Apple

Above Avalon Podcast Episode 147: A Faster Bumper Car

In episode 147, we take a look at the changing competitive landscape facing the giants (Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft). Comparing the situation to bumper cars, we discuss why Google and Facebook have the slower cars that are no longer able to hide within the traffic. Additional topics include deep dives into three competitive battles in particular: Apple vs. Google, Apple vs. Facebook, and Amazon vs. Facebook vs. Google.

To listen to episode 147, go here

The complete Above Avalon podcast episode archive is available here

What the Beats is Going on? Thoughts on Apple Acquiring Beats

Apple is reportedly interested in acquiring Beats for $3.2 billion. 

Here’s what I’m thinking:

1) Separate the rumored deal price from the transaction.  It’s a lot of money for Apple and in many ways focusing too much on the money will make it difficult to focus on the underlining acquisition target. 

2) What is Beats?  While everyone seems to have a different answer, to me Beats is a start-up music company that is after one thing: music mind share. Think of music and Beats comes to mind, right? No? Well give it a few more years and the growing popularity of those “obnoxiously large” headphones may change things.  Co-founded by intelligent musicians (and businessmen) who “get” music, Beats knows what it is doing and more importantly what it’s after.  Headphones, stereo equipment, music streaming service, and the list goes on. Beats wants to own music. 

3) Apple is Afraid. I suspect Apple feels threatened as its mind share for music is declining. The iPod died on behalf of its older sibling, the iPhone, and following its death, the grip Apple had on music has started to slip. Think of digital music, and Pandora or Spotify may come to mind. Beats could very well be on the same path of music stardom. This past holiday shopping season, Beats headphones were everywhere (and people were buying them in droves). Walk down the street and you could tell when someone was wearing Beats. For the first time, the white EarPod was being threatened. Who knows what things would look like in a few years. Apple would be looking to change that with this acquisition. I suspect Apple is interested in buying Beats to gain music mind share.  

4) Similar Cultures. Beats and Apple share similar cultures where passion is the ultimate driver. While there would undoubtedly be segments or pieces of Beats that Apple will shutter, Beats could very easily represent a decently sized (fewer than 200 people) division within the Apple system. Sure, this would mark a departure from the way things have been, but judging from Disney’s success, sometimes you have to let the past go and embrace the future. 

5) Let’s go back to price. I think Apple is overpaying for Beats. Recent valuations pegged the music streaming service at around $100 million with the entire company worth a reportedly $1 billion last year. While additional details may come out in the coming days I suspect Apple is overpaying to avoid others from coming in and competing over price. It’s a lot of money for any company, and regardless of how much cash Apple has in its bank account, it’s still a lot of money. To me this means Apple is serious about this bet.  

6) Lots of unanswered questions.

- Will Apple actually promote the Beats brand post acquisition? Such an idea is still hard to grasp, but maybe they would have to in order to maintain a gripe on the music mind share they are acquiring.  Is the reason Beats headphones are popular because they aren’t Apple branded?  If I had to bet I would say Apple walks a thin line introducing new Apple-branded music product, while also keeping the Beats brand around.  Such an idea is still hard to swallow though…

- Will there be a Beats brain drain (employees leave) and does it even matter?

- How will this impact future Apple products? I suspect we are going to see Apple attempt a very significant push at a true music streaming service where I can have any song, when I want it (NOT RADIO), wherever I want it…and it would be free for iOS users signed up for Apple’s new mobile payment system.  

- Will this open the floodgates to additional Apple acquisitions?  If the answer is yes, then we may be entering a new era in tech M&A as the biggest tech company in existence is officially an acquirer (I don’t think this is the case though). 

Acquiring Beats would be a new type of transaction for Apple. While there are similarities to previous acquisitions, there are just as many differences and for the first time we may be seeing Apple “doing what is right” - fighting for its survival. Apple wants to own music

14 hour update: After plenty of Twitter discussions and thought, the only additional comments I have include:

1) Jimmy Iovine may play a big role. If the $3.2 billion price tag holds up, it becomes obvious that Apple is paying for intangibles (branding, music industry relationships) and not current products or services.   In essence, Apple would be buying the music industry - something that Apple would not be able to do organically. Iovine has been critical of iTunes and it’s possible Apple wants him to revamp iTunes and bring the service into a new era (with the full support of the music industry).  

