Showing posts with label AAPL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AAPL. Show all posts
10/5/10
Consensus earnings growth does not justify share price for AAPL, AMZN, NOK, VMW, or CRM
12/15/09
RES Free Thinking: 2009 Year In Review.
Overall, 2009 has been a fun ride for RES Free Thinking with the Top 5 Tech Picks returning 184.9% from the beginning of the year, and 156.9% since the market lows during the week of March 8, 2009.
11/26/09
CEO Series: Interview with Andrew Osis, CEO Multiplied Media - developers of the Poynt Mobile App
This is the first in a series of interviews conducted with CEOs of interesting Canadian technology companies. The intent of this project is to provide investors with a unique understanding of what various companies are doing - directly from the top dog. Hopefully, the interviews conducted over the next few weeks will help investors to gain insight into the fundamentals of the companies to which they may not otherwise have access.
The first interview conducted is with Andrew Osis, Chief Executive Officer, Multiplied Media (MMC.V). The company is headquartered in Calgary, Alberta and has developed the wildly successful and award-winning mobile search application for Blackberry called Poynt.
The first interview conducted is with Andrew Osis, Chief Executive Officer, Multiplied Media (MMC.V). The company is headquartered in Calgary, Alberta and has developed the wildly successful and award-winning mobile search application for Blackberry called Poynt.
11/2/09
Could Multiplied Media Be "The Next Big Thing"?
Last week, the DVC SmallTech Newsletter identified ten breakout smallcap technology stocks for YTD 2009. Many of those intersect with the RES Free Thinking Top 5 picks for 2009. Investors in all of those stocks are smiling so far as we enter the last two months of the year. Alas, but there may be one more stock that could make a lot of noise over the next few months.
9/18/09
Check out Poynt: An award winning mobile search app for BBerry...iPhone next?
This application won the grand prize for RIM's Blackberry Developer Challenge at the end of 2008. It is well designed. Not only can you find stuff nearby, but you can actually do something after you find what you are looking for - like buy movie tickets. Spend a couple of minutes checking it out.
Multiplied Media (MMC.V) has taken longer than expected to perfect the app, and the company is still at the early stages of commercialization, but the app seems like it should be a grand prize winner. Look for an iPhone version of Poynt to follow soon.
Earlier this week, the Company announced that it has reached the 1 million user milestone, which suggests that it has the potential to go viral. Investors are taking note. In August, the Company was able to raise $2.9 million in growth financing. Over the past couple of weeks, the penny stock has doubled in value.
Disclosure: I do not own shares of MMC.V
Multiplied Media (MMC.V) has taken longer than expected to perfect the app, and the company is still at the early stages of commercialization, but the app seems like it should be a grand prize winner. Look for an iPhone version of Poynt to follow soon.
Earlier this week, the Company announced that it has reached the 1 million user milestone, which suggests that it has the potential to go viral. Investors are taking note. In August, the Company was able to raise $2.9 million in growth financing. Over the past couple of weeks, the penny stock has doubled in value.
Disclosure: I do not own shares of MMC.V
7/23/09
Worldwide Connectivity Statistics.
Some interesting numbers for technology investors interested in companies that participate in the connectivity ecosystem. Worldwide recession notwithstanding, there are some areas of significant growth which should bode well for companies in several sectors. The NASDAQ has outperformed the Dow index significantly this year, and some of the statistics below may reveal some of the reasons why. During earnings season AAPL, IBM, NOK, INTC, GOOG all beat consensus estimates and all but GOOG (which does not provide guidance) have indicated positive outlooks entering H2 2009. In fact, IBM has increased its guidance for the last half of the year. Investors should expect positive outlooks for both CSCO and RIMM when they report next, although positive outlook may have been priced into these stocks.
Notwithstanding a pause in growth in some areas during H2 2008 and H1 2009, the global march towards greater connectivity continues.
Internet Usage:
Total worldwide: 1.5 billion or 23.6% of total world population.
