Skip to content


Apple: A strategy dinosaur?

A rather brilliant article in iMedia Connection (http://bit.ly/anVI4W) highlights some of the flaws in Apple’s strategy, and refers to what many partners (developer especially), perceive as pure arrogance.

Among the noteworthy points made are:

“Apple’s desire to control its marketplace has made it a poor choice for developers, even when it offers a large market. Having a large base of customers makes Apple initially attractive, but its poor support for the developer community eventually forces smaller niche players out.”

“When Steve Jobs announced MS Office for the Mac to a stunned audience in 1997, he looked very uncomfortable about it. He justified it by saying Apple existed in an eco-system and could not sustain the Mac as a closed platform. His iPhone strategy seems to have forgotten this painful lesson.”

“The iPhone may be popular now, but history has shown us that the days of competing operating systems eventually give way to more open platforms. The world will not tolerate three or four competing smartphone systems with roughly equal market share. Eventually, one system will dominate. Apple’s iPhone OS and BlackBerry’s RIM are not candidates for that role because they’re not available for other phones, which only leaves Google’s Android and Microsoft’s WinOS as candidates for global domination. “

“Apple’s attitude to developers looks to me as if Apple feels it is doing developers a favor by allowing them the privilege of access to their customers.”

The author goes on to say that while Apple designs great products, their business strategy is stuck in the 1970s.  As someone who has experienced the pain of dealing with Apple’s almighty decision making power on what goes in their store or not, I can certainly agree with a lot of the points being made.

Google and Microsoft’s challenge of course, is to try and emulate the success of the eco system model of Apple, but in an open environment. This is challenging given proliferation of app stores and mobile operators somewhat confusion about what role they are going to play in this (case in point T-Mobile USA’s recent closing of their developer program).

In the end, it comes down to the value proposition proposed to end users: http://bit.ly/SmartPhoneValueProp. Apple may have a lead now, but a case can be made that this advantage will be short lived.

Please chime in with your thoughts in the comments section!

Posted in The Business of Mobile.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


Wedbush: Trouble looming for mobile navigation companies

Although hardly a surprise, since Google maps now comes with turn by turn directions for free and Nokia and Microsoft is giving away their navigation for free, the company you may not want to work for lately are the ones in the Personal Navigation Device market.  Companies like Garmin, TomTom and Navman have seen their business being upended in the last few years, with a mix of positive (increasingly cars and other products come with navigation systems built in) with the negative (your product is essentially being given away for free).  Even if you are a car manufacturer today, you have to wonder whether the value add is to put navigation in, or simply have an elegant device holder for your phone, and rather just integrate bluetooth for better sound and add a charger.  So there is no surprise that Wedbush predicts severe trouble for the market in their recent report:

Worldwide PND Shipments and ASPs 2005-2013E

(Source: IDC August 2009 and Wedbush Securities)

The strategies taken by the companies differ. Garmin focuses on in-dash (cars, boat, fitness equipment), while TomTom focuses on services. Personally I believe more in TomTom’s strategy, although it will require continous innovation in tems of what they provide.  Yes, I admit I forked over EUR10 to have Homer Simpson tell me where to drive, and while innovative, they will need to think way beyond what they actually provide as a company. The voice addition borders humor and entertainment, and as a PND company, you are perhaps not in the direction finding business, but in the travel companion business, whatever those needs may be (lessons can certainly be learned from GM’s OnStar here).  This will be an exciting space to watch from a corporate strategy perspective, and for sure, only the ones able to adapt quickly will come out of this well.

Posted in The Business of Mobile.

Tagged with , , , , .


Sharing is caring? Increased sharing creates noise for marketers

The concept of product reviews and sharing what you do is hardly a new concept in the online world. But with start-ups like Foursquare, Gowalla and Blippy, whose sole concept is built around sharing an experience tied to a brand or a place, the lines between recommendation focused players like Yelp and the barrage of messages from other services are starting to blur.

The New York Times points to the fact that privacy concerns have gone with the wind, as the social network scene is now used to share product purchases. In a quest for their 15 minutes (or more) of fame, there seems to be the perception that people really want to know what you do. One eager “sharer” said:

It’s very important to me to push out my character and hopefully my good reputation as far as possible, and that means being open,” he said, dismissing any privacy concerns by adding, “I simply have nothing to hide.”

The sharer, a Mr Brooks, refers to his “character” as an important online brand that has a following that really wants to know what he is up to. And  no doubt he follows his stats on Twitter or elsewhere to see how many people read about his experience standing in line for the iPad (not that I know if he did, but it seems like that guess is not far off). But is this wave of sharing providing real value to marketers?

Forrester identified a certain group of people called “Mass Influencers”. The group is divided into “Mass Connectors” who provide a lot of impressions about brands in the social media sphere, and “Mass Mavens”, who create and share content about the services. No doubt you want to have people speak favorably about your brand, but with the level of noise about shared brand experiences increasing to a deafening level, at what point do we simply start to ignore this group of people, and revert back to the people who we used to rely on advice for – our friends?  (No, not our Facebook friends, I mean the “real” ones, that you physically see at least a couple of times a month).

I really question the value of spending marketing dollars on the Mass Influencers without really understanding how and whom they are supposedly influencing.  I do think online product reviews are useful, and statistics from the Social Shopping Study confirms that this is the case. 50% of respondents in the survey confirmed that they read between four and seven reviews before making a purchase, and that portion of consumers has been fairly consistent over the past few years. But also interesting in this study is that only 6% of the people surveyed rank social media sites as places to research products.

So while tweets and check-ins may provide useful SEO opportunities for brands, they fall short of providing the true measurement of success: recommendations that lead to a purchase. Marketers are better off focusing on identifying “hyper influencers”, those that are considered trusted advisors by friends and strangers, as well as serious online review sites.  But the key would be to identify the influencers in a micro-setting, i.e. those that influence a small close knit group of friends, who may not have a blog touting their expertise in gadgets or travel, but rather are seemed like someone great at giving advice to their friends. Now there is a start-up idea…

Posted in Social Media Marketing.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .