1. No category

Investor Overview
Suresh Vasudevan, Chief Executive Officer
Anup Singh, Chief Financial Officer
May 26, 2015
Safe Harbor
This presentation and the accompanying oral presentation contain “forward-looking” statements that are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently
available to management. We intend for such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the U.S. Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include all statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this presentation, including information concerning our
financial outlook, business plans and objectives, potential growth opportunities, competitive position, industry environment and potential market opportunities.
Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors including, but not limited to, those related to our future financial performance,
market acceptance of our solutions, our ability to increase sales of our solutions, including to attract and retain customers and to selling additional solutions to our existing customers, our ability
to develop new solutions and bring them to market in a timely manner, pricing pressure (as a result of competition or otherwise), our ability to maintain, protect and enhance our brand and
intellectual property, global economic conditions and our ability to continue to expand our business and manage our growth. Moreover, we operate in very competitive and rapidly changing
environments, and new risks may emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to
which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Further information on these and
other factors that could affect our financial results are included in our filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and may cause our actual results, performance or
achievements to differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied by our forward-looking statements.
You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although our management believes that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity, performance or events and circumstances described in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur.
Moreover, neither we, nor any other person, assume responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any
forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this presentation to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations, except as required by law.
In addition to GAAP financial information, this presentation includes certain non-GAAP financial measures. The non-GAAP measures have limitations and you should not consider them in
isolation or as a substitute for our GAAP financial information. There are limitations to the use of non-GAAP measures. For example, bookings and free cash flow are not substitutes for
revenues or cash provided by operations. In addition, non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the impact of stock-based compensation expense, which is a recurring expense for us. See the
Appendix for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their nearest GAAP equivalent.
2
Founding Thesis
1980s
DAS
1995+
Networked Storage
2013 TAM:
~$40B
Today
Flash vs. Disk
Cloud vs. On-premise
Storage Management
Opportunity for a ground-up redesign of storage
3
Customer Challenge: Storage That Adapts To Application Needs
CRM
CRM
ERP
CRM
CRM
ERP
ERP
ERP
ERP
CRM
Deterministic
Latency < 1ms
CRM
ERP
Performance and Capacity
Within a Cost Envelope
Lowest Cost of Capacity
A platform that adapts as the relative merits of flash and disk evolve, and as workloads change
4
Industry Approach To Leveraging Flash Is Inadequate
Workloads
Capacity
High-performance applications
Flash-Only Arrays
Cheap and deep
Tiered
Hybrid
Arrays
Low cost
disk/cloud
Performance
Mainstream Apps
5
Nimble Approach To Leveraging Flash: Adaptive-Flash Platform
Workloads
and
Mainstream Applications
Adaptive-Flash
Platform
Cheap and deep
Performance
+ Capacity
High Performance applications
Low Cost
Disk/Cloud
A ground-up design should efficiently and flexibly address performance and capacity intensive workloads
6
Data And Storage Management Costs Are Significant
Total Cost of Ownership
20%
Upfront Capital
Expenditure
80%
§  Data protection and
data management
§  Storage monitoring
and support
7
Nimble’s Approach Transforms Data Protection
D2D + Replication
Snapshots + Replication
Primary
No backup window
§  Rapid local recovery
§  Cost-effective,
simple DR
§ 
Backup
Disaster
Recovery
Tier 3
(+Dedupe)
No Tapes
8
Traditional Storage Management is Inefficient
? ? ?
!
!
#
!
#
!
#
#
!
Vendor
#
In a connected world why
can’t vendors proactively monitor
customer deployed systems?
With modern data analytics tools
can vendors predict and prevent
problems before they occur?
9
Nimble Approach To Storage Management
InfoSight Cloud-Based Management
Nimble Approach
Comprehensive
Telemetry
Analysis and
Automation
Customer Benefits
Proactive
Wellness
Storage Management
SaaS Offering
Community
Learning
Leveraging pervasive network connectivity and big data analytics to automate support and enable cloud-based management
10
Nimble’s Adaptive Flash Platform Value Proposition
Nimble Adaptive Flash Platform
CASL™
Flash-optimized file
system software
InfoSight™
Cloud-based
management/support
Efficiency
Scale-to-Fit
Integrated Protection
Ease of Operations
Significantly better
performance/$ and capacity/$
Non-disruptive, flexible
scaling to massive scale
Rapid backup
and recovery
Predictive support and
operational simplicity
11
SmartStack Converged Infrastructure Solutions
SmartStack
Product Integration
Collaborative Support
Multiple Reference Architectures
12
Positioned To Lead In The Flash-Optimized Era
1980s
DAS
1995+
Networked Storage
Today
Flash-Optimized Storage
2013 TAM
~$40B
Positioned to emerge as the market leader in storage by
Opportunity
a ground
up redesign
of storage
delivering
thefornext
generation
storage
platform
Illustrative Customer Case Studies
Customer Case Study: Transforming Storage Efficiency at a Large Bank
Challenges
§  Storage costs were 30% of
the capital budget
Competitor Hybrid
Disk-Flash Solution
• 
• 
Nimble
6 Racks
Phase 1:
Exchange
½ Rack
§  Core project drivers:
• 
VS.