Most users: China with 288 million or 22.4% of population.
Regions with greatest penetration: N.A. 62.7%, EU 60.7%
For China to obtain similar levels of connectivity as North America or the European Union, another 500 million or so Chinese users would need to come online over the coming years, requiring massive investments in base infrastructure.
Emerging economies continue to drive internet connectivity growth, but are more likely to leverage fixed wireless broadband infrastructure to compensate for under-built wireline infrastructure. Even still, BRIC countries are likely to represent the vast majority of backbone investment as mega-operators in countries such as China and India continue to lay down the fundamental capacities to support growth in internet traffic.
Mobile subscriptions:
Total worldwide: 4.1 billion
Fastest growing regions: Middle East 32% CAGR and Africa 24% CAGR over past 5 years.
Basic mobile subscriptions in emerging economic regions are being used as a means by people to get access to basic services including banking. EEFT and First Data, among others, are likely to be vendors providing access to low-cost financial services options.
Mobile data services:
Total worldwide: 225 million
2009 growth rate: 93%
The most compelling growth rates that exist, even in the depths of a major recession, continue to be related to the mobile data services channel. Hence, investors continue to see better than expected results from companies associated with this niche. As stated many times in previous posts, the scale and complexity of the emerging infrastructure should benefit technology companies that supply solutions to this niche. Eventually, all current mobile subscribers worldwide are likely to adopt mobile data services at some point. The current penetration of data services into the mobile subscriber market is still very modest at 5.4%.
As the world continues to become more connected, capacity, capability, energy consumption and security should remain key issues. Worldwide, there should be more investment and innovation in these areas.
The top basket of Canadian stocks to think about in the connectivity ecosystem include: RIM, CGI, BWC, DWI, RCM, WIN, RKN, and TUN. Most of these companies have demonstrated excellent recent earnings performance, sustained and sometime expanding gross margins, with solid balance sheets and low debt ratios. These could represent a pretty good "connectivity" portfolio. Others to possibly consider include ABS, SVC, PIX, Q, and AXX.
I have probably overlooked a few key favorite stocks, feel free to add.
Disclosure: I own CSCO and BWC. I do not own any of the other stocks mentioned.
Notwithstanding a pause in growth in some areas during H2 2008 and H1 2009, the global march towards greater connectivity continues.
Internet Usage:
Total worldwide: 1.5 billion or 23.6% of total world population.
Most users: China with 288 million or 22.4% of population.
Regions with greatest penetration: N.A. 62.7%, EU 60.7%
For China to obtain similar levels of connectivity as North America or the European Union, another 500 million or so Chinese users would need to come online over the coming years, requiring massive investments in base infrastructure.
Emerging economies continue to drive internet connectivity growth, but are more likely to leverage fixed wireless broadband infrastructure to compensate for under-built wireline infrastructure. Even still, BRIC countries are likely to represent the vast majority of backbone investment as mega-operators in countries such as China and India continue to lay down the fundamental capacities to support growth in internet traffic.
Mobile subscriptions:
Total worldwide: 4.1 billion
Fastest growing regions: Middle East 32% CAGR and Africa 24% CAGR over past 5 years.
Basic mobile subscriptions in emerging economic regions are being used as a means by people to get access to basic services including banking. EEFT and First Data, among others, are likely to be vendors providing access to low-cost financial services options.
Mobile data services:
Total worldwide: 225 million
2009 growth rate: 93%
The most compelling growth rates that exist, even in the depths of a major recession, continue to be related to the mobile data services channel. Hence, investors continue to see better than expected results from companies associated with this niche. As stated many times in previous posts, the scale and complexity of the emerging infrastructure should benefit technology companies that supply solutions to this niche. Eventually, all current mobile subscribers worldwide are likely to adopt mobile data services at some point. The current penetration of data services into the mobile subscriber market is still very modest at 5.4%.
As the world continues to become more connected, capacity, capability, energy consumption and security should remain key issues. Worldwide, there should be more investment and innovation in these areas.