2) Would Apple replace the iTunes brand with Beats? Is it possible for a declining consumer electronics brand (iTunes) to turn around and regain its strength? Maybe the only way for Apple to regain its grip on music is to update its branding from iTunes to Beats (among other things).  In such a case, a $3 billion price tag doesn’t seem as crazy. 

Samsung’s Crisis of Design 2.0

Samsung unveiled its second attempt at wearables, along with its latest flagship phone, earlier this week at MWC. I was not impressed and I am growing more confident that Samsung not only has another “crisis of design”, but will also soon face major headaches from competing Android OEMs.  I think we are on the verge of a new phase in mobile phone hardware: Samsung competitors will finally be able to find a footing and begin to attack the giant.  Meanwhile, I suspect Apple has already placed Samsung in the same drawer as Microsoft; irrelevant. Tim Cook and company is marching to a completely different beat.

1) The Galaxy Fit looks awful. A curved AMOLED touch screen with a huge piece of plastic on its underside attached to a Modern Glam (plastic) watch strap.  I’m having a hard time seeing what is so “beautiful” or “pretty” about Samsung’s new fitness device, to quote a few easily amused tech bloggers. The company’s business model is not dependent on good design and few would suggest otherwise, but I struggle to understand how people can look at the Galaxy Fit and be even mildly impressed by such a horrendous product. One tech blog went so far as to say the Galaxy Fit is a “smartly designed fitness band”.  It’s a piece of curved glass set on top of a bunch of plastic with an extremely awkward user experience and interface.  Smartly designed?

 2) Samsung Galaxy S5.  Samsung’s flagship phone now comes in gold and has a fingerprint scanner. While the joke would typically stop there and many would say “copying a good artist is a pretty good strategy”, Samsung didn’t even copy well.  The gold color is the wrong shade of gold (Modern Glam gold?) and the fingerprint scanner doesn’t work.   I really don’t think I need to say much more about Samsung’s new flagship phone. I suspect Samsung will unveil the real Galaxy S5 this May?  Interestingly, Apple was very quiet this week versus last year’s PR push leading up to the Galaxy S4 launch.  I wonder why…

3) Samsung is a fish out of water without new Apple inspiration.  Samsung is struggling.  The easy smart phone growth achieved by simply shipping an alternative to iPhone (bigger screen) is drying up and with no clear path to additional revenue or earnings growth, the company amusingly jumped into wearables. The Galaxy Gear was downright disgusting, while the Galaxy Fit isn’t far behind. Samsung likes to throw around the “we give consumers what they want” meme and I am left wondering who was asking for something like the Galaxy Gear or Galaxy Fit?   Samsung is throwing a lot of poop against the wall and desperately hoping something sticks. While some may label such a business strategy as acceptable, I have my doubts that consumers are going to stand by a company that is willing to ship products that merely represent different batches of wall poop.

4) Samsung’s credibility is taking a hit. Last year I noticed a few of my acquaintances made the switch from iPhone to Samsung.  The usual reason given for such a move involved wanting a change or simply being bored by iPhone.  Interestingly, on follow-up discussions in recent weeks, these switchers are now regretting their move away from iPhone due to Samsung’s plastic and subpar build quality.  More than a few people on Twitter tell me the same thing about friends or family being disappointed with their Samsung phones. The amount of negative feedback caught me by surprise.  Interestingly, only a few hours after introducing the Galaxy S5, Samsung rumor blogs were talking about a new Samsung phone coming out in May that actually wasn’t made of cheap plastic. Have we reached a point where even Samsung realizes the “not an iPhone”  plastic gold Urban Glam option probably isn’t going to do much in terms of winning converts from competing platforms?  Consumers are starting to notice what Samsung is actually shipping and the grumblings are getting louder.