Performance scaling
Storage budget
Datacenter footprint
3 Racks
Phase 2:
SQL
Databases
¾ Rack
Nimble Advantage
§  1.5x usable capacity and 50%
lower capital costs
§  10x lower power and cooling costs
§  Dramatically simpler storage
management
§  2.5x performance and 2x usable
capacity at much lower capital costs
§  75% lower power and cooling costs
§  Dramatically simpler storage
management
15
Customer Case Study: Consolidation and Efficiency at Global Oil & Gas Leader
Challenges
§  Global Energy leader with hundreds of
remote sites
§  Initial VDI project goal to consolidate
thousands of employee desktops at
hundreds of field locations
§  XenDesktop deployment with
incumbent storage experienced
serious performance issues, prompting
a competitive bake-off with Nimble
Nimble VDI Solution
§  3000 VDI users
§  64TB and 30K
IOPS on average
§  Price-performance: 72% lower cost per
IOPS
§  Cost of capacity: 37% compression,
coupled with low-cost, Nearline HDDs
§  50% lower recovery time for virtual PCs
§  Calls to help desk reduced dramatically
Nimble Expanded Use Cases
Phase 2: Exchange
§  11,500 mailboxes
§  ~60TB used
§  HA across two data centers
Phase 3: ESX Farm
§  600 VMs
§  Over 200 TBs across three
data centers
16
Customer Case Study: Fortune 50 Telecommunications Company
Challenges
§  Storage challenges in
meeting the needs of a highperformance Vertica cluster
-  Constant trade-off
between IO and capacity
-  Adding nodes to support
storage was not cost
effective
-  Lack of consolidated
provisioning and
management
-  Data protection difficult for
separate storage pools
Nimble Solution
§  Vertica cluster processing Billions
of events / hour
§  170TB capacity
§  Hourly snapshots
for data protection
Nimble Advantage
§  Reduced cost by reducing the
number of required HP Vertica nodes
-  Performance to meet the IO needs
of the analytics workload
-  Scale-to-fit architecture allows for
separately scaling IO or capacity
§  Consolidated storage management
§  Nimble snapshots, clones and
replication improve data protection
and eliminate risk
17
Customer Case Study: Leading Cloud Services Provider
Challenges
Nimble SmartStack
§  Service Provider with
presence across the US
Nimble Advantage
VMWare
§  Core drivers:
+
Datacenter consolidation
•  Rapid provisioning
•  Performance scaling
• 
Cisco
§  Large Telecom customer
with scaling challenges
prompted POC
+
Nimble
10G iSCSI
10G UCS
§  Much higher performance at
substantially lower capital costs:
§  Compression savings of 50% site-wide
§  High-density HDDs and more effective
use of flash optimize both performance
and capacity
§  Much simpler management and
faster on-boarding time
§  Current environment comprises over
600 TB (pre-compression) hosting
over 6000 VMs for hundreds of
customers and a variety of workloads
18
Transforming Data Protection at a Global Consulting Firm
Challenges
Rethinking infrastructure at
all of their 11 sites
Aging storage infrastructure in
their main data centers:
Boston and Chicago
Inadequate data protection in
9 remote sites:
Tapes for backup
•  Offsite tape copies for disaster recovery
• 
Nimble Approach
9 Remote Sites
§  Nimble chosen as the platform
for all 11 sites
§  Each site protected with hourly
snapshots for rapid recovery
§  Data replicated between offices
for cost-effective and simple DR
§  Significant savings on storage and
bandwidth
Boston
Data Center
Chicago
Data Center
19
Compelling Value Proposition
Global Office Products Company
Challenges
Competitor Solution
Nimble Solution
3 Racks of “Tier 1” storage
2 Nimble arrays
§  SQL Server, SAP applications
and other VMs using traditional
“Tier 1” Storage
§  Core project drivers:
–  Minimize data center
costs like power, cooling
–  Reduce storage
capacity costs
–  Reduce complexity
“Nimble has given us much more
flexibility with primary storage and data
protection and a much more resilient
infrastructure – all at a much lower
cost.”
—IT Platform Lead
vs
40TB Usable
Storage in 126U
59TB Usable
Storage in 6U
9X Reduction in Storage Costs
20X Reduction Footprint
50% Savings in Data Protection Costs
20
Compelling Value Proposition
Fortune 500 Engineering & Construction Company
Challenges
Nimble Advantage
Competitor Solution
§  Performance up by 2X, despite using virtual servers
§  80% physical servers; EMC & NetApp SAN
§  Data reduction of 2.3X lowers $/GB substantially
§  Struggled with performance for Autonomy
e-discovery & Oracle data warehouse
§  Snapshots -based backup eliminated backup window
§  Application backups taking over 10 hours
§  Power, cooling and space costs lower by $3,500/month
Pre-Nimble Environment
Primary SAN: 2 Racks
§  Replication for DR
Nimble SmartStack
Prod (Houston)
DR (Austin)
Daily backup to tape
§  6U!
§  110TB with 2.3X
data reduction
§  30 days of
snapshots
Replication
DR with 90 days
of replicated
snapshots
21