GOOGL - Google

[rkbabang]

Little by little...:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-07/apple-said-to-add-baidu-as-iphone-search-engine-in-china.html

That's not a surprise, though, Baidu is the main search engine in China and Google isn't exactly a friend of the government because they won't censor everything the way they want.

 

 

"Google could anger Beijing by pointing out individual terms that might produce blocked results ... A Google spokesman declined to comment on whether the company was concerned about Chinese government retaliation."

 

Google helps Chinese avoid censorship

 

Looks like Apple on the other hand has no qualms about cozying up to tyranny.

 

[Guest valueInv]

But I'm certain Siri is relying on the powerful search engine (aka Google) to get answers to a lot of questions though...but the question would be, could you still monetize ads this way?

Today, Siri uses Wolfram Alpha to answer queries and falls back to Google if Wolfram cannot address the query. Over time, it will add more and more services that are able to provide better information than a search engine. For example, it will use the services to the Yelp app when asked for restaurant review without using a search engine. Expect some big announcements in this direction next week.

 

Siri could be monetized with ads but I doubt Apple is interested in doing it in a big way. There are many, many other avenues for monetization. For example, Apple could get a cut of the dinner reservations made through Siri.

 

I think Apple's intentions on Google are clear:

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303768104577460244284627170.html

[Guest valueInv]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/itc-rejects-googles-patent-loan-to-htc/

 

So Google can use its patents to help the Android companies that are getting sued. Is this why they bought Motorola in the first place?

[Guest valueInv]

Facebook extend its advertising tentacles:

 

http://gigaom.com/2012/06/13/facebook-preps-facebook-exchange-for-real-time-bidding/

 

Could a publisher network be in the cards?

[Guest valueInv]

Updates on Google's products.

 

Search: http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/15/hitwise-google-us-search-share-down-5-in-the-last-year-bing-yahoo-gained

 

Google+: http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/15/popcap-and-wooga-pull-games-from-google/

 

ChomeOS: http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/15/report-googles-chromebooks-account-for-less-than-02-of-all-desktop-traffic

[Guest valueInv]

Facebook's first steps towards a publisher ad network:

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-facebook-places-ads-on-zynga-could-an-online-ad-network-be-next-20120622,0,26508.story

[prunes]

Google to put sales reps inside retail stores

[Guest valueInv]

I agree. What the ..?

 

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/the-google-nexus-q-is-baffling/?nl=technology&emc=cta2_20120705

[DCG]

ChomeOS: http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/15/report-googles-chromebooks-account-for-less-than-02-of-all-desktop-traffic

 

Chrome OS could serve a real purpose if they focus on getting it on normal-sized desktops and laptops instead of on netbooks that nobody want.

[Guest valueInv]

Grap the popcorn, this is a price war all the way to the bottom:

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/11/amazon-actually-testing-smartphone-in-asia-now-platform-wars-heat-up/

[txlaw]

Grap the popcorn, this is a price war all the way to the bottom:

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/11/amazon-actually-testing-smartphone-in-asia-now-platform-wars-heat-up/

 

Yup.  Could affect AAPL most of all.

[Guest valueInv]

Grap the popcorn, this is a price war all the way to the bottom:

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/11/amazon-actually-testing-smartphone-in-asia-now-platform-wars-heat-up/

 

Yup.  Could affect AAPL most of all.

 

Not necessarily. AAPL still continues to grow and increase margins despite the competition. It is the Android vendors who are

suffering. Historically, AAPL has been able to maintain magins (iPods, laptops, desktops).

 

If Amazon succeeds, it will be even bigger fragmentation of Android. Amazon's version is likely to be very incompatible with Google's version and

not contain most of Google's services.

 

You have two vendors who for whom profit/margin is not a priority. Amazon is subsidizing hardware + software with content sales and Google with advertising and content sales. Amazon is way better at content and Google at ads.

 

We saw this same pattern playing out in the pc industry except MSFT wisely stayed out of the hardware business letting the hardware vendors battle it out. This time around hardware and software are more tied together.

[txlaw]

Grap the popcorn, this is a price war all the way to the bottom:

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/11/amazon-actually-testing-smartphone-in-asia-now-platform-wars-heat-up/

 

Yup.  Could affect AAPL most of all.

