Google’s grab for the smartphone market

Google’s Pixel smartphone is part of the company’s bid to exert greater control over the smartphone market.

This week Google released its latest smartphone, the Pixel, to mixed reviews. Controlling the most popular mobile operating system, Android, isn’t enough for the company.

As Microsoft found, just supplying the operating systems for smartphones isn’t enough to influence the market. Apple, along with Nokia and Blackberry before them, showed that the path to both controlling the segment and being profitable relies on having devices designed for their software.

Given the Pixel’s price point, it’s unclear how well it will do against the iPhone, Samsung’s models or the plethora of Chinese devices but for all the Android ecosystem’s players, having its controlling owner running in opposition to them can’t be comforting.

Again though Microsoft’s experience is instructive, and encouraging, for the broader Android community as Microsoft’s attempts to push out Windows CE devices failed dismally. For Google to be successful where Microsoft failed would require a degree of corporate discipline the search engine giant is not renown for.

In the Windows ecosystem, Microsoft strength was licensing and controlling access to the operating system. Android’s strength in the smartphone world is that Google doesn’t have the same veto power. To be able to exercise control over the market, Google needs a big device share.

Ultimately though the success of the Google Pixel smartphone will depend on how many users will adopt it. It may be time for another round of smartphone subsidy wars.

 

Samsung needs a win with the Galaxy 6 smartphone

Samsung are staking a lot on their new Galaxy 6 smartphone

Having seen its dominance of the smartphone market eroded by a resurgent Apple and a range of upstart Chinese vendors, Samsung has announced it will launch its Galaxy 6 smartphone on March 1 reports the Sammobile website.

The new phone is reported to boast a curved screen measuring somewhere between 5.1 and 5.3-inches a fingerprint sensor and a 20 mega-pixel camera, which compares well to the iPhone 6’s eight mega-pixel camera.

While the proposed specs are impressive, the company has a challenge ahead as consulting firm IDC reported its smartphone shipments dropped 11% year on year last quarter in an market that grew by quarter.

Top Five Smartphone Vendors, Shipments, Market Share and Year-Over-Year Growth, Q4 2014 Preliminary Data (Units in Millions)  source IDC Research

Vendor

4Q14 Shipment Volumes

4Q14 Market Share

4Q13 Shipment Volumes

4Q13 Market Share

Year-Over-Year Change

1. Samsung

75.1

20.01%

84.4

28.83%

-11.0%

2. Apple

74.5

19.85%

51.0

17.43%

46.0%

3. *Lenovo

24.7

6.59%

13.9

4.75%

77.9%

4. Huawei

23.5

6.25%

16.6

5.66%

41.7%

5. Xiaomi

16.6

4.42%

5.9

2.03%

178.6%

Others

160.9

42.9%

120.9

41.31%

33.1%

Total

375.2

100.0%

292.7

100.0%

28.2%

*Lenovo + Motorola

24.7

6.6%

19.5

6.7%

26.4%

While the numbers for the Chinese manufacturers are impressive, Apple’s shipments should also worry Samsung given the two companies are fighting for the top end consumers in the European and North America markets.

For Samsung  its smartphones form a central part of its Internet of Things strategy so the success of the Galaxy 6 is critical to the company’s future plans, particularly given the lukewarm reception to the Tizen based Z1 phone on the Indian market last month.

Samsung’s China Crisis

With Samsung struggling with both its high end Android smartphones and its lower priced Tizen devices as Chinese manufacturers like Lenovo, Xiaomi and Huawei steal market share, the company  desperately needs to hit the mark with the Galaxy 6.

Google as well has a stake in Samsung’s success as the Chinese manufacturers are increasingly turning to open source versions of Android for their smartphone systems. A flagship device for Android to counter the iPhone 6 is desperately needed to keep consumer and developer interest in the Google Play store and for Google’s consumer IoT ambitions.

The stakes are high for both Google and Samsung, the South Korean giant getting a mis-step with the Galaxy 6 could see it following the faded fortunes of its Japanese competitors.

Apple looks dangerous in the payment wars

Apple Pay is making big gains in the online space, however the battle is far from over.

Apple are making great gains in the online payment space but the battle with Google Android, PayPal and the banks to control the market is far from over.

One of the biggest business struggles this blog has been watching for the last five years is the battle over payment systems as banks, credit card companies, telcos and technologies vendors have jostled for control of what will probably the world’s most lucrative market by the end of the decade.

Apple were late to that fight with their Pay service only being released a few months ago however according to a report by ITG Investment Apple’s service is already ahead of PayPal in terms of usage among new adopters.

While PayPal have an impressive range of technologies, it’s clear they have found themselves wrong footed by Apple and have new companies like Stripe also challenging their market position.

Apple Pay may be getting the headlines, but at present Google Android still dominates the mobile commerce industry according to another research company Criteo.

In their State of Mobile Commerce report, Criteo claims that globally Android is well ahead in smartphone transactions. An interesting aspect of Criteo’s report is how far behind many nations such as Japan, South Korea and Germany the United States is in the take up of mobile commerce.

Criteo’s report shows the battle to control the e-commerce space is far from over, however if Apple Pay can grab a large chunk of the payments market then the company will have a strong hold on key part of global industry. It remains a high stakes and uncertain battle.

Potentially unwanted applications – what are we are installing on our smartphones?

Do we really understand what we are installing on our smartphones? Sophos Labs thinks potentially unwanted applications or PUAs are a growing problem.

One of the notable things about the technology industries is there are always new terms and concepts to discover.

During a visit to Sophos’ Oxford headquarters last month, the phrase ‘Potentially Unwanted Applications’ – or PUAs – raised its head.

PUAs come from the problem application developers have in making money out of apps or websites. The culture of free or cheap is so ingrained online that it’s extremely hard to make a living out of writing software.

As result, developers and their employers are engaging in some cunning tricks to get customers to download their apps and then to monetize them, particularly in the Android world which lacks the tight control Apple exercises over the iOS App Store.

“What’s interesting about Android,” says Sophos Labs’ Vice President President Simon Reed, “is it’s attracting aggressive commercialisation.”

The fascinating thing Reed finds about this ‘aggressive commercialisation’ is where the distinction lies between malware and monetisation and when does an app or developer cross that line.

Reed’s colleagues Vanja Svajcer & Sean McDonald explore where that line lies in a paper titled Classifying PUAs in the Mobile Environment which they submitted to the Virus Bulletin Conference last October.

In that paper Svajcer and McDonald discuss how these applications have developed, the motivations behind them and the challenge for anti virus companies like Sophos and Kaspersky in categorising and dealing with them.

The authors also flag that while the bulk of the revenue generated by these apps comes from advertising, there are serious privacy risks for users as developers try to monetize the data many of these packages scrape from the phones they’re installed on.

Svajcer and McDonald do note though that potentially unwanted applications aren’t really anything new, we could well classify many of the drive by downloads that plagued Windows 98 users at the beginning of the century as being PUAs.

What we do need to keep in mind though that what is driving the development of PUAs is users’ reluctance to pay for apps and that it’s going to take a big change in customer attitudes for this problem to go away.

For businesses, this is something managers are going to have to consider as they move their line of business applications onto mobile devices, as Marc Benioff proposed at the recent Dreamforce conference.

Sophos’ Simon Reed believes potentially unwanted apps won’t be such a problem in the workplace however. “Consumers may have a different tolerance towards PUAs than commercial organisations,” he says.

The prevalence of PUAs on mobile devices does underscore though just how careful organisations have to be with who and what can access their data. It’s another challenge for CIOs.

Samsung’s place in the market

How will Samsung respond to the challenges from Apple and Google?

Samsung’s announcement of a 7 billion dollar quarterly profit yesterday tops off a big 2012 for the Korean electronic manufacturer in which they became the world’s biggest mobile phone manufacturer after overtaking Nokia’s sales.

Android phones have been the great success for Samsung as other providers, including Google, have been comparatively slow to offer devices which give telcos the opportunity to claw back some margins they’ve been giving away to Apple over the last few year.

Despite these successes Samsung have a number of challenges ahead in 2013.

The biggest challenge is channel conflict with Google and Motorola working on launching an X-Phone which they hope will compete against both the iPhone and Samsung products

Channel conflict was always going to be a problem for handset manufacturers using the Android operating system when Google bought Motorola Mobility and now we’re seeing the effects of this.

The Koreans aren’t taking Google’s threat lying down having joined with Japanese manufacturers in a joint venture to develop a Linux based operating system for smartphones and Samsung expects to release Tizen equipped phones later in 2013.

Just on its own, the conflict with Google would be a problem for Samsung but the ongoing fights with Apple over tablet and smartphone patents continues to be a management distraction as well.

Apple’s relationship with the Korean conglomerate is a classic case of co-dependency as Samsung supply the bulk of the processors used in the iPad and iPhone. While Apple may want to kill the Samsung Galaxy tablet range, they have to be careful about going too far with a key supplier.

On the Asymco blog wonders if Apple’s announcement to bring some manufacturing back to the US may be part of a strategy to deal with the company’s dependence upon Samsung.

With threats from ‘frenemies’ like Apple and Google one of best defenses Samsung has is the companies varied range of products along with its willingness to strike out on its own into customers’ markets.

At the Computer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Samsung showed off its range of OLED TVs, laptops and other equipment alongside smartphones. That breadth of product frees the company from being locked into one or two markets.

Of course the best example of such an electronics conglomerate in the past was Japan’s Sony which is now truly lost and wandering in the business wilderness.

Whether Samsung can avoid Sony’s mistakes will be worth watching over the next few years, for Apple and Google it may determine who is the biggest competitor in the 2020s.

Comparing Management costs

How much are big corporations spending on administration and marketing costs?

Telecoms analyst site Asymco has a look at how much Samsung spends on marketing compared to other tech companies, particularly Apple, with Coca-Cola added as a sanity check from outside the bubble.

While the results are stunning with Samsung dwarfing the others, the Asymco story also touches on the total cost of sales and general administration expenses with the observation that, as a proportion of revenue, Sumsung’s are soaring while Apple’s are declining.

Teasing those figures out a bit more is interesting, when we track the sales and general administration costs of all the business we see that with the exception of Apple they’ve been remarkable flat in straight dollar terms over the last three years.

Of course this comparison is a little unfair as this is an absolute number, not as a proportion of revenue and as Horace Dediu points out in the Asymco posts Apple’s expenses as a ratio to sales has fallen.

For companies like HP, Dell and Microsoft where sales have been stagnant or falling it might be that the ratio is rising while spending is flat.

We’ll tease these figures out over the next few days.

In the meantime, the fact that Samsung is spending such an awesome amount on marketing should cause us to treat Android sales figures with caution as that spend in undoubtedly inflating their sales figures. More on that in the future as well.

Enter the Dragon

The development of Aliyun, a mobile phone software package, illustrates how Chinese industry is moving up the value chain.

Once up a time our parents laughed at the tinny little Japanese cars – in the 1960s companies with silly names like Toyota and Mazda could never threaten world giants like Chrysler, Ford and General Motors.

Within two decades the Japanese had moved their products up the value chain leaving their American and European competitors running scared while governments in western countries offered the new leaders of the manufacturing industries bribes to set up plants in their towns and states.

It was always obvious China would follow the same course as the Japanese, particularly given the country’s position as the world’s cheap labor supplier had a time limit thanks to the demographic effects of the 1970s One Child Policy.

So it’s no surprise that Alibaba, China’s biggest e-commerce service, has built its own mobile operating system to compete with Google’s Android.

If Aliyun follows the Japanese development path, the first version is terrible but within five years – the development cycle of software is a lot quicker than that of cars – Alibaba will be a viable competitor to Google and Android.

Chinese developers moving into the mobile market is terrible news for the also rans like Microsoft and Blackberry. As Apple dominate the premium mobile sector and Android the mass market, it’s very hard for those running third or lower to achieve the critical mass needed to be competitive. Aliyun makes it much harder for them to gain any traction in high growth developing markets.

An interesting aspect of the Wall Street Journal’s story is how Aliyun is aimed at the domestic Chinese market for the moment. This is part of China’s economy moving away from being overly reliant on exports, having locally made products that meet the needs and aspirations of a growing domestic economy is an important part of this process.

Exports though will remain an important part of the Chinese economy for most of this century and value added products like Aliyun will be important for China as the cheap labour advantage erodes over the next two decades.

Businesses who think their markets are protected because their quality is better than their Chinese competitors may be in for a nasty shock, just like the 20th Century auto makers who dismissed the Japanese were in the 1970s.

Whether Aliyun is successful or not, we’re once again seeing many of the facile assumptions about Chinese growth being tested as the country’s economy and society evolves.

Android’s corporate wins

Android is increasingly becoming the platform for business hardware.

Telstra’s launch of the second iteration of their T-Hub device and the Commonwealth Bank’s Albert tablet Point of Sale device are notable in their choice of operating system.

