Jump to content

Yeah, called it a year ago


Guest valueInv
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest valueInv

Take a look at Motorola's earnings this year. Commoditization is a great strategy only as long as your partners are bearing its costs.

 

Chances are very high that Google will create a patent pool and give access to patents to Android handset makers and try to protect the whole ecosystem. The way software patents work, everybody is infringing a bunch of patents of everybody else, the question isn't "if", it only depends if you want to sue. I suggest you listen to this: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack

 

The 1B revenue for Android is missing the point. Android is much, much more valuable than that long term (both as a revenue source and as a moat), and mobile searches, from the data that I've seen, aren't cannibalising desktop searches much at all (they are very complementary - ie. more during lunch breaks, the evenings and weekends, while desktop searches are more during working hours).

 

Motorola isn't just a bunch of patents, though, it can be a profitable business that can now become better than it has been so far thanks to access to Google's talent and money.

 

If Google defends its new competitors with its patent portfolio, it will help them and Motorola will lose even more market share. For a business this is not profitable already, that would hurt. If on the other hand, Google favors its Motorola division to produce better integrated handsets, it is likely to anger the ecosystem resulting in more fragmentation and forking and weakening of the Android ecosytem. I think Microsoft is the biggest gainer here.

 

The 1B revenue IS the point for investors. That 1B includes Googles IOS revenues, not just Android. If that is all that it can bring in with 50% market share , what does it make assuming 100% marketshare 3 years down the line?  What do the slim margins among Android handset makers do to Google's margins? Android has succeeded by producing cheaper handsets. Google has taken a commoditization approach to win while the handset makers bore the slim margins. Now, Google also bears the cost of its commoditization.

 

It is a big leap to conclude from the timing of searches that revenue is not being cannibalized. How do you know that a search being performed while standing in line at Starbucks at 8:00 would not have been performed at 9:30 on the desktop, if mobile search didn't exist?

 

Google has just hung a dead weight around its neck. It now has to deal with integration issues, culture clashes, regulatory issues and more. For a company that built itself on efficiency and nimbleness, this is a big issue.

 

BTW, what happens to this?

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904823804576500544082214566.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us_business&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fxml%2Frss%2F3_7014+%28WSJ.com%3A+US+Business%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

goog doesn't care about what the conventional wisdom is on the moto deal. they don't care what the bloggers think, what the pundits say, what the wall street seers predict. this was a low risk bite size deal for goog. they wanted the patents. if the hardware happens to work out, then fine. that's frosting on the cake. if it doesn't, they will flip some designs and manf assets to korea china or taiwan. they will sell the set top business. it came with a bunch of cash. a very low risk way to acquire some patent depth. the stock has done fine since they did that deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

goog doesn't care about what the conventional wisdom is on the moto deal. they don't care what the bloggers think, what the pundits say, what the wall street seers predict. this was a low risk bite size deal for goog. they wanted the patents. if the hardware happens to work out, then fine. that's frosting on the cake. if it doesn't, they will flip some designs and manf assets to korea china or taiwan. they will sell the set top business. it came with a bunch of cash. a very low risk way to acquire some patent depth. the stock has done fine since they did that deal.

I'm not sure what this has to do with conventional wisdom or bloggers,etc. There are two issues here: patents and earnings. Let's see what happened in the past year.

 

Patents: I haven't seen Motorola win any lawsuits in the last year. They started filing lawsuits based on FRAND patents and added to the FTC and FCC legal trouble that Google already was in. The one non-FRAND patent lawsuit against Apple was mysteriously withdrawn. The other FRAND patent lawsuit in Germany was quickly settled for what is believed to be a nominal amount to ward off anti-trust trouble.

 

One the other hand, Motorola has lost patent lawsuits in MSFT, refused to settle and has had its devices banned both in the US and Germany. So instead of providing patent cover, Motorola has provided patent liability to Google.

 

There are plenty of ways for Google to buy a patent portfolio without exposing itself to operating losses. Interdigital has a large patent portfolio and just gave up trying to sell itself.