 

Not necessarily. AAPL still continues to grow and increase margins despite the competition. It is the Android vendors who are

suffering. Historically, AAPL has been able to maintain magins (iPods, laptops, desktops).

 

If Amazon succeeds, it will be even bigger fragmentation of Android. Amazon's version is likely to be very incompatible with Google's version and

not contain most of Google's services.

 

You have two vendors who for whom profit/margin is not a priority. Amazon is subsidizing hardware + software with content sales and Google with advertising and content sales. Amazon is way better at content and Google at ads.

 

We saw this same pattern playing out in the pc industry except MSFT wisely stayed out of the hardware business letting the hardware vendors battle it out. This time around hardware and software are more tied together.

 

But you are betting that the "innovation gap" will remain wide such that AAPL will be able to maintain its extraordinarily high margins in the face of competitors who are fine with razor thin margins because their real businesses are services. 

 

By all accounts, the new Nexus tablet and the latest galaxy are awesome, and people could easily start gravitating to those options versus Apple options.  It already appears that AAPL is being forced to put out a smaller tablet, which could cannibalize its very high margin iPad sales.

 

And if Surface is successful, AAPL may have to come up with a competing product that cannibalizes sales of both iPads and Macbooks. 

 

I don't disagree with you that AAPL will likely have the highest margins on the integrated hardware/software, but that margin could shrink going forward due to the competition heating up.  Nobody knows for sure, but it would be wise to bake that possibility into any AAPL valuation.

[Ross812]

This is a race to the bottom between Google and Amazon to put devices into peoples hands. From the beginning Google has not been trying to monetize Android in the traditional sense. They are using it to expand their internet presence, mind share, and moat. Google started out by cornering the search market,making their name synonymous with internet search. Now they are expanding their moat by trying to make their name the first thing you think about when the internet comes to mind. Amazon proved that there is a market for a tablet that is smaller and less expensive than the Ipad. This was something that the other tablet manufacturers who were trying to compete with the Ipad couldn't figure out. I think Google saw the success of the Kindle Fire and realized they could make a better more Google centric tablet for the same price. I think the race to the bottom is going to be between android tablet manufacturers now that Google followed Amazon and a small tablet market has been fully defined.

 

Remember Amazon marketed the Fire as a Kindle and not a tablet. The Nexus 7 is the first big release $200 tablet to hit the market. I think if the other Android manufacturers follow this trend Amazon does not stand a chance in the hardware race. Amazon has to rely on their ecosystem of books, movies, and television shows to stay relevant. Digital media is something Google has the infrastructure to imitate easily. If this goes the way I think it will, in five years, Amazon will be the go to website for parcel items and its digital services will be somewhat less relevant compared to what Google is able to offer.

 

Apple isn't in this fight. They will continue to produce great hardware at great margins staying one step ahead of the competition. If they slip up, and release a "windows vista", or they don't stay far enough ahead of Android, they are done. Apple cannot maintain 20%+ margins while their competition could run at 0% margins and continue to grow revenue. Investing in Apple is betting on them to stay out in front. Their margin for error is shrinking every year. If they loose a race, or don't come up with the next best thing once the smartphone market matures (after android compared to iOS becomes a Dell compared to a HPQ), I wouldn't want to be a part owner of Apple. 

[Guest valueInv]

This is a race to the bottom between Google and Amazon to put devices into peoples hands. From the beginning Google has not been trying to monetize Android in the traditional sense. They are using it to expand their internet presence, mind share, and moat. Google started out by cornering the search market,making their name synonymous with internet search. Now they are expanding their moat by trying to make their name the first thing you think about when the internet comes to mind. Amazon proved that there is a market for a tablet that is smaller and less expensive than the Ipad. This was something that the other tablet manufacturers who were trying to compete with the Ipad couldn't figure out. I think Google saw the success of the Kindle Fire and realized they could make a better more Google centric tablet for the same price. I think the race to the bottom is going to be between android tablet manufacturers now that Google followed Amazon and a small tablet market has been fully defined.

 

Remember Amazon marketed the Fire as a Kindle and not a tablet. The Nexus 7 is the first big release $200 tablet to hit the market. I think if the other Android manufacturers follow this trend Amazon does not stand a chance in the hardware race. Amazon has to rely on their ecosystem of books, movies, and television shows to stay relevant. Digital media is something Google has the infrastructure to imitate easily. If this goes the way I think it will, in five years, Amazon will be the go to website for parcel items and its digital services will be somewhat less relevant compared to what Google is able to offer.