For the T-Hub, the first version was a bug plagued and slow proprietary system that which one of the reasons for the device’s market failure. Telstra’s second attempt runs on the Google Android system.

The Commonwealth Bank didn’t make Telstra’s mistake with the Albert device, instead choosing  the open source system from the beginning.

Choosing an open platform like Android makes it easier for the developers and company to support the device and develop new products. There’s also the advantage of thousands manufacturers supplying hardware that runs on Android.

If we compare the costs of developing a proprietary system and sourcing hardware for it to run on, the choice of an open system is almost irresistible.

For Microsoft, this adoption of Google Android by corporations is another blow to Windows’ dominance of the market, a few years ago all of these devices would have been running a version of Windows but Android is a cheaper, more flexible and better suited to most of the tasks required.

It could be worse for Microsoft – Apple could be dominating this market. Apple though have had their own victory on consumer devices and increasingly companies have to cater for their customers and staff wanting an iPhone or iPad app.

Like on smartphones, the battle is now between Android and Apple.

The high stakes of Lumia

Microsoft and Nokia have a lot riding on their new mobile phone product

Yesterday Nokia and Microsoft gave a preview of their upcoming Lumia 710 and 800 phones for the Australian market. It’s make or break time for both companies in the mobile space.

The phone itself is quite nice – Windows Phone 7.5 runs quite fast with some nice features such as integrated messaging and coupled with good hardware it’s a nice experience. Those I know who use Windows Phones are quite happy with them (I’m an iPhone user myself).

Whether its enough to displace the iPhone and the dozens of Android based handsets on a market where both Nokia and Microsoft have missed opportunities remains to be seen.

The battle is going to be on a number of fronts – at the telco level, in the retail stores and, most importantly, with the perceptions of customers.

Probably the biggest barrier with consumers is the perceived lack of apps, to overcome this Nokia have bundled in their Maps and Drive applications while Microsoft include their Mixed Radio streaming features along with Microsoft Office and XBox integration.

As well the built in services, both parties are playing up their application partners with services like Pizza Hut, Fox Sports and cab service GoCatch. Although all of these are available on the other platforms.

While application matter, the real battle for Nokia and Microsoft is going to be in the retail stores where the challenge shouldn’t be underestimated.

Apple dominate the upper end of the smart phone market and Android is swamping the mid to low end. How Windows Phone devices fit remains to be seen.

In Australia, if they going to find salvation it will be at the tender hands of the telco companies.

The iPhone is constant source of irritation for the telcos as not only do Apple grab most of the profit, but they also “own” the customer.

On the other hand, Android devices are irritating customers who are bewildered by the range of choices and frustrated by inconsistent updates that can leave them stranded with an outdated system.

So the Windows Phone does have an opportunity in the marketplace although one suspects commissions and rebates will be the big driver in getting sales people at the retail coal face to recommend the Microsoft and Nokia alternatives.

Overall though, it’s good to see a viable alternative on the market. For both Microsoft and Nokia the stakes are high with the Lumia range – it could be Nokia’s last shot – so they have plenty of incentives to get the product right.

Microsoft has consistently missed the boat on mobile computing since Windows CE was launched in 1996 while Nokia were blind-sided by the launch of the iPhone in 2007 and have never really recovered.

To make things worse for Nokia, the market for basic mobile phones where they still dominate is under threat from cheap Android based devices. So even the low margin, high volume market isn’t safe.

For both, the Lumia range is critical. 2012 is going to be an interesting year in mobile.

The business of baffling choices

Why do computer and phone companies offer so many plans and models?

In his Daring Fireball blog, John Gruber’s takes to task the view that Apple suffers through not having a wide product range.

John makes the valid point that Samsung seems to stealing market share from HTC rather than Apple but the whole theory of offering too many choices strikes to the heart of two industry’s business models.

Those two industries are the mobile telco business and the Windows personal computer sector.

In the PC world, the wide range of models has been both an advantage and a weakness; it’s allowed Dell and others to create custom machines to meet customer needs but also leaves consumers – both corporate and home buyers – confused and suspicious they many have been taken advantage of.

All too often customer were being had; frequently buyers found they’d bought an underpowered system stuffed with software that either was irrelevant to their needs or an upgrade was necessary to get the features they hoped for.