 

Earnings: Motorola lost $527M in operating income this quarter and will probably lose about a billion this year. Add that to the $12.5 B paid for the company. It is not a bite size deal as Motorola is 18% of revenues and is dragging Google's earnings down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

We were just talking about this:

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444592704578067012660157452.html

 

BTW, they do care about what bloggers, journalists talk about. Thats why there are articles about the insides of their data center and their mapping technology. Thats why they stage PR stunts like the skydiving thing for Google glasses, etc.

 

Take a look at how Apple communicates to the press and how Google does. You'll see the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've said this multiple times before as well, but this is exactly what's wrong with Android.

 

In my own experience owning an Android phone (which was a Motorolla phone), they stopped supporting Android updates on the phone after only 10 months after I bought the phone (with a 2-year contract). Then app developers updated their apps for the newest versions of Android, which caused them to work horribly on the version of Android I had. Had use an Android phone that had become close to a brick for nearly a year. Sounds like they've done very little to resolve the fragmentation problems with Android.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

the average user doesn't even know what fragmentation is. they go into the store see a phone, like a phone, buy a phone and take it home and use the phone. they have no idea that the phone might be updated or can be updated. feature phones never used to be upgraded. my Dad bought a droid phone. when I visited him I saw he had many apps that needed updating and he had an OS update waiting for him. So I did all the updates. Know what he said? he complained that things didn't look the same as before. He has yet to contact me asking why android is So fragmented.

 

Yes a small percentage of vocal users who do know about this stuff claim fragmentation is killing android. but the numbers of activations of android suggest otherwise. it's growing like a weed. products that grow like weeds don't have issues with consumers. it suggests that consumers find them of high value and utility.

 

if you do care about updates you have a choice to buy a nexus phone. you will get all the updates you want. you could also buy an Apple phone and pay their tax and you will get to update your phone. unfortunately you will get the "update" without getting all the features. but at least you can claim you are using a platform that is not fragmented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

the average user doesn't even know what fragmentation is. they go into the store see a phone, like a phone, buy a phone and take it home and use the phone. they have no idea that the phone might be updated or can be updated. feature phones never used to be upgraded. my Dad bought a droid phone. when I visited him I saw he had many apps that needed updating and he had an OS update waiting for him. So I did all the updates. Know what he said? he complained that things didn't look the same as before. He has yet to contact me asking why android is So fragmented.

 

So Motorola is offering a $100 rebate because they want to spread Google's wealth around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the average user doesn't even know what fragmentation is. they go into the store see a phone, like a phone, buy a phone and take it home and use the phone. they have no idea that the phone might be updated or can be updated. feature phones never used to be upgraded. my Dad bought a droid phone. when I visited him I saw he had many apps that needed updating and he had an OS update waiting for him. So I did all the updates. Know what he said? he complained that things didn't look the same as before. He has yet to contact me asking why android is So fragmented.

 

Yes a small percentage of vocal users who do know about this stuff claim fragmentation is killing android. but the numbers of activations of android suggest otherwise. it's growing like a weed. products that grow like weeds don't have issues with consumers. it suggests that consumers find them of high value and utility.

 

if you do care about updates you have a choice to buy a nexus phone. you will get all the updates you want. you could also buy an Apple phone and pay their tax and you will get to update your phone. unfortunately you will get the "update" without getting all the features. but at least you can claim you are using a platform that is not fragmented.

 

Agreed. I can't get my girlfriend to update her SGS2 to ICS because she likes it the way it is. I think most people like a phone that will just work. If you really want the latest and greatest, root your phone and install any number of custom roms. I think most of the complaining about fragmentation is coming from bloggers and sudo developers who use/make custom roms and can't enable new flavors of android without phone drivers spoon fed to them by the phone manufacturers. The technically inclined may cry the loudest, but I have never seen a facebook status from someone complaining their phone is not getting the latest google update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the average user doesn't even know what fragmentation is. they go into the store see a phone, like a phone, buy a phone and take it home and use the phone. they have no idea that the phone might be updated or can be updated. feature phones never used to be upgraded. my Dad bought a droid phone. when I visited him I saw he had many apps that needed updating and he had an OS update waiting for him. So I did all the updates. Know what he said? he complained that things didn't look the same as before. He has yet to contact me asking why android is So fragmented.

 

Yes a small percentage of vocal users who do know about this stuff claim fragmentation is killing android. but the numbers of activations of android suggest otherwise. it's growing like a weed. products that grow like weeds don't have issues with consumers. it suggests that consumers find them of high value and utility.