 

Apple isn't in this fight. They will continue to produce great hardware at great margins staying one step ahead of the competition. If they slip up, and release a "windows vista", or they don't stay far enough ahead of Android, they are done. Apple cannot maintain 20%+ margins while their competition could run at 0% margins and continue to grow revenue. Investing in Apple is betting on them to stay out in front. Their margin for error is shrinking every year. If they loose a race, or don't come up with the next best thing once the smartphone market matures (after android compared to iOS becomes a Dell compared to a HPQ), I wouldn't want to be a part owner of Apple.

 

How long with the competition survive on 0% margins? What is likely to happen first - the competition runs out of steam or Apple screws up?

[Sunrider]

But you are betting that the "innovation gap" will remain wide such that AAPL will be able to maintain its extraordinarily high margins in the face of competitors who are fine with razor thin margins because their real businesses are services. 

 

By all accounts, the new Nexus tablet and the latest galaxy are awesome, and people could easily start gravitating to those options versus Apple options.  It already appears that AAPL is being forced to put out a smaller tablet, which could cannibalize its very high margin iPad sales.

 

And if Surface is successful, AAPL may have to come up with a competing product that cannibalizes sales of both iPads and Macbooks. 

 

I don't disagree with you that AAPL will likely have the highest margins on the integrated hardware/software, but that margin could shrink going forward due to the competition heating up.  Nobody knows for sure, but it would be wise to bake that possibility into any AAPL valuation.

 

txlaw - Are you an apple user (I mean beyond an iPod, iPhone)? This is not to start a this-vs-that debate but the one thing I found over time using Apple products which most non-users or casual users don't seem to internalise, is that Apple (at least under Steve Jobs) never did a product because it felt it had to respond to some sort of competitive pressure. This is part of the reason why the products are so good. (And this runs through the products, down into things that most users never see, like programming APIs). I would hope, as a shareholder, that this cultural imperative to make good products that they want for themselves remains inculcated in the management team for a long time because once they start making products for the sake of responding to some competitor, they will lose their status as leaders, the marketing halo will vanish and it is also likely that the products will turn out to be crap. I can highly recommend the original introduction of the iPhone (you can find it on youtube) for a glimpse of how that thinking works vs. "Oh we need to sell products, so we need to look at what competitors are doing and then do the same or do it a little better to sell ...".

 

Part of the reason, in my view that Android did not kill the iPhone beyond the marketing cloud was that Apple simply thought the product through better from all angles. The value is not in the hardware or the operating system. The value is in the apps and they made it very easy to produce these and for customers to safely consume them. And then they gave developers a huge base by ensuring that virtually all i-products can run their software, which is not the case across different flavours/versions of Android.

 

This is not (yet) the case in Android and part of the reason why the 'app landscape' is dominated by i-products. Anyway, long winded message to make the point that I hope that they will NOT feel that they "have to come up with" xyz because then the growth days are probably at an end.

 

Cheers - C.

 

 

[txlaw]

txlaw - Are you an apple user (I mean beyond an iPod, iPhone)? This is not to start a this-vs-that debate but the one thing I found over time using Apple products which most non-users or casual users don't seem to internalise, is that Apple (at least under Steve Jobs) never did a product because it felt it had to respond to some sort of competitive pressure. This is part of the reason why the products are so good. (And this runs through the products, down into things that most users never see, like programming APIs). I would hope, as a shareholder, that this cultural imperative to make good products that they want for themselves remains inculcated in the management team for a long time because once they start making products for the sake of responding to some competitor, they will lose their status as leaders, the marketing halo will vanish and it is also likely that the products will turn out to be crap. I can highly recommend the original introduction of the iPhone (you can find it on youtube) for a glimpse of how that thinking works vs. "Oh we need to sell products, so we need to look at what competitors are doing and then do the same or do it a little better to sell ...".

 

Part of the reason, in my view that Android did not kill the iPhone beyond the marketing cloud was that Apple simply thought the product through better from all angles. The value is not in the hardware or the operating system. The value is in the apps and they made it very easy to produce these and for customers to safely consume them. And then they gave developers a huge base by ensuring that virtually all i-products can run their software, which is not the case across different flavours/versions of Android.

 

This is not (yet) the case in Android and part of the reason why the 'app landscape' is dominated by i-products. Anyway, long winded message to make the point that I hope that they will NOT feel that they "have to come up with" xyz because then the growth days are probably at an end.

 

Cheers - C.

 

I own an iPhone, iPad, and 15" matte-screen Macbook Pro.  I also own a Boxee box, which is way better than AppleTV, though still pretty buggy, and a PS3.  I am not an Apple fanboy, so if I find I product I like better than an Apple one, I will buy it.

 

My point was not that Apple needs to respond due solely to competitive pressure, but rather that Apple products are no longer the only game in town because their competitors are releasing highly comparable products and because there are new innovative designs (smaller tablets, hybrid tablets/desktops) that could take away Apple sales or reduce gross margins if they don't come up with competing designs. 

 

In my opinion, the value that AAPL provides is in the AAPL OS (iOS and OSX), which is spread across multiple devices.  Indeed, the ultimate value a complex OS provides to society is, of course, the ecosystem (read: apps) it supports.  So I wouldn't at all put it the way you have. 

 

As for Apple domination of the app landscape, that will be a thing of the past.  Yes, Apple was a first mover with an amazing product -- so it now has the most apps.  I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that Apple likely will not dominate the app ecosystem for all of time, much less the next decade.  Developers will develop apps for Android and Windows.  There will also be a movement to make it much easier for developers to develop apps that work across platforms.  In such a world, Apple's competitive advantage will be design, not the number of apps it already has available.

[Guest valueInv]

But you are betting that the "innovation gap" will remain wide such that AAPL will be able to maintain its extraordinarily high margins in the face of competitors who are fine with razor thin margins because their real businesses are services. 

 

By all accounts, the new Nexus tablet and the latest galaxy are awesome, and people could easily start gravitating to those options versus Apple options.  It already appears that AAPL is being forced to put out a smaller tablet, which could cannibalize its very high margin iPad sales.

 

And if Surface is successful, AAPL may have to come up with a competing product that cannibalizes sales of both iPads and Macbooks. 

 

I don't disagree with you that AAPL will likely have the highest margins on the integrated hardware/software, but that margin could shrink going forward due to the competition heating up.  Nobody knows for sure, but it would be wise to bake that possibility into any AAPL valuation.

 

txlaw - Are you an apple user (I mean beyond an iPod, iPhone)? This is not to start a this-vs-that debate but the one thing I found over time using Apple products which most non-users or casual users don't seem to internalise, is that Apple (at least under Steve Jobs) never did a product because it felt it had to respond to some sort of competitive pressure. This is part of the reason why the products are so good. (And this runs through the products, down into things that most users never see, like programming APIs). I would hope, as a shareholder, that this cultural imperative to make good products that they want for themselves remains inculcated in the management team for a long time because once they start making products for the sake of responding to some competitor, they will lose their status as leaders, the marketing halo will vanish and it is also likely that the products will turn out to be crap. I can highly recommend the original introduction of the iPhone (you can find it on youtube) for a glimpse of how that thinking works vs. "Oh we need to sell products, so we need to look at what competitors are doing and then do the same or do it a little better to sell ...".

 

Part of the reason, in my view that Android did not kill the iPhone beyond the marketing cloud was that Apple simply thought the product through better from all angles. The value is not in the hardware or the operating system. The value is in the apps and they made it very easy to produce these and for customers to safely consume them. And then they gave developers a huge base by ensuring that virtually all i-products can run their software, which is not the case across different flavours/versions of Android.

 

This is not (yet) the case in Android and part of the reason why the 'app landscape' is dominated by i-products. Anyway, long winded message to make the point that I hope that they will NOT feel that they "have to come up with" xyz because then the growth days are probably at an end.

 

Cheers - C.

 

+1. You're right about the apps and the ecosystem. Amazon is creating a completely different ecosystem including OS, app store, content,etc from Google. This only fragments Android more and weakens the ecosystem. From an app developer perspective, it makes Android that much more unattractive and more complex and expensive to support.

 

For example, take a look at this device:

 

 

On Android, whci tablet would you build it for ? Nexus 7?Kindle Fire? Samsung Tab?

 

None of these have enough sales comparable to the iPad to justify an investment.

