Tag Archives: market

Why I bet that Apple future without Steve Jobs is as bright as the past

Many sites and authors (among them Matt Hartley at Lockergnome, full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2011/01/17/is-steve-jobs-critical-to-apple/, Joe Wilcox at Beta news, full article at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apples-future-without-Steve-Jobs-wont-be-as-bright/1295327829 and at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/What-future-does-Apple-have-without-Steve-Jobs/1295286850 and at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Steve-Jobs-takes-another-medical-leave-from-Apple/1295278306, Juan Carlos Perez at Computer world, full article at http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9205362/With_Apple_s_Jobs_on_leave_many_questions_and_few_answers, Peter Sayer at Computer world, full article at http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9205342/Update_Apple_CEO_Steve_Jobs_to_take_medical_leave_of_absence, Chris Foresman at Ars Techinca, full article at http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/01/apple-ceo-steve-jobs-back-on-medical-leave.ars, Matthew Humphries at Geek.com, full article at http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/steve-jobs-goes-on-medical-leave-of-absence-20110117/, Mike Halsey at ghack.com, full article at http://www.ghacks.net/2011/01/17/steve-jobs-to-take-leave-of-absence-from-apple-for-health-reasons/) covered the anouncement of Steve Jobs leave for absence due to medical problems. Most of them also told that Steve Jobs is strictly related to Apple future in terms of positive impact. On top of this Apple shares declined after the announcement has been made.

In my opinion, Steve Jobs is very important for Apple because of charisma, innovation, leadership and vision. But times are different now form those when Steve came back and reseurrected Apple from ashes.

Apple is now a company with a stronger brand, that goes over the geeks and is more linked to marketing.

Apple is a strong company with cutting edge technologies and more patents that can turn in billion dollars ideas.

Apple has now an industrial approach for going live.

Apple has also grown or acquired lot of professionals and managers that can continue the business.

Apple also has a marketing and commercial model for applications selling that is something that is a step beyond also for new coming devices.

I don’t work for Apple (in fact I work for another very big company that is a competitor for part of Apple business), but I think the Cupertino company is stronger than ever.

With Steve at the helm also has the plus of a Guru, but without can continue the business without problems.

This post as a comment also at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apples-future-without-Steve-Jobs-wont-be-as-bright/1295327829, at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/What-future-does-Apple-have-without-Steve-Jobs/1295286850http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Steve-Jobs-takes-another-medical-leave-from-Apple/1295278306http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9205362#comment-716336http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/01/apple-ceo-steve-jobs-back-on-medical-leave.ars?comments=1&p=21225850#comment-21225850http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/steve-jobs-goes-on-medical-leave-of-absence-20110117/comment-page-1/#comment-3975084http://www.ghacks.net/2011/01/17/steve-jobs-to-take-leave-of-absence-from-apple-for-health-reasons/#comment-1295892 and at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2011/01/17/is-steve-jobs-critical-to-apple/comment-page-1/#comment-250537

Facebook IPO? No thanks

Brian Osborne at Geek.com (http://www.geek.com/users/Brian%20Osborne/) reports that Facebook IPO won’t happen until 2012, allowing the company to strengthen sales and customers (full article at http://www.geek.com/articles/news/facebook-ipo-may-not-happen-until-2012-20100730/).

But do the market and company itself want to go public?

IMHO the answer is positive for the market that will be able to profit from Facebook in a small time, but is deadly for the company and, at the end for the entire sector.

Facebook has grown too fast and too chaotically to be considered a company ready for going public.

How do we think market, so confused and reacting at the limits of an histeric behaviour at the moment for reasons we all know, will react in case of another data loss or privacy issue Facebook will face?

I think that first Facebook need to strengthen reputation and then go public, as a company conscious of the impact that can have on market and investors.

This post as a comment also at http://www.geek.com/articles/news/facebook-ipo-may-not-happen-until-2012-20100730/comment-page-1/#comment-3855281

Apple drives some market growth, despite antenna gate

The New York Times reports that Apple better than estimated results are driving a little growth of stock markets (full article at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/business/22markets.html?_r=1).

