saves lives. That's a moat no amount of venture capital can cross.

From two strangers who had never met to a $46 billion company essential to global healthcare—the Veeva journey defies every Silicon Valley stereotype. No pivots, no blitzscaling, no unicorn mythology. Just patient execution, deep expertise, and relentless focus on customer success. In an industry obsessed with disruption, Veeva proved that sometimes the most radical thing you can do is build something that lasts.

The question isn't whether Veeva will reach its 100-year goal—at this trajectory, that seems achievable. The question is what lessons the next generation of founders will take from their example. Will they chase the quick flip or build for the long term? Will they spread thin or go deep? Will they follow the herd or chart their own course?

The answer will determine not just the future of vertical SaaS, but the future of enterprise software itself. Because Veeva has proven something profound: In a world obsessed with horizontal scale, sometimes the biggest opportunities hide in the smallest markets. You just need the patience to find them and the courage to commit.