The top basket of Canadian stocks to think about in the connectivity ecosystem include: RIM, CGI, BWC, DWI, RCM, WIN, RKN, and TUN. Most of these companies have demonstrated excellent recent earnings performance, sustained and sometime expanding gross margins, with solid balance sheets and low debt ratios. These could represent a pretty good "connectivity" portfolio. Others to possibly consider include ABS, SVC, PIX, Q, and AXX.
I have probably overlooked a few key favorite stocks, feel free to add.
Disclosure: I own CSCO and BWC. I do not own any of the other stocks mentioned.
6/15/09
Enstream: A Mobile Moneris or Dexit Revisited?
Yesterday, Telus (T), Bell, and Rogers (RCI) launched mobile payment solution branded Zoompass, which is developed and operated by Enstream, a new mobile payment solution platform, which also just happens to be a three-way joint venture among them. This post will attempt to contextualize Enstream (where the intellectual property resides) within the mobile ecosystem. Will it dominate? Will it survive? As with most things, its future is probably somewhere in the middle and it could morph into something entirely different.
I have attempted to sign up for the beta service. The sign up process appears to be fairly straightforward from the web, although the system hangs once I have logged into my new account from my Blackberry 8700. I still have not got to the point where I can use it.
Mobile Payments Will Have a Major Worldwide Economic Impact
An earlier blog post analyses the importance of billing systems in a race to become top dog for mobile applications. Mobile payment systems are a genus closely related to billing systems within the mobile ecosystem, although with probably more far-reaching economic implications, especially for emerging economic blocks such as BRIC and MENA. Mobile payments have the ability to accelerate the flow of funds, improve liquidity, and improve economic access for hundreds of millions, closing in on billions, of people worldwide (more on that later). Mobile payments systems are operating in countries as varied as Kenya, Korea, the Phillipines, and Britain, which has have helped to provide a glimpse into a potentially massive worldwide opportunity.
Is Enstream Relevant?
Leadership at Enstream appears to understands the global potential, and is already positioning itself within an inferred world market opportunity. The question is; can it get there from here? Possibly. But there is a lot of work to do and the JV is nowhere near to being a first mover in the industry. Even in Canada. The inter-relationships and possible connectedness among participants is extremely complex with carriers, software vendors, device manufacturers, distribution channels, retailers, banks, and payment networks all vying for bits of transaction value. Many of those bits are still to be defined, and Enstream has to stake out its claim quickly.
Consumer Feedback Is Negative
For now, the Zoompass solution offers some additional convenience for Canadian consumers, although many appear to be choking on the high fees currently advertised at $0.50 per transaction. Consumer feedback via the blogsphere and twitter has been decidely negative related to fees and the potential for competitive concentration. CEOs that have been in the market for a while have all commented that the fee structure, as it stands, is a likely impediment to adoption.
Commentary From the Ecosystem Itself is More Positive
Notwithstanding the fee structure, most of the commentary offered by CEOs already operating in the ecosystem has been balanced and considers what Enstream means to their companies, to Canadian consumers, and to the world.
Universally, CEOs believe that it is a positive development that Canadian carriers are getting serious about mobile payments. Most of the vendors in the Canadian market are under-capitalized start-ups that have struggled to convince carriers of the market potential in Canada. As one CEO put it, carriers are finally showing that they "get it". Some believe that Enstream could behave as a universal gateway to the major carriers for independent mobile payment applications, which may kickstart another wave of development in the vertical.
Zoompass connects mobile transactions to a co-branded prepaid, reloadable Mastercard - not subscriber accounts. Presumably, this hybrid card system offers users maximum flexibility for consumers to withdraw funds via ABMs, pay via POS, and to transact via SMS or NFC from a mobile handset. There are already several prepaid Mastercard programs deployed, with many others in the works, which all appear to operate within a similar framework. Many CEOs believe that the Enstream platform may be an opportunity to better connect current prepaid programs to mobile devices both electronically, and at the POS.
Others believe that this move by the carriers may spur on more aggressive competition from banks and payment networks, which could deliver competitive gateway infrastructures, and ultimately better choice and lower costs to consumers. Several financial institutions are currently at early stages of developing applications to connect mobile devices directly and securely to consumer bank accounts for mobile payments. However, unless projects are sped up, consumers may have to wait several quarters until serious choice becomes available.
Some Global Comparatives
Device manufacturers such as Nokia (NOK), RIM (RIMM), and Apple (APPL) have a broader world view on mobile payments. In March 2009, Nokia made a substantial strategic investment in Silicon Valley-based Obopay. Obopay operates with a similar model to Enstream, but with deployments in both the United States and India. The price point is $0.25 to send up to $1000 and nothing to receive funds. In the meantime, RIM is actively testing ideas and pursuing multiple opportunities in the space, and has recently announced a partnership with payment giant PayPal (EBAY) to deliver billing and payment solutions for its AppWorld venture. PayPal Mobile is considered by many to be competitive to the new Enstream venture.
Euronet (EEFT) is a significant electronic transaction processor with 421,000 prepaid wireless, long-distance, and gift card endpoints worldwide. In 2007, it acquired RIA, the third largest money transfer agent in the world, and then last year attempted but failed to buy MoneyGram, the second largest money transfer agent in the world behind Western Union. Euronet, through its electronic network, is beginning to deliver a mobile payment and remittance infrastructure that can be cash-based. And here is why.
Between 80% and 85% of all mobile subscribers in emerging economies do not have bank accounts (not to mention credit), nor do they have easy access to local banking infrastructure. Most emerging economies operate as cash-based societies. This is a main driver behind the proliferation of prepaid subscriptions in BRIC, MENA and Latin America. Euronet and others like it are attempting to deploy ways to digitize cash via local merchants without banking infrastructure. By comparison, the Enstream solution appears to need banking infrastucture.
____________________________________________________
Bottom Line: Ecosystem
The Enstream launch is seen as positive by participants in the ecosystem as long as it evolves to a platform for multiple mobile payment applications tha can be offered to Canadian consumers. Enstream states that it is looking for development partners. The question is how economic will it be for independent developers to participate. Without participation by third-parties, the concept may struggle.
Bottom Line: Consumers
Consumers appear mistrustful of the enterprise, which implies that there is a branding deficit shared by the three founding partners that could impede progress. Pricing has been described by consumers and others in the ecosystem as the most immediate concern and potential barrier to adoption. Objections and barriers have been erected quickly by consumers, which may require time, capital, and effort to overcome before traction can be gained.
Bottom Line: Market Share
As for worldwide expansion, by comparison to other more advanced solutions worldwide, Enstream is late to the game and its business model may not be easily translatable to other regions of the world. As a result, Enstream should be viewed as regional play limited to the Canadian marketplace, with potential to buy its way into other markets in the future.
Bottom Line: Investors
Investors should expect that the JV will contribute little to the performance of RCI, T, or BCE over the next few years, unless the business model is revamped to go viral, which is quite possible. From a cost perspective, Enstream could contribute to the accelerated extinction of "hard cards" on display in many convenience stores, saving millions of dollars in the channels.
I have attempted to sign up for the beta service. The sign up process appears to be fairly straightforward from the web, although the system hangs once I have logged into my new account from my Blackberry 8700. I still have not got to the point where I can use it.
Mobile Payments Will Have a Major Worldwide Economic Impact
An earlier blog post analyses the importance of billing systems in a race to become top dog for mobile applications. Mobile payment systems are a genus closely related to billing systems within the mobile ecosystem, although with probably more far-reaching economic implications, especially for emerging economic blocks such as BRIC and MENA. Mobile payments have the ability to accelerate the flow of funds, improve liquidity, and improve economic access for hundreds of millions, closing in on billions, of people worldwide (more on that later). Mobile payments systems are operating in countries as varied as Kenya, Korea, the Phillipines, and Britain, which has have helped to provide a glimpse into a potentially massive worldwide opportunity.