This is syntomatic of how much an imagine problem is sometime over estimated, at least in the short term.

I wonder how much has been acrrued by Apple to face next quarter(s) expenses for cases and reimbursements for Antennagate.

1 Apple or 1 Blackberry= 3 androids

Kyle VanHemert at Gizmodo reports a Nielsen study that indicates that, going beyond android rising market share, in US still has a 9% in a market largely dominated by RIM(35%) and Apple  (28%) (full article at http://gizmodo.com/5556346/iphone-os-triples-androids-market-share-for-now).

I think that in Europe percentages are different (with Apple more ahead than RIM), but interpretation is the same: Android is rising but needs a second push to acquire more market share.

Comparing medicine

Kit Eaton at Fast Company (http://www.fastcompany.com/user/148610), reports that “[…] The benefits of Eastern versus Western medicine have been debated for decades. But the only way to really test the difference is scientifically–it’s a difficult task, although there are plenty of ongoing studies. IBM’s joining that fray with a tool to analyze medical records in collaboration with the Guang Dong Hospital of Traditional Medicine (South China’s largest traditional hospital) […]” (full article at http://www.fastcompany.com/1655960/ibm-eastern-western-medicine-clinical-records-research-kidney-health-computing-science).

As the final aim of IBM intervention is “[…] creating an almost automatic diagnostic tool, able to sift through a ton of data and help clinicians decide if particular combinations of Eastern or Western treatments for chronic kidney disease are most beneficial for cure or prevention […]” seems to me a good thing, though sounds quite strange this specific interest in finding the best mix between eastern and western medicine.

Though I believe both in eastern and western medic approaches and that this research will bring some benefits, what is more meaningfull to me is that IBM is conducting a commercial action in China, where should increase market quota.

This post as a comment also at http://www.fastcompany.com/1655960/ibm-eastern-western-medicine-clinical-records-research-kidney-health-computing-science

Microsoft affected by inertia or by monopoly?

the oracle at Lockergnome writes an article on Microsoft reporting former employee impressions on different topics, including Redmond’s inability to produce a serious breahtrough in tablets (full story at http://www.lockergnome.com/theoracle/2010/02/05/microsoft-isn%e2%80%99t-going-anywhere-soon-%e2%80%93-it%e2%80%99s-called-inertia/).

In my opinion, a couple of factors affect Microsoft:

a) first of all, the “winner inertia” started when acquired (and is still maintaining) the “de facto” monopoly of os and offic applications. This situation doesn’t help people innovating and, in consequence, doesn’t bring a winning product (both software or hardware) to the market

b) Microsoft not being able of introducing (and communicating) a style, a unique “flavour” that differentiates from competitors (such as Apple user interface)

Newspapers and pay per view

Rafe Needleman at CNET (http://www.cnet.com/profile/rafe/) writes a good article on his opinion of paying once for digital newspapers subscription (full story at http://news.cnet.com/8301-19882_3-10417065-250.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20).

I think it’s absolutely right to pay for some kind of informations or VAS (Value Added Services), though it’s absolutely correct to have a “flat subscription” where you pay for the information but you don’t for the media bringing it.

And cannot be penalized those having acces through diferent media.

I think that information providers (but also media providers,…) look at making big money in short time to maximize initiative ROI instead of creating a stable and fidelized subscriber base.

It’s the distortion (and subsequent error) we’ve been through last years and that is triggered by market: it’s better to grow short than consolidate in long time.

This post as a comment also at http://news.cnet.com/8618-19882_3-10417065.html?communityId=2127&targetCommunityId=2127&blogId=250&messageId=8817126

On line company reputation and fair use of informations

Edward Tse at Strategy+Business (http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00011?pg=all#authors) writes an extensive article on how and why “[…] Executives should track Internet commentary in China to protect their company’s reputation — and market position” (full article at http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00011?rssid=all_updates&gko=9f718&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StrategyBusiness-AllUpdates+%28strategy%2Bbusiness+-+All+Updates%29).