 

if you do care about updates you have a choice to buy a nexus phone. you will get all the updates you want. you could also buy an Apple phone and pay their tax and you will get to update your phone. unfortunately you will get the "update" without getting all the features. but at least you can claim you are using a platform that is not fragmented.

 

Agreed. I can't get my girlfriend to update her SGS2 to ICS because she likes it the way it is. I think most people like a phone that will just work. If you really want the latest and greatest, root your phone and install any number of custom roms. I think most of the complaining about fragmentation is coming from bloggers and sudo developers who use/make custom roms and can't enable new flavors of android without phone drivers spoon fed to them by the phone manufacturers. The technically inclined may cry the loudest, but I have never seen a facebook status from someone complaining their phone is not getting the latest google update.

 

However, it is much more difficult for app *developers* to target a platform like that.  Two reasons:

 

1) The aforementioned fragmentation makes the platform a nightmare to develop for in the same consistant way--your app may work, but certain APIs may be broken, things will look "wrong", bug reports will be numerous, and if you tried to be professional, it would be very difficult to test your code on the variety of phones out there.  Testing matters.

2) There have been indications that a far lower percentage of people buy software on Android.  Not only is there much higher piracy

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/176214/The_Android_piracy_problem.php

http://keyeslabs.com/joomla/blogs/i-think-im-becoming-an-android/136-android-the-perfect-piracy-storm

 

, but as you've indicated here, there are lots of people who never update anything, and so they won't be buying new software either.

 

And if we were to quote Ballmer, a platform's success hinges on "Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers." While many people won't be buying stuff, the margin usually does make or break the overall success of a platform. 

 

Misc issues with not updating the software:

 

1) Giant security issues.  The big viruses of the future will probably be targeting mobile devices.

2) Users have little choice for getting the touted "new android features" without buying a new phone.  That may or may not work; I have heard of just as many people switching back to iOS from Android as the other way around, after dealing with hardware problems or software bugs on Android.

 

I certainly see no reason that Android shouldn't essentially own the lower end of the cellphone market--it's much more effective than rolling your own os or licensing another one for the low-margin cellphone maker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the average user doesn't even know what fragmentation is. they go into the store see a phone, like a phone, buy a phone and take it home and use the phone. they have no idea that the phone might be updated or can be updated. feature phones never used to be upgraded. my Dad bought a droid phone. when I visited him I saw he had many apps that needed updating and he had an OS update waiting for him. So I did all the updates. Know what he said? he complained that things didn't look the same as before. He has yet to contact me asking why android is So fragmented.

 

Yes a small percentage of vocal users who do know about this stuff claim fragmentation is killing android. but the numbers of activations of android suggest otherwise. it's growing like a weed. products that grow like weeds don't have issues with consumers. it suggests that consumers find them of high value and utility.

 

if you do care about updates you have a choice to buy a nexus phone. you will get all the updates you want. you could also buy an Apple phone and pay their tax and you will get to update your phone. unfortunately you will get the "update" without getting all the features. but at least you can claim you are using a platform that is not fragmented.

 

Agreed. I can't get my girlfriend to update her SGS2 to ICS because she likes it the way it is. I think most people like a phone that will just work. If you really want the latest and greatest, root your phone and install any number of custom roms. I think most of the complaining about fragmentation is coming from bloggers and sudo developers who use/make custom roms and can't enable new flavors of android without phone drivers spoon fed to them by the phone manufacturers. The technically inclined may cry the loudest, but I have never seen a facebook status from someone complaining their phone is not getting the latest google update.

 

Same here, I was trying to upgrade my SGS2 to ICS, but there is on easy way to do it, and ICS seems to be running slower on SGS2, so I decided not to upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

 

However, it is much more difficult for app *developers* to target a platform like that.  Two reasons:

 

1) The aforementioned fragmentation makes the platform a nightmare to develop for in the same consistant way--your app may work, but certain APIs may be broken, things will look "wrong", bug reports will be numerous, and if you tried to be professional, it would be very difficult to test your code on the variety of phones out there.  Testing matters.