The entire PC industry was guilty of this and Microsoft were the most obvious – the confusing range of operating systems and associated software like the dozen version of Microsoft Office was deliberately designed to confuse customers and increase revenue.

For the PC industry, the “baffle the customer” model reached its zenith, or nadir, with Windows Vista where Microsoft deliberately put out an underspecced ‘Home’ edition designed to push sales up the value chain.

Compounding the problem, most of the manufacturers followed Microsoft’s lead and put out horribly underpowered systems in the hope that customers would upgrade with more memory, better graphics card and bigger, faster hard drives.

Most customers didn’t upgrade and as a result the Vista operating system – which was horrible anyway – enhanced its well deserved reputation for poor performance.

In the telco sector, consumer confusion lies at the heart of their profitable business model; a bewildering range of phones and plans often leaves the customer spending too much, either through an overpriced plan or paying punative charges for ‘excess’ use.

Having a hundred different types of Android phone adds to the confusion and, by restricting updates, they can cajole customers into ‘upgrading’ to a new phone and another restrictive plan every year or so. This is why you get phone calls from your mobile phone company offering a new handset deal 18 months into a two year plan.

Apple’s model has been different; in their computer range there has never been a wide choice, just a few configurations that meet certain price points. The same model has used for their phones and iPads.

For Apple, this means a predictable business model and a loyal customer base. They don’t have to compete on price and they don’t have to fight resellers and telcos who want to ‘own’ the customer. It’s one of the reasons mobile phone companies desperately want an alternative to the iPhone.

Companies using the baffling choices business model – Microsoft, HP, Dell and your local mobile telco – may well continue to do okay, but that business model is coming under challenge as new entrants are finding new niches.

For all of us as consumers all we can do is make the choices that are simple are reject complexity. Warren Buffett has always maintained he doesn’t invest in businesses he doesn’t understand, perhaps we should have the same philosophy with the purchases we make.

The business of denial

Denying market realities is rarely a good business move

Denial is a powerful sedative, it allows us to trundle dozily along a well worn patch oblivious to the reality our comfortable world has changed.

Last week’s claim that youth is fed up with the iPhone by Nokia’s Niels Munksgaard – who has the wonderful title of Director of Portfolio, Product Marketing & Sales – is a great example of how far and how long denial can continue while there’s still money to pay executive bonuses.

Canada’s beleaguered Research In Motion, manufacturers of the Blackberry phone, showed the same delusions when they released their Playbook tablet computer with the declaration Amateur Hour Is Over.

The only amateur hour was in the hubristic minds of RIM’s marketing team.

While profits keep flowing big organisation can afford delusions – Google can indulge their social media fantasies while the Adwords rivers of gold continue to flow ever faster and Microsoft can continue to indulge their delusions while their Windows and Office products remain immensely profitable.

Microsoft’s “droidrage” campaign, designed to embarrass Google’s Android mobile phone platform, is part of that delusion; for Microsoft’s campaign to work they have to prove there is a widespread Android malware problem, show their system isn’t prone to the same flaws and – most importantly – have enough product on the market to sell to those disillusioned Google customers.

Such a negative campaign has many fallacies – it assumes there are widespread security problems in Android, that Microsoft will pick up disaffected Google customers and there are enough Microsoft based products to grab those sales.

Probably Microsoft’s biggest problem is the assumption that customers actually care about that stuff – for years Windows dominated its market despite being riddled with computer with security holes and malware.

Microsoft succeeded because their competition was delusional; the best example being WordPerfect claiming graphic systems like Windows were a fad at a time when an inferior Microsoft Word was gobbling up their markets.

By the time WordPerfect realised their error and released a truly dreadful WordPerfect for Windows it was all too late, like a stagecoach company realising the motorcar is here to stay.

The problem for businesses in denial is that reality eventually does bite; plenty of people in the newspaper industry believed their advertising based model was secure and profitable – indeed many of the cosseted managers in that sector still believe it is – which now leaves them struggling in a changed world they thought they could ignore.

Denial among incumbents is a great opportunity for newer, more flexible players; for years mobile phone and tablet computer manufacturers were in denial about the usuability of their product – Apple proved them wrong and now commands the most profitable chunks of those markets.

Being the village blacksmith or a buggy whip maker was a good business to be in at the beginning of the 20th Century. Thirty years later those block boys and saddlemakers who hadn’t made the jump found themselves out of work.

It’s going to be interesting to see will be this century’s buggy whip manufacturers.