I think on line reputation is becoming more a threat than an opportunity, not only in China, but throughout the world.

I think everyone agrees that company reputation is one of the biggest assets a company owns: being innovator or having a bunch of assets in the barn is nothing valuable (or at least seems so) if company has a bad reputation.

The only difference is that with globalization and the internet, what in the past was limited to a city, state, continent (depending on company size and spreading) now has a worldwide dimension.

But who decides that a company reputation is good or bad? People.

But what makes the difference between people with solid facts for or against a company and those saying false things? In our world only the number of people involved. Sometimes is percieved as more credible a Social networked group (just because has a lot of people), rather than an informed opinion of some “gurus”.

I think most of us remember some urban legends saying (without scientific basis) that some ingredients used in bath foams were cancer developers. And what happened? People stopped buying products and companies lost reputation. Just because of a wrong spread of mouth.

What I’m saying is that online reputation should always be evaluated together with solid facts for a company and never shoul prevail on real facts, because is too easy to be manipulated

Smartphone future: some comments

Matt Hamblen at Computerworld writes a good article expressing some opinions on SmartPhones future (full article at http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141761/7_smartphone_predictions_for_2010?source=rss_news).

Here is my comment:

1. Smartphones will grab an even bigger share of the overall mobile phone market

It’s true, due to the fact that cost is similar and people that can use the advanced functions are growing. I have two concerns: more smart phones mean more investments needed in networks supporting the increasing demand of services (and the fear is would the investment and infrastructure trend grow at same pace); the other concern is the one linked to usability, because smartphones don’t rhyme always with smart interfaces 🙂

2. AT&T will lose its exclusive rights to sell the iPhone

Again true, but Apple has build a solid network of exclusives. Economically talking is not the best accellerator, but at same time is the most direct way to being “exclusive”

3. The Android mobile operating system will take off.

This is very personal: True, because, in terms of usability, ther’s only one player (IPhone), with windows mobile being a no altrenative. Android is growing on this point and this is an accellerator in gaining market share at a faster pace

4. Mobile application stores will continue to balloon.

I agree, but what will make the (real) difference will be two things: quality of software provided and easiness of access (due to increasing number of apps released)

5. Location based services will get their due on smartphones

I’m not quite sure of this and of possible implications (mainly due to network traffic), though on the other side, enhanced reality apps are taking more space. Success will depend on how smart will be the access to this functions.

6. The FCC will compromise with wireless carriers on Net neutrality

Since I’m not US resident I don’t feel confident to express an opinion on this

7. More types of devices, like e-readers, will emerge

It’s true, but their diffusion will be limited by two factors: network support and the eternal dilemma: many specialized devices doing things at their best vs one “generalistic” device doing things with less depth.

This post as a comment also at http://www.computerworld.com/comments/comment/reply/9141761 and at http://www.computerworld.com/comments/comment/reply/9141761#comment

Apple and Nintendo and other false (or true) competitors

Jeff Smykil at Art Technica (http://arstechnica.com/authors/jeff-smykil/), wites an article on the fact that “Nintendo’s president thinks Apple isn’t a competitor and people should stop saying so. Is this a bluff, denial, or just the beginning of another decline of a once-powerful video game company” (full article at http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/11/despite-nintendos-claims-apple-is-a-competitor.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss).

I think is only the last case of a company (or a person) telling the market that everybody didn’t understandwhat was happening.

Is the same reaction I had when Yahoo CEO said that Yahoo wasn’t a search company. And I add, only beacuse was still loosing market shares against Google.

Unfortunately for Nintendo’s CEO Mr.  Satoru Iwata, Apple is a player in gaming industry, and, in my opinion, wil be one of the three player that will remain in less that 5 years: Google (through Android), Microsoft (through Windows) and Apple (through Iphone).

This post as a comment also at http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=174096756&m=133002122041&r=222007422041#222007422041

%d bloggers like this: