Comments on: Business Model Dances

By: how to overcome fear of flying

how to overcome fear of flying — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 20:10:01 +0000

I almost never leave a response, however i did a few searching and wound up here Business Model Dances | Monday Note.
And I do have a couple of questions for you if you tend not to mind.
Is it simply me or does it look like a few of these remarks look
as if they are left by brain dead folks?
And, if you are writing at additional places, I’d like to keep up with anything fresh you have to post. Would you make a list of the complete urls of all your public pages like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter feed?

By: expert en référencement naturel

expert en référencement naturel — Sun, 11 Nov 2012 00:39:17 +0000

Je suis en train de créer un blog et je me renseigne sur le référencement de mon site. Je serais vraiement intéressé de savoir votre avis sur ceci.. Afin d’économiser sur le devis d’un référencement de site web et mieux profiter de la prestation d’un webmarketer seo, vous pouvez suivre des formation seo pour devenir à votre tour un expert seo services. Des conseils ?

référencement naturel http://goo.gl/IFm7g référencement google

By: כמה עולה בוטוקס לשפתיים

כמה עולה בוטוקס לשפתיים — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 14:39:18 +0000

כמה עולה בוטוקס לשפתיים…

… בוטוקס השוואת מחירים – האם חייבים לחזור על הטיפול פעמיים בשנה בממוצע, כך שאם אתם מבקשים לעבור טיפול בוטוקס מחליף פעמים רבות. בינקות העור עשיר בחומצה היאלרונית וככל שמתקדם העור בגיל כך יש הפחתה משמעותי… Business Model Dances | Monday Note ……

By: Nevin Liber

Nevin Liber — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:27:14 +0000

Sure, the partners of Microsoft and Google are probably very unhappy, but where can they go?

By: dave

dave — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 23:36:03 +0000

The point is that Apple doesn’t need to change it’s biz plan. Google and MS do. But they are in a space where apple eats all the profit. So they have to abandon their hardware partners and building the completely vertically integrated solution is very very hard.

IF samsung is smart they have a clone and own android stack like amazon. The question is can they learn to do the software side of things faster than google can learn to do the hardware side and customer support side. Apple isn’t really googles competitor on mobile (pros vs minor league)… Samsung is.

By: Vishi Gondi

Vishi Gondi — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:27:37 +0000

This is the first Monday Note that I don’t agree with.

Lets take a guess on what’s currently cooking in Apple labs.

iWatch (previously iPod Nano), iPad mini (previously iPod Touch), Apple TV & iMote (multi touch for tv ala leap motion), iPad 8″.

The interesting thing is that all the above will be within the $100 to $250 range. The only way apple can make money at that price point is to charge users to sync their data across these devices.

Here’s when these companies make money currently:
Microsoft : $1000.
Apple: $500.
Google and Amazon: Under $200.

As the new $200 price point emerges, Apple has to figure out how to to make money at that level.

iCloud is the big bet. Charge people to save data in the cloud and build an ecosystem of cheap devices around it.

I’d say its apple’s business model thats changing.

By: Mike Van Horn

Mike Van Horn — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:43:21 +0000

Relevant quote from Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, quoted in ZDNet:

“80 million iPhone 5 units are in the bag. . . Our recent survey of 400 consumers confirms our belief that the iPhone will take share over the next few years. In our survey, 65% of phone owners said that their next phone is expected to be an iPhone, which compared to 52% total iPhone ownership in the survey. We also note that the re-buy rate of iPhone users increased slightly y/y to 94% from 93%. Most importantly, 51% of consumers that planned on making the iPhone their next smartphone (whether current iPhone users or not) said they were waiting for the iPhone 5. We believe this suggests that as much as 50% of our estimated iPhone units for FY13 are in the bag (~170 million iPhone users x 94% re-buy x 51% iPhone 5 planned purchase).”

http://www.zdnet.com/apple-iphone-5-will-set-up-4g-lte-android-showdown-7000001219/

By: Edwin

Edwin — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:47:38 +0000

Apple is business model nirvana, nearly complete vertical integration. Google and Microsoft have seen the light and are racing towards vertical integration but it’s really hard. But the Google model is ubiquity and the Apple model is roach motel (MS – whatever). Google open sources the core layers of Android so everyone is inclined to use it since it is free and good. People can ad value as they see fit. The end result is some Android users are more profitable to Google than others but everyone’s using it. Google’s proprietary value add services are then ported to iOS to the extent possible… more ubiquity.
Choose Apple and be prepared to pay up because it’s the last technology choice you ever make because Apple always knows what’s best for you and they make it as hard as possible to leave once you’re in.
I think Google is pursuing a messier, more humane model incrementally headed towards ubiquity. Apple is pursuing an authoritarian model which needs to be fed by smash hit products. Good luck.

By: Gmail

Gmail — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:00:00 +0000

You seem to be unforgiving to Google (and Microsoft).

The “design point” strategy is a great move, probably the best possible for both of them. Now the OEM have a clue about what to do. They are great to copy, bring incremental improvements, fill in every niche and trigger a cost reduction war, but they can’t be asked to be “disruptive” nor “visionary” : it’s not their job.

I think this strategy completely fill the current guidance void, and will make the Tablet a viable and ferocious market.