[Sunrider]

txlaw - I do agree that the products are becoming increasingly comparable but I wouldn't want to handicap the app space (the next respondent made the point well enough ... so we'll see how fast this all happens). Anyway, as I said, no intention to get into a fanboy this-vs-that debate (and yes, there sure are products that do some things better than the respective apple counterpart). Neither was I arguing against google or amazon :) rather for my hope that Apple won't go into the mode that you had described because then my investment in that firm will no longer be a good one.

 

Cheers - C.

[Ross812]

This is a race to the bottom between Google and Amazon to put devices into peoples hands. From the beginning Google has not been trying to monetize Android in the traditional sense. They are using it to expand their internet presence, mind share, and moat. Google started out by cornering the search market,making their name synonymous with internet search. Now they are expanding their moat by trying to make their name the first thing you think about when the internet comes to mind. Amazon proved that there is a market for a tablet that is smaller and less expensive than the Ipad. This was something that the other tablet manufacturers who were trying to compete with the Ipad couldn't figure out. I think Google saw the success of the Kindle Fire and realized they could make a better more Google centric tablet for the same price. I think the race to the bottom is going to be between android tablet manufacturers now that Google followed Amazon and a small tablet market has been fully defined.

 

Remember Amazon marketed the Fire as a Kindle and not a tablet. The Nexus 7 is the first big release $200 tablet to hit the market. I think if the other Android manufacturers follow this trend Amazon does not stand a chance in the hardware race. Amazon has to rely on their ecosystem of books, movies, and television shows to stay relevant. Digital media is something Google has the infrastructure to imitate easily. If this goes the way I think it will, in five years, Amazon will be the go to website for parcel items and its digital services will be somewhat less relevant compared to what Google is able to offer.

 

Apple isn't in this fight. They will continue to produce great hardware at great margins staying one step ahead of the competition. If they slip up, and release a "windows vista", or they don't stay far enough ahead of Android, they are done. Apple cannot maintain 20%+ margins while their competition could run at 0% margins and continue to grow revenue. Investing in Apple is betting on them to stay out in front. Their margin for error is shrinking every year. If they loose a race, or don't come up with the next best thing once the smartphone market matures (after android compared to iOS becomes a Dell compared to a HPQ), I wouldn't want to be a part owner of Apple.

 

How long with the competition survive on 0% margins? What is likely to happen first - the competition runs out of steam or Apple screws up?

 

Google can survive forever at 0% margins because selling hardware is not their revenue generator. Other android manufacturers can survive on razor thin margins like the desktop industry. For the last five years Apple has stayed ahead of the competition and maintained margins by having a better product, but you are starting to see android catch up. Apple has already been forced to create their own navigation system to stay maintain their position, and there are rumors they are producing a mini Ipad. The competition won't run out of steam because they are in a different arms race than Apple. Apple is making money selling high priced luxury cars. Google is making money by giving away cars at cost then tolling all the cars on the road. The problem for Apple is their luxury Lexus is starting to look very similar to the Google Nexus at half the price.   

[txlaw]

txlaw - I do agree that the products are becoming increasingly comparable but I wouldn't want to handicap the app space (the next respondent made the point well enough ... so we'll see how fast this all happens). Anyway, as I said, no intention to get into a fanboy this-vs-that debate (and yes, there sure are products that do some things better than the respective apple counterpart). Neither was I arguing against google or amazon :) rather for my hope that Apple won't go into the mode that you had described because then my investment in that firm will no longer be a good one.

 

Cheers - C.

 

Well, let me just clarify again -- I'm not saying that Apple will make "me too" products because of what Google or Amazon or Microsoft have released.  What I'm saying is that if the new products coming out of those companies are innovative and of real value to end users, Apple's business will be affected, full stop.  Most likely by lost sales or gross margin compression. 

 

Additionally, if it turns out there is a real need for the new innovative products being released (for example, a hybrid tablet/desktop experience or smaller sized tablets), I don't see why AAPL would not want to come out with their own versions of such products, provided that they are the best damn products Apple can make.  But if AAPL does not come up with their own versions of those new products, they may no longer be able to claim that they have best stuff on the market.

 

Re: developers not wanting to develop for Android, they're doing so despite any fragmentation.  So if GOOG reduces the probability of fragmentation, think about how that will affect the market.

 

In any case, I'm not telling you that I think AAPL is overvalued or that your investment won't be a good one.