2) There have been indications that a far lower percentage of people buy software on Android.  Not only is there much higher piracy

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/176214/The_Android_piracy_problem.php

http://keyeslabs.com/joomla/blogs/i-think-im-becoming-an-android/136-android-the-perfect-piracy-storm

 

, but as you've indicated here, there are lots of people who never update anything, and so they won't be buying new software either.

 

And if we were to quote Ballmer, a platform's success hinges on "Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers." While many people won't be buying stuff, the margin usually does make or break the overall success of a platform. 

 

Misc issues with not updating the software:

 

1) Giant security issues.  The big viruses of the future will probably be targeting mobile devices.

2) Users have little choice for getting the touted "new android features" without buying a new phone.  That may or may not work; I have heard of just as many people switching back to iOS from Android as the other way around, after dealing with hardware problems or software bugs on Android.

 

I certainly see no reason that Android shouldn't essentially own the lower end of the cellphone market--it's much more effective than rolling your own os or licensing another one for the low-margin cellphone maker.

 

 

this would be a great argument if it could be proven that android is a) either missing apps and b) that developers developers developers are not developing for android. both are not true. android has all the "name" apps already, and developers are targeting android either first or second for future apps. why wouldn't they? it has the numbers. as for android being low end, again the facts simply don't support it as samung has turned the High End Android Galaxy brand into one of the two best products in the smartphone world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

this would be a great argument if it could be proven that android is a) either missing apps and b) that developers developers developers are not developing for android. both are not true. android has all the "name" apps already, and developers are targeting android either first or second for future apps. why wouldn't they? it has the numbers. as for android being low end, again the facts simply don't support it as samung has turned the High End Android Galaxy brand into one of the two best products in the smartphone world.

Try to find Sparrow or Snapseed on Android. Also, take a guess why I mention those names.

Also, let me know how much later was Instagram available on Android after IOS.

How about Rockmelt?

 

Take a look:

http://blog.flurry.com/bid/86277/Microsoft-May-Be-Closer-Than-It-Appears-in-Android-s-Rearview-Mirror

 

What platform has the highest app starts? By what margin?

 

Facts, indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

gmail sucks on ios. and so does maps / navigation. way better experience on android. and those apps are used way more often than those apps you mentioned. goog owns sparrow now. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

gmail sucks on ios. and so does maps / navigation. way better experience on android. and those apps are used way more often than those apps you mentioned. goog owns sparrow now. :)

 

Your post had to do with whether Android was missing apps. I showed to two popular app developers that were not developing for Android, that Google had to buy to get them to develop for Android. I also showed you that app starts have been twice as much on IOS as Android.

 

Here's more:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57346115-37/iphone-app-sales-kicking-app-on-android-market-says-study/#!

 

I showed you facts, you tried to change to topic to "gmail and maps suck".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest rimm_never_sleeps

android is not missing any important apps. it may be missing some inconsequential apps that you mentioned. and there are probably alternatives that are just as good anyway. But what's more important is that two of the most used apps by smartphone users are way way better on android than IOS. that's what matters. not apps nobody but you has ever heard of. android has plenty of developer support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

android is not missing any important apps. it may be missing some inconsequential apps that you mentioned. and there are probably alternatives that are just as good anyway. But what's more important is that two of the most used apps by smartphone users are way way better on android than IOS. that's what matters. not apps nobody but you has ever heard of. android has plenty of developer support.

About half, according to Flurry.

 

BTW, Snapseed is the most popular photo editing app on IOS. It was the highest rated and regularly featured by Apple in the app store, not some app no one has heard of. Why do you think Google bought them?

 

Yeah, #facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest valueInv

gmail sucks on ios. and so does maps / navigation. way better experience on android. and those apps are used way more often than those apps you mentioned. goog owns sparrow now. :)

 

Your post had to do with whether Android was missing apps. I showed to two popular app developers that were not developing for Android, that Google had to buy to get them to develop for Android. I also showed you that app starts have been twice as much on IOS as Android.

 

Here's more:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57346115-37/iphone-app-sales-kicking-app-on-android-market-says-study/#!

 

I showed you facts, you tried to change to topic to "gmail and maps suck".

They had paid out $4B up till this Jan. By September, they have paid out $6.5B:

 

http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/25/apple-sets-all-time-record-for-quarterly-app-store-sales-700k-apps-275k-for-ipad-6-5b-paid-to-devs/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...