Apple And IBM Becoming Friends

Back in 1984, Apple's Super Bowl commercial was clearly aimed at big business and its most present leader IBM.  Much has happened since then.  IBM sold off its PC business and put its emphasis into the corporate customer; Apple pursued the home customer with phones and tablets that have simply revolutionized the world.  And today, these once brand enemies are becoming partners.

Working together, Apple and IBM have forged a partnership to provide corporations with the devices and apps to improve productivity, manage communication, and drive revenue growth.  "The two companies said they hope to use the expertise of IBM's consultants and relationships with corporate customers to create business apps that offer the simplicity—a hallmark of Apple products—of today's consumer apps. The apps will draw on IBM computing services such as security, device management and big-data analytics."  The immediacy of these devices to support the business selling chain and to draw out improved data for analysis and response will surely be a game changer.  For one, it will lead to improved customer service, quicker managing of the order process, and a more secure experience.  Specifically how it will work will come soon.  "The companies said Apple and IBM engineers are together developing more than 100 new apps for various industries. "The companies said Apple and IBM engineers are together developing more than 100 new apps for various industries."  But it is a big step for Apple into the enterprise world and an opportunity for IBM to connect its services, through Apple devices, more effectively across industries. 

This partnership seems to be a win-win.  Where once they were rivals, now they are partners to an ever changing mobile landscape.  In the meantime, we will wait and see more specifically how they will put this partnership into action.  But should it prove effective, it certainly will produce another strong revenue stream. 

FCC Listening To Net Neutrality Comments

With the rise in merger activity likely affecting the future of broadband, there is no doubt that the FCC is taking a serious look at net neutrality.  Net neutrality requires that all digital content, whether it is e-mail or streaming content from Netflix, be handled the same way with equal access through the pipeline to the consumer.  And while some net neutrality remains in effect, some wonder whether there has been some throttling where some content essentially is able to bump ahead in the line. 

This Multichannel article provides an interesting take on what FCC Chairman, Tom Wheeler is facing.  First, John Oliver overwhelmed the FCC website with his take on the issue a few weeks ago and consumers continue to flood the site with comments.  According to the article, they have received over 600,000 comments and are extending the deadline to handle the influx. 

Issues regarding net neutrality verse the creation of HOV or high frequency toll lanes for those that pay more lay at the heart of the discussion.  So too the notion of reclassification of broadband as a utility, like electricity and water, could hurt growth of the industry.  A better broadband system requires a better infrastructure and that requires capital.  More competition is also required to enable consumers to choose their broadband provider and allow competition to help lower pricing.  And lastly disruptive technological innovation that improves speed and reliability is important as well.  Governmental regulation tends to limit growth not engage it.  How much the FCC tinkers could affect all these efforts. 

Our Loss Of Privacy Through Social Media

When was the last time you checked your privacy settings on any of your social network sites, last week, last month, never?  We may be under the false impression that we are sharing with just our "friends" or a particular group, but most of us are sharing our lives with the entire world.  The question to ask is do you care?

With each press of a like button, we tell advertisers that we want them to continue to pitch products to us; with every GPS link to our location and the place we are visiting, we tell the world that we are not at home.  For me, it seems like an invitation to the world that our house is empty as we regale the world with our vacation photos while we are on vacation.  And while we think we are only sharing with a specific number of people, our privacy settings may be saying otherwise.

It may simply be a fine line between sharing and privacy; how much we want to share and how often we want to share the events of our lives.  It is both a blessing and a curse.  For families and friends spread far and wide, social networking becomes a means to stay connected.  For those seeing financial inducement to share what you've purchased or where you are eating, it may offer discounts or more. Sites like Foursquare and Living Social are especially helpful in this matter.

But the negative effects include telling the world that you were invited somewhere that others were not.  In children, that seems to happen frequently when postings of gatherings and parties tell others that they were not included.  A level of social awkwardness amplified through sites like Instagram, Facebook, and others.  And because the information lives on for eternity, it remains a permanent reminder of who is in and who is out.  Heartbreaking at times for kids going through adolescence and figuring out their own self-worth.

There is no easy answers for social networking and privacy.  It comes with both benefits and risks.  But it is clear that we at least know the settings that are enabled on each of our social networking sites and how, where, and who we are sharing our lives with.  So take a moment to check your settings and consider with every post, the possible ramifications it might cause. 

