Does Apple Need To Own A Social Network?

Some public speculation that Apple is considering a major investment in social networking site, Twitter, as a means to extend itself in this space.  Perhaps also to compete as much with Google who chose to build their own social site, Google Plus.  But is this the best investment choice for Apple?  "Apple and Twitter are logical partners in some ways. Unlike Facebook or Google, Twitter has no plans to compete with Apple in the phone business or elsewhere. And as Apple has found, social is just not in its DNA."  Still I wonder if there is  a profitable long term future in social networking?

Ask Facebook that question and the stock price today says no.  Trading below its IPO, Facebook is yet a runaway financial success.  Twitter is only as successful as the ads that  run on it; but those ads, like the ones on Facebook's timeline have started to become intrusive and unwanted.  And should Twitter fall out of favor, there are other sites eager to take a lead.   A financial investment in Twitter may be a defensive move, but Apple's success has been in being an innovative company.

Where I would like to see more investment is in products that improve and differentiate the security of their products.  And in products that enable more e-commerce and wallet applications.  For me, that could mean investments in PayPal and Square.  These companies and others are changing our purchase behaviors and improving the ease in which we transact business.  Apple's push to better security over our devices will also be an important differentiator.  And lastly, the battery that runs our devices and the quantum leap that is still needed to allow these products to run for much longer periods without a recharge, is to me a very valuable investment.

Twitter and Facebook and other social network apps should be enabled to easily integrate with other programs - photos, music, videos, etc.  That can happen regardless of a deep financial investment.  That Apple products remain a deeply integrated part of our lives, in our communication among family members as well as with our social circles, and the must have device from when we wake up to when we fall asleep remains the top priority.

Could Google Overbuild The Cable Operators

Kansas City is a buzz over Google Fiber and cable operators may be concerned that a new rival is in town.  "Google Fiber makes the cable-based ISPs look pathetic. It promises to offer speeds up to 1,000Mbps downstream and upstream, for only $70 a month." Bring audiences in at a faster and cheap rate and win them over.  "For Google, the main business purpose of Fiber is to give people faster Internet access, so they'll spend more time online -- where they're more likely to use a Google product and click a Google-sold ad. But just like Gmail unlocked an enterprise business, Fiber could unlock a whole new business as an ISP and TV provider."

And according to a Multichannel article, Google is also in talks with some large programmers, including Disney, Turner, and Fox.  How Google Fiber  tests in Kansas City could demonstrate the value to Google of rolling out this service across other cities.  Still the infrastructure to support such a rollout and manage the pipeline must be enormous, but if anyone has the deep pockets, it is Google.

Xfinity Means What To You

Branding is a tough game.  A new brand can cause quite a bit of confusion until consumers can understand its identity and value.  For Verizon, it was trying to explain how it was better than staying with Bell Atlantic or NYNEX as a brand.  For Radio Shack, it is wondering whether the name should be changed to reflect a changing technological environment.  And for Comcast, it means explaining why Xfinity best represents its bundle of products.

So far, consumers may still be unsure what Xfinity is, what it stands for, and why Comcast has introduced a new name.  "Comcast Corp. is launching a marketing campaign costing at least $170 million, to fix what Chief Executive Brian Roberts has acknowledged has been a less-than-successful two-old corporate rebranding effort."  Xfinity is meant to be far more than just cable, phone, and data.  It is how consumers live their lives in and out of the home.  "The new advertisements aim to show what an integrated Xfinity 'experience' feels like to a customer."  That the products actually work seamlessly together.

It may be the expectation, but I am unsure if it is yet the reality.  Do consumers know how to use the Xfinity apps to integrate devices? Do they see the synergy yet?  And most important how can Comcast get current customers to take full advantage of what they offer in order to unlock the value and improve customer satisfaction.  It is clearly a work in progress.

BSkyB Banking On Over The Top

The truth is that if you can't beat em, join em.  The rise of broadband and the fear of consumers switching to IPTV devices has cause BSkyB to consider new distribution strategies.  "BSkyB will spend £30 million cutting its own cord through Now TV".  The truth is clear; why let other platforms take away this audience, better to have a presence in the OTT space too.  "That gives us a clue how much BSkyB is investing to protect its heavyweight satellite and triple-play offering from disruption by new over-the-top (OTT), cord-cutting services and platforms, and to seek new online customers".  As a new platform it also allows more flexibility to create a low cost package of service and support a consumer preference to a la carte offerings.  From my vantage point, it is a very smart move.

What Is A Radio Shack?

Sad to say but it looks like another institution is on a path toward closure.  It seems that Radio Shack has not changed with the times.  We no longer build radios in our basement, we no longer seek wires and connections; technology has changed the process and Radio Shack has become less relevant.  Today it tries to compete with wireless phone stores, big box electronic companies, and even some toy stores; but what is Radio Shack?

"While RadioShack is suffering from industry-wide trends — including declining TV sales and consumers using their smartphones to compare prices, as well as an uncertain economy where shoppers shun spending on high-ticket items — analysts said the company has made several mistakes."  To me, the biggest one is its name.  It no longer connotes innovation but reminds us of older technology.  Second, it neither offers any real differentiated product or better price point to challenge its various competitors.  And third, its merchandise consists of  an "'overloaded product assortment,' including 'obscure items' such as magnifying glasses and soldering irons that make its stores hard to shop."  So frankly, the question to ask is, can Radio Shack be saved.