[Guest valueInv]

 

Google can survive forever at 0% margins because selling hardware is not their revenue generator. Other android manufacturers can survive on razor thin margins like the desktop industry. For the last five years Apple has stayed ahead of the competition and maintained margins by having a better product, but you are starting to see android catch up. Apple has already been forced to create their own navigation system to stay maintain their position, and there are rumors they are producing a mini Ipad. The competition won't run out of steam because they are in a different arms race than Apple. Apple is making money selling high priced luxury cars. Google is making money by giving away cars at cost then tolling all the cars on the road. The problem for Apple is their luxury Lexus is starting to look very similar to the Google Nexus at half the price. 

 

Google has bought a $13B dollar business selling hardware. They're manufacturing the Nexus Q themselves. Andy Rubin said that the Nexus 7 has 0 margin. Now Asus is not going to sell for 0 margin, which means Google is subsidizing it. They will also be selling Google Glasses. So Google is very much in the hardware business.

 

A lot of vendors in the PC industry went out of business due to razor thin margins.

 

Apple created a navigation system not because they were forced to but because they're slowly rooting out Google from their platform. Mapping and location information is strategic enough that they don't want an outsider vendor controlling it. Further, Google is deprived of mapping data from iPhone users and also of advertising revenue from location based ads. For Apple, it is a no brainer. They're will probably be cutting out the search engine at some also.

 

I played with a Nexus 7 last week . Yes, their UI is getting pretty close.  It may be half the price, but it also is half the size.

The apps are not tablet apps but scaled up smartphone apps. The screen is too small for full featured tablet apps. BTW, it looks like  the $199 Nexus 7 will be sold only through the online store. Only the $249 version will be sold through regular retail outlets. Further, most the the content available for it is licensed only in 5 countries including the US. The other countries will have a tablet that won't be doing much. Comparing the Nexus 7 to the iPad is like comparing a BMW 3 series to a Kawasaki Ninja motorcycle. They may be equally good at what they do but they have different capacities. For example, on my iPad I can edit a presentation with Keynote, write music on Garageband or create mashups using vjay (http://www.algoriddim.com/vjay). These tasks are not feasible on a 7 inch screen.

 

What the Nexus 7 does is address a market segment that is not covered by Apple today.

[Guest valueInv]

Well, let me just clarify again -- I'm not saying that Apple will make "me too" products because of what Google or Amazon or Microsoft have released.  What I'm saying is that if the new products coming out of those companies are innovative and of real value to end users, Apple's business will be affected, full stop.  Most likely by lost sales or gross margin compression. 

 

Additionally, if it turns out there is a real need for the new innovative products being released (for example, a hybrid tablet/desktop experience or smaller sized tablets), I don't see why AAPL would not want to come out with their own versions of such products, provided that they are the best damn products Apple can make.  But if AAPL does not come up with their own versions of those new products, they may no longer be able to claim that they have best stuff on the market.

Agreed. As you said there's an "if". Obviously, Apple needs to outperform. But I see more cracks appearing in the Android ecosystem than in the IOS ecosystem currently.

 

Re: developers not wanting to develop for Android, they're doing so despite any fragmentation.  So if GOOG reduces the probability of fragmentation, think about how that will affect the market.

 

http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG.Biz/Flurry/feature.asp?c=41881

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406993,00.asp

 

Google has been trying to reduce fragmentation but has failed. Only 10% of devices out there are on ICS. Not only are vendors slapping on their own UI on top of Android, their are building apps and store that compete with Google's. Samsung has S-Voice, their own version of iMessage and they even are creating a mobile ad network. HTC bought Beats Audio, MOG, etc. They're all trying to differentiate themselves and compete with Google. Then there's Amazon who is gunning straight for Google. Fragmentation is not going to decrease anytime soon

 

http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/04/samsung-mobile-ad-network/

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/174348/samsung-acquires-mobile-media-streaming-company-ms.html

http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/beats-audio-buys-mog-htc-gets-a-streaming-music-service-20120320/

 

[tradevestor]

Since there is no topic that covers smartphones in general,  I will leave this here. 

 

The great smartphone boom is about to end as the market nears peak.

- Growth slows

- Competition intensifies

- Open systems will start to win.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2012/07/16/report-apple-iphone-5-will-be-last-smartphone-hurrah-as-market-nears-peak/

[DCG]

Marissa Meyer named CEO of Yahoo. Didn't see that one coming.