Which is, by the way, exactly what Apple can be afraid of…

By: Georges Gombay

Georges Gombay — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:23:35 +0000

Sorry about the typo, that should of course be Jean-Louis

By: Georges Gombay

Georges Gombay — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:21:31 +0000

Good article, Jena-Louis, I enjoyed reading it, especially the part about Google’s move into hardware. You raised several good points.

By: jehrler

jehrler — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:00:22 +0000

APitt “The manufacturers are seeded with this DNA to produce something better, faster and more beautiful.”

The problem with that scenario is that with the Nexus 7 Google may have seeded the DNA but they took all the air away. As Jean-Louis points out, these “reference” designs are being sold at cost. Google still makes (a bit of money on the eyeballs), but where does Samsung find any margin?

This is the same issue that MS has, you can build a great device as a reference, but if you sell it at cost you are suffocating those you are trying to motivate.

By: Antoine

Antoine — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:35:46 +0000

I am with APitt: not sure that Nexus 7 is such a significant inflexion to Google’s strategy to seed with reference model. Also the manufacturer brand is present (Asus). The price point is interesting though, as you seem to suggest that Google is subsidizing to get to that level. I dont know if it is true, and/or if it is that different from the first Nexus.

By: Mike Van Horn

Mike Van Horn — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:26:09 +0000

Jean-Louis
I don’t get why Apple would go the iOS licensing route. What’s the problem they face for which this move might be the answer? You go on to point out the difficulties faced by Apple’s major competitors. Seems to me that these trials point to the strength of Apple’s model. Why do a 180 when all your competitors are still working the kinks out of their own models?

By: Forks in the Road Ahead?

Forks in the Road Ahead? — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:13:19 +0000

[...] Gassée in his weekly column for the Monday Note takes a look at this (Business Model Dances). Google, he argues, have not necessarily followed Microsoft by extending vertically with the Nexus [...]

By: Walt French

Walt French — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 22:44:27 +0000

…I think the “business model” of hardware-only, vertically integrated h/w & s/w, or software-only misses the point: companies entering an established market have to prove they have unique, or at least much better, features to grab customers’ attention. Microsoft, for one, seems to remain a captive of their Enterprise desktop customers, and should expect to fail in efforts to expand beyond that slow- or negative-growth market.

By: Walt French

Walt French — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 22:39:46 +0000

Apple’s strenuous efforts notwithstanding, it seems like there are NO barriers to a competitor duplicating your software and ruining whatever protective barrier you thought you had.
.
Does anybody else think this may be Google’s lasting legacy, or at least that they are the poster child for? It was just a few years ago that hardware was the commodity play (as JLG rightly notes, driven by a lack of innovation from Redmond so that pennies of margin were all that separated the boxes). And now, integrated hardware is God, because Apple bundles its software profit margins into hardware?
.
Allow me to be skeptical. The standout failures are the woefully inadequate or even bumbling-looking Xoom, WP7 and Playbook. These were simply inadequate, and the fact that they were cobbled together as boxes of parts from multiple vendors was not what did them in. Ditto, Windows PCs are not musty old things because of a lack of close partnerships with hardware, but from Microsoft’s steadfast resistance to Mobile. (Take a look at the utterly touch-hostile dialogue boxes for detailed features in today’s Office announcement, a “breakthrough” mobile!)
.
If hardware innovation slows, as it well might (absent ubiquitous 5G networks, holographic displays and Near+Medium+Far-Field Communications), then the battlefield will shift to a company’s ability to communicate how significant other new system- and software-level features are. Ergo, Siri.
.
Methinks the battle shifts to favor firms that can communicate a comprehensive suite of sensible, valuable features, with the occasional breakthrough that many will be able to identify with (the way that Apple wishes we all would with Siri). I think the “business model” of hardware-only, vertical

By: Mike Cane

Mike Cane — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:43:38 +0000

>>>If they’re not cowed by Apple, they certainly aren’t going to let Google eat into their tablet business
WHAT “tablet business”? Samsung admitted they haven’t been doing well (Google it). They also dropped the 8.9 Galaxy Tab, ironic given it’s the best size competitor to a 7.85″ iPad Mini. Yeah, there’s the 7.7, but no WiFi-only version has appeared in the US, only Verizon has it, and that Super AMOLED screen is battery-eating for something as simple as reading. There are few real fans of TouchWiz out there too.

By: Marcos Duran

Marcos Duran — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 20:57:25 +0000

I ordered one as well… as a gift because I am very Apple centric. This is what upset me about Google. That Play store is a mess. Besides the ridiculously long order number there is not way to change your shipping address online. There is no way to cancel your order online. Everything has to be done via the phone. I spent 40 minutes on hold to see if I could switch my shipping address from my home to office. Surprise!! I could not! Seriously? They have no skills dealing with physical products and it shows.

By: APitt

APitt — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 20:33:42 +0000

I just don’t agree about google and android. Google seeds the market with reference models. It’s like seeding with new genes in the wild to create more fit handsets that can evolve more quickly in a turbulent environment. The manufacturers are seeded with this DNA to produce something better, faster and more beautiful.

Google doesn’t have to do everything. Google just needs to lead the market. I think this is a great strategy that’s causing fits for Apple.

By: John Gordon

John Gordon — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:51:23 +0000

Please don’t do this too us. “Let’s stop the fiction here ” half-way down?

These fiction-focused posts (2nd one you’ve done recently) do need some kind of a dislaimer.