For one, a name change couldn't hurt, one that resonates a more future technologist approach.  A better mix of merchandise especially in the mobile and web space.   Build out an exclusive product line at a competitive price point.  And less reliance on big screen products that need larger merchandise layouts than Radio Shack can offer.  Perhaps its time for "The Web Shack" or Tech Shack" or "Digital Shack' to emerge.

Do We Expect Too Much From Apple?

Apple released their quarterly earnings last night and the analysts were disappointed in the actual verse estimate. Despite rising year over year, it just wasn't good enough.  The challenge may be in what lens we look at companies like Apple.  Is it fair to look at it so closely over a quarter, especially when product life cycles and new release dates can significantly affect short term buying behavior.  I mean why buy a new iPhone today when the rumors of a new model before end of year causes us to wit on the sidelines to wait.  And once the new iPhone, new iPad, and other releases occur, won't they tend to send unit sales through the roof.  I mean the first week of a movie release is always higher than the 5th week.

Financially, Apple is still a rising star. And while the short term bump on the stock price is part of the game, Apple continues to impress in the long run.  Knowing that there is product to be released, seeing how well the iTunes business grows as a result of these sales, and the impact Apple has on other companies and businesses, I still believe that Apple is a long term play.

Never Ending Saga - Content And Cable Distribution Clash Again

Just as the Time Warner Cable and Hearst broadcast agreement has settled comes word that a next fight is brewing.  This time it is between Time Warner Cable and Meredith Broadcast networks.  "On Wednesday the cable company could lose the CBS and MyNetworkTV affiliates in Kansas City, an NBC station in Nashville, and a CBS outlet in Springfield, Mass. if the companies don’t resolve their contract dispute."  And if it follows the same script, the stations will go dark for a period of time, negative advertising will emerge, websites will arise to send nasty messages to each party, and ultimately an agreement will be reached.  Unfortunately, we must watch all the nasty stuff first before either party will get to the conclusion; it starts to sound like a bad sitcom.

Going To The Movies Not So Worth It

Here's a basic question, are you going to the movies more or less times than you went say last year or 5 years ago.  Does the movie experience or interest in a title push you to go out and would you be willing to go back to see the same film again and again?  It seems that the cost of going to the movies, coupled with much shorter distribution windows and better home viewing experiences has hurt attendance.  "Attendance at the movies last year was the lowest since 1995, and per-person attendance fell to a 25-year low — in particular among younger consumers who frequent the cinema most often, a new report shows."  3D movies have grown, but the cost to watch and the experience in general underwhelms.  Imax screens help, but there are few around to make them convenient to the masses.  And the price to watch and the cost of refreshments make the total cost a bigger drain on the pocket books.

On the other hand, films released early in the year are accessible through on demand or online in less than a year.  With vastly improved HD TV sets and high resolution iPads, the cost is much less and the enjoyment more.  For a family of 4, a night out at the movies with popcorn is more than $60; the cost to watch on VOD with a microwave popcorn bowl, under $10.  It is that growing chasm between the two choices in a depressed economy that  strikes at the nerve of the movie industry.  When going to the movies becomes a more special experience, we go less and expect much more in return.

"Back in 2002, the average moviegoer went to the theater eight times a year; last year, it was fewer than six. In particular, younger viewers are going to movies less often. Attendance per person for consumers ages 12 to 24 is down 40 percent since 2002."  Blockbusters try to help, but the rising costs limit how many we choose to watch.  This trend is not limited to movie theaters.  Look at professional sports and see how few seats are being sold.  Yankee stadium as an example has rows and rows of seats empty; the New York Jets face similar issues trying to sell out its stadium.  As costs rise, less people can afford to go.  And once they begin to switch their viewing behavior, it becomes more difficult to win them back to your venue.

The Fall And Rise Of Yahoo!

Yahoo! has had some very public struggles lately.  But with the hiring of former Google exec, Marissa Mayer, we may start to refocus on the value that Yahoo! brings to the web.  Some may question what Yahoo! stands for today, but the more important question will be what does Yahoo! want to be.  Ad Age has it right.  "Yahoo needed to be a product company again, and media alone isn't a good enough product. Rather, Yahoo needs to build the tools and services that bind its 700 million users into its world, services such as Mail, Yahoo Finance and Sports. The debate of Yahoo as a tech company vs. a media company has been settled: It must be both."

Despite their failings, viewers still use their services; for me it is finance, sports, and news.  Continuing to push their content and their strengths as aggregators of content means we will still seek them out for our information.  But more is needed to drive use.Ad Age notes need to improve the homepage and mail.   "With those two products growing increasingly stale, and today's youngest generation of internet user gravitating toward social networks instead of portal pages or even email, Yahoo is facing a not-so-distant future in which it'll need to replace the core traffic-driving engines that create value in its media properties." Whether it through acquisition or refresh, Yahoo! needs to focus on matching itself to the future - from better mobile deployment and tablet usage to a best social network experience.

Can Yahoo! do it?  I think with the right leadership and renewed investment, the answer is a resounding yes.