5) Samsung competitors are foaming at the mouth.  The long-standing joke is that the best Android phones available in the market (never a phone made by Samsung) don’t sell well because no one cares about anything other than Apple and Samsung.  I think that may change. After this week, I am becoming confident that consumers are going to stop being passive and begin seeking out alternatives to Samsung in the form of HTC, Sony, Nokia, Lenovo, or countless of other Asian OEMs, all of which are making significant progress in shipping attractive phones at attractive prices (I would include Nexus, but Tony needs to help Google rework distribution). In terms of hardware specs, most of these phones are already at parity and with several Samsung competitors now focusing on hardware design; consumers will simply have fewer reasons to instantly turn to Samsung. Whereas in the past, Samsung might have been the default choice for Android, I suspect that lead will start to slip. In addition, Samsung recently announced that they will reduce their advertising and marketing budget as mobile phone profits decline (not exactly the best timing for such a move). While smaller mobile hardware companies individually lack the ability to compete against Samsung, and just the thought of going up against Samsung can scare many executives into a cold chill, I think each competitor can take a bite out of the giant which can collectively create serious damage. To succeed against Samsung: 1) Focus on branding 2) Save or raise as much capital as you can and throw it into marketing 3) Narrow your distribution focus 4) Figure out why someone should buy your phone. The challenge is significant and Samsung will not stand still, but 2014 is the year. Wait any longer and limited resources may not allow another fight in the future.  

Bonus - iWatch Implications from Galaxy Fit. The iWatch will not look like the Galaxy Fit and the iWatch will certainly not operate like the Galaxy Fit. The best way to think about this would be envisioning a small table in Jony’s design lab with various iWatch prototypes. The Galaxy Fit version (simple rectangular curved piece of glass positioned on a plastic watch strap) would be instantly cast off as a no, if it even would be positioned as a possible prototype in the first place.  I highly doubt the iWatch will include a strap/buckle or a thick piece of bulging glass. The device won’t depend on an awkward user experience where you have to rotate your head and arm just to look at the device. In summary: Look at the Galaxy Fit and you now know what the iWatch won’t be.

I Like Apple's iPhone Strategy

I felt Apple did a good job today. For the first time Apple will be selling two brand new phones, including one for under $100 in the U.S. A brand new iPhone for under $100. I wouldn’t underestimate the impact of such a feat. 

While there were some interesting technologies introduced, including a fingerprint scanner and a motion coprocessor, I have learned to control my long-term predictions on what such technologies may mean for Apple’s product line. Time will tell if such innovations become major cornerstones in future Apple products. 

The most controversial aspect of today’s event was iPhone pricing. I see a schism developing among the tech punditry. On one hand, there is the belief that market share is king and Apple must address the bottom of the market because developers will begin to focus on Android’s sheer numbers instead of iOS. On the other side, where I stand, market share is not created equal. It is okay if Apple doesn’t address the lower end of the market since five consumers who don’t buy mobile apps or content is not equal to one who does. Looking at today’s events, I think Apple is doing the right thing gradually moving down market (iPhone 4 and 4S have not been discontinued). This strategy will only expand in coming years. With approximately 400M-500M (and growing) active iOS users with credit cards, I view the iOS ecosystem as now self-sustaining, capable of app innovation as long as the hardware and software back developers up.  If I changed sides and instead only looked at market share, I’m sure I would have been championing Symbian, then Blackberry, and now Android. Market share is not everything. 

Moving to more minor topics, Apple is still addicted to case money, now selling iPhone 5s and 5c cases. Selling cases is a good and easy business decision and judging from the popularity of iPhone cases, Apple will make a decent amount of profit (and margin) from going down that road.  Apple also announced it will give away $40 of software with new iPhone and iPad purchases. While I am not a big user of Apple’s mobile productivity apps, quite a few people are and I suspect there will be many happy iOS users. 

There are still plenty of questions remaining about Apple and strategy. 

Did Apple’s keynote contain a bit too much of tech jargon? Maybe. 

Will mainstream consumers accept iOS 7 without any major complaints? Maybe. 

Will Apple’s margin actually benefit from the new iPhone line? Maybe. 

Nevertheless, with a new flagship phone that has enough differentiation to stand out from competitors, a more value-oriented option for consumers with slightly different priorities, and the desire to maintain older iPhone models in order to address the mid-tier phone market, I like where Apple is sitting and the outlook for the iPhone business over the next 6-12 months.