Will We Ever Get To Leave Our Wallet At Home

I recently was forced to buy a new wallet.  The old one was starting to crumble but it could at least hold everything and every new one I found seemed to small for my needs.  Eventually I found one but I also came upon the realization that I needed to pare down what I carried.  Between the necessary amount of cash, credit cards, courtesy cards, business cards, train tickets, subway card, drivers license, AAA card, health cards, receipts, etc., my wallet was overflowing.  I needed to pare down and as I did, I kept wondering will there ever be a day I can keep my wallet at home.

For some courtesy cards, I was able to transfer them into my iPhone into an app called CardStar and for others, I rely on my phone number as the identifier.  But Costco wants me to carry a card and others, too.  I'd love to move my drivers license into an app but I am bot sure the police would be so pleased.  And while I have cut down on the number of credit cards I carry, I would be happy to transfer all my credit card activity into my smartphone and let it tell the retailer which one I wanted to charge my purchase against.

We are slowly moving away from carrying physical cards and currency, but the transition seems to be taking a very long time.  There are still places that require cash on hand.  I could try flashing my phone to the beach parking attendant or try to pay for my beach tag through Venmo or some other payment sharing app, but I don't see too many companies announcing that they accept payments that way.  The MTA Subway once required coins and now it is a MetroCard but one day soon all payments could happen through an app too.

And so I still carry a wallet and it still feels too stuffed with unnecessary items.  I can only hope that one day in the near future, all identification, courtesy cards, cash and credit payments, and even payment receipts can all be managed via our mobile devices.  Then my pocket will no longer feel dragged down by the bulk and weight of a wallet, bending and cracking cards, over the course of its lifetime.  The world is moving in that direction but not as quickly as I might hope. 

Microsoft's Changing Focus

The old adage that what gets you there can't keep you there seems to run across every industry and every company.  It seems especially so in the technology industry where the pace of change ever increases.  And for Microsoft, in particular, what got them there, licensing Windows and Office content on every computer, isn't keeping them there either.  They have been usurped by companies like Apple, Google, and others who keep reinventing themselves and delivering new products and services.  According to Satya Nadella, new CEO of Microsoft, now it is Microsoft's turn. 

His memo to Microsoft employees lets them know that they are no longer a device or services company; rather, "Microsoft is the productivity and platform company for the mobile-first and cloud-first world."  With this new direction, many wonder where Xbox fits in this new strategy.  Should it be sold off or is there a place in this new business model.  For now, given its current success, no changes are planned.

For the rest of Microsoft, employees are wondering if it means layoffs especially from its acquisition of the Nokia mobile phone business.  Can Microsoft turn this new mission into a reality and once again claim market share?  What new tools and apps does Microsoft have to attract more customers to their platform?  Many believe that Nadella has the skill set to make this turn around happen.  In the end, the technology industry continues to evolve quickly and Microsoft could be the ones to lead consumers through the next turn. 

Should Content Owners Consolidate Too

While battles loom regarding the proposed distribution consolidation occurring, those on the content side expect the same.  Speaking at the Allen & Co. Conference, David Zaslav, CEO of Discovery Networks, believes that "'In the next couple of years, I think it's likely there will be consolidation on the content side,' he said."  Discovery has been mentioned both as a potential buyer of content as well as a possible seller of its content business.  Others mentioned include Scripps, AMC Networks, Viacom, and even Time Warner, holder of TBS, TNT, and HBO.

And while there are challenges brought in by the increased size brought on by cable consolidation, the rise in digital disruption continues to alter the playing field.  How we get our broadband access, what we want to watch, and where we want to watch our content, have made traditional linear programming that much harder to grow.  Live programming, sports, events, award shows, have all been best at driving linear viewing.  The success of World Cup ratings in the US is the most recent example to cite.

Consolidation of content owners could provide some level of leverage against the big cable distributors.  It certainly assures carriage of better watched networks while hoping to support an increase in carriage of smaller cable networks. Their challenge continues to be their niche appeal.  Success of smaller cable networks that have found audience growth has come from broadening their programming format, building show brands, and driving reach and interest.  But in the end, these networks become hard to differentiate one from the other for the sake of the bigger rating.  Consolidation of content owners may simply help these niche networks to stay around a little bit longer. 

Analysts Think Content May Not Be King For Long

There are some that worry that content will no longer be king as media distribution platforms continue their consolidation.  With the FCC looking at both the planned merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable and AT&T with DirecTv, analysts fear that the power will shift from content to distribution.  The solution though is not content consolidation, according to Barclays Capital’s Kannan Venkateshwar.  Given the fixed costs of content production, less synergies can be derived if content creators merge; their power will not be enhanced in negotiating with these potentially larger distributors. 

While his insights ring true, I am not so sure that I agree that the merging of cable distributors will change the fact that content is and will continue to be king.  Good content drives viewership and builds value.  Netflix has emerged as a strong player with original content like "Orange Is The New Black" and other digital properties are doing the same, whether it is for subscription or ad revenue or both.  Yes, cable has the strongest platform, but their high cost continues to hurt future growth. The younger generation continues to embrace broadband and digital streaming, uncovering new content like You Tube's PewDiePi. 

As a result, content creators actually face a lower barrier to entry to getting their content produced and viewed.  The challenge for digital content to better compete with cable consolidation requires an aggregator that can not only combine and present all the digital channels, but deliver a search and recommendation engine across these content properties to help the consumer best choose what to watch.  Cable distributors have their interactive screen guide for linear and on demand, helping cable customers to find shows across all networks.  The Apple TV device, Amazon Fire, Roku, and others certainly work to the first point of delivering digital content, but need that aggregated search app to aid in the content discovery. 

So, I wouldn't worry that the threat of content distribution mergers will lessen the power of content.  Disruption is already occurring and content will continue to remain king.

Cameras Everywhere

Here in NY, the latest news was that a women left her baby at a subway station and casually walked away.  A good Samaritan made sure the infant was watched till police showed.  The news reports at the time indicated that no cameras were at this particular stop and so no footage available of the woman.  But hours later, other footage was found that showed the woman pushing the stroller elsewhere and she was eventually discovered.  What is particularly noteworthy is that we have become more and more used to cameras and surveillance in our lives.  At every airport, store, and even on streets, cameras seem to be almost everywhere.  And we seem ok with that.

Certainly in an age where terrorism affects us, cameras help to find perpetrators and victims.  It is used as a defense to help thwart potential crimes and we live by the notion that a good defense is a good offense.  Take for example the story a week ago of a trucker who watched a state trooper speed and talk on his cell, honked his horn and caused the trooper to pull the trucker over.  Quickly, the trucker started filming the interaction with his smartphone which led, not to a ticket for excessive honking, but to an apology from the trucker for not following the rules of the road, no cell phone while driving.  Without the video, a ticket would certainly have been the more likely outcome.

It demonstrates that we have become okay with cameras recording us in life just as we have the same ability with our smart phones to video our interactions.  Camera security is now more prevalent in our homes as wireless and remote cameras protect us from break-ins and help lead to capture. Cameras are in every store too recording us entering and leaving as well as waiting at the cash register. 

But the rise in camera coverage in almost every step we take comes with a price.  A loss of anonymity for one thing, and perhaps a bit of individual freedom.  Private may never be private anymore.  With every recording, everything we say or do becomes a permanent record.  Donald Sterling, "former" owner of the LA Clippers, certainly feels this way.  His anti-social rant was captured and shared with the county, resulting in his loss of team ownership. 

Overall, the use of cameras, both publicly and privately, tries to assure that safety and security are improved.  But it is at the cost of some personal freedoms.  And while it provides an added level of information, we also know that we can't be naive to believing that it represents all the facts either.  Technology also enables clever editing, Photoshopping, and other visual and audio tricks.  Still cameras are a tool that we as the public seem to be very comfortable knowing that we are always being recorded. 

Music - Rent Or Buy

The music industry is facing a difficult hurdle as the rise of streaming services like Spotify, Pandora, and others are affecting the sales of downloadable music.  Consumers seems happy with a monthly subscription service that in fact lets them listen but not own their music.  The result, "listeners in the United States used such audio and video streaming services to listen to 70.3 billion songs in the first half of 2014, an increase of 42 percent from the first half of 2013."  Unfortunately, "According to Nielsen, 120.9 million albums have been sold so far this year, down 14.9 percent from the first half of 2013. Of those albums, 62.9 million were on CD (down 19.6 percent) and 53.8 million were digital downloads (down 11.6 percent)."  What isn't clear is whether the net effect is good news or bad news, revenue wise, for the music industry.

Certainly, on the video side, the success of Netflix and Amazon Prime, echos a similar path as streaming video growth expands.  Its effect on dvd sales must be equally noticeable.  No longer is there a need to buy the movie or TV series if the content is just as easily offered in a streaming subscription service.  The challenge, of course for both video and music are the license fee rights.  When they go away, the content is no longer accessible by the subscriber.  Netflix subscribers just saw that recently as some content vanished as new content entered the library. 

At least with ownership of content, music and video, it is owned in perpetuity, or until we lose the cd or scratch the dvd.  Oh well.