Is Enstream Relevant?
Leadership at Enstream appears to understands the global potential, and is already positioning itself within an inferred world market opportunity. The question is; can it get there from here? Possibly. But there is a lot of work to do and the JV is nowhere near to being a first mover in the industry. Even in Canada. The inter-relationships and possible connectedness among participants is extremely complex with carriers, software vendors, device manufacturers, distribution channels, retailers, banks, and payment networks all vying for bits of transaction value. Many of those bits are still to be defined, and Enstream has to stake out its claim quickly.
Consumer Feedback Is Negative
For now, the Zoompass solution offers some additional convenience for Canadian consumers, although many appear to be choking on the high fees currently advertised at $0.50 per transaction. Consumer feedback via the blogsphere and twitter has been decidely negative related to fees and the potential for competitive concentration. CEOs that have been in the market for a while have all commented that the fee structure, as it stands, is a likely impediment to adoption.
Commentary From the Ecosystem Itself is More Positive
Notwithstanding the fee structure, most of the commentary offered by CEOs already operating in the ecosystem has been balanced and considers what Enstream means to their companies, to Canadian consumers, and to the world.
Universally, CEOs believe that it is a positive development that Canadian carriers are getting serious about mobile payments. Most of the vendors in the Canadian market are under-capitalized start-ups that have struggled to convince carriers of the market potential in Canada. As one CEO put it, carriers are finally showing that they "get it". Some believe that Enstream could behave as a universal gateway to the major carriers for independent mobile payment applications, which may kickstart another wave of development in the vertical.
Zoompass connects mobile transactions to a co-branded prepaid, reloadable Mastercard - not subscriber accounts. Presumably, this hybrid card system offers users maximum flexibility for consumers to withdraw funds via ABMs, pay via POS, and to transact via SMS or NFC from a mobile handset. There are already several prepaid Mastercard programs deployed, with many others in the works, which all appear to operate within a similar framework. Many CEOs believe that the Enstream platform may be an opportunity to better connect current prepaid programs to mobile devices both electronically, and at the POS.
Others believe that this move by the carriers may spur on more aggressive competition from banks and payment networks, which could deliver competitive gateway infrastructures, and ultimately better choice and lower costs to consumers. Several financial institutions are currently at early stages of developing applications to connect mobile devices directly and securely to consumer bank accounts for mobile payments. However, unless projects are sped up, consumers may have to wait several quarters until serious choice becomes available.
Some Global Comparatives
Device manufacturers such as Nokia (NOK), RIM (RIMM), and Apple (APPL) have a broader world view on mobile payments. In March 2009, Nokia made a substantial strategic investment in Silicon Valley-based Obopay. Obopay operates with a similar model to Enstream, but with deployments in both the United States and India. The price point is $0.25 to send up to $1000 and nothing to receive funds. In the meantime, RIM is actively testing ideas and pursuing multiple opportunities in the space, and has recently announced a partnership with payment giant PayPal (EBAY) to deliver billing and payment solutions for its AppWorld venture. PayPal Mobile is considered by many to be competitive to the new Enstream venture.
Euronet (EEFT) is a significant electronic transaction processor with 421,000 prepaid wireless, long-distance, and gift card endpoints worldwide. In 2007, it acquired RIA, the third largest money transfer agent in the world, and then last year attempted but failed to buy MoneyGram, the second largest money transfer agent in the world behind Western Union. Euronet, through its electronic network, is beginning to deliver a mobile payment and remittance infrastructure that can be cash-based. And here is why.
Between 80% and 85% of all mobile subscribers in emerging economies do not have bank accounts (not to mention credit), nor do they have easy access to local banking infrastructure. Most emerging economies operate as cash-based societies. This is a main driver behind the proliferation of prepaid subscriptions in BRIC, MENA and Latin America. Euronet and others like it are attempting to deploy ways to digitize cash via local merchants without banking infrastructure. By comparison, the Enstream solution appears to need banking infrastucture.
____________________________________________________
Bottom Line: Ecosystem
The Enstream launch is seen as positive by participants in the ecosystem as long as it evolves to a platform for multiple mobile payment applications tha can be offered to Canadian consumers. Enstream states that it is looking for development partners. The question is how economic will it be for independent developers to participate. Without participation by third-parties, the concept may struggle.
Bottom Line: Consumers
Consumers appear mistrustful of the enterprise, which implies that there is a branding deficit shared by the three founding partners that could impede progress. Pricing has been described by consumers and others in the ecosystem as the most immediate concern and potential barrier to adoption. Objections and barriers have been erected quickly by consumers, which may require time, capital, and effort to overcome before traction can be gained.
Bottom Line: Market Share
As for worldwide expansion, by comparison to other more advanced solutions worldwide, Enstream is late to the game and its business model may not be easily translatable to other regions of the world. As a result, Enstream should be viewed as regional play limited to the Canadian marketplace, with potential to buy its way into other markets in the future.
Bottom Line: Investors
Investors should expect that the JV will contribute little to the performance of RCI, T, or BCE over the next few years, unless the business model is revamped to go viral, which is quite possible. From a cost perspective, Enstream could contribute to the accelerated extinction of "hard cards" on display in many convenience stores, saving millions of dollars in the channels.
In the end, we may see Enstream positioned as a Moneris-type of mobile payment infrastructure that would likely compete directly with Moneris itself, or some other bank-based mobile payments system in Canada. As for other threats, handset manufacturers could provide substitution through some as-of-yet developed applications. Notwithstanding, to be successful Enstream would need to become a neutral Canadian platform for competing applications from local providers to multinationals.
Bottom Line: Joint Venture
However, there is no guarantee the the founding partners can resist meddling, or poking each other in the eye, long enough to give the venture an opportunity to feel its way towards success. For every successful JV among Canadian institutions - whether banks or telcos - there have been dozens that have failed.
I do not own shares of any of the Companies mentioned in this post. As well, I have chosen to generalize the commentary as opposed to attribute direct quotes.
4/3/09
Billing Systems May Determine App Store Success
Earlier this week Research in Motion (RIMM) launched its proprietary mobile applications store, branded App World, presumably as a direct competitive response to the success of Apple's (AAPL) iPhone application store. RIM enters an emerging ecosystem that is both chaotic and complex and already worth approximately US$60 billion worldwide according to IDC projections. By the end of this year, Nokia (NOK), Google (GOOG), and Microsoft (MSFT) are all expected to launch mobile app stores. Some estimate that by 2013, the market size could more than quadruple from where it is now. Today, even with the introduction of iPhone applications, 99% of downloads are still games, ringtones, and music. More interestingly, only about 20% of subscribers have ever downloaded content or applications, although market research suggests that intentions are strong towards downloadable apps. Clearly, there is a huge potential, but there are a lot of intricate dynamics at play as the market emerges.
mobile application storefronts tend to fall into 3 primary categories.
The most entrenched retailing group continues to be the carriers (or operators in Europe), that have, for several years, been involved in ringtone, games, music, video and, more recently, application downloading . In North America, there are a handful of carriers, while in Europe there are between 40 and 50 operators plus dozens more MVNOs (mobile virtual network operators) that have helped to pioneer the market. Downloads are considered a core business for most carriers.
Soon after the market began, another group of vendors emerged, which are often called "off-portal" retailers. These Companies have similar offerings as the carriers, but with independent storefronts and provisioning systems, albiet hooked directly into the carriers' billing systems. Typically, off-portal retailers such as Jamster, Playphone, Zed, and dozens of others like them generate high margin revenue for the carriers through revenue-sharing models and they are tolerated, if not embraced, by the carriers.
More recently, beginning with the iPhone application store in 2008, leading smartphone and mobile OS manufacturers have begun to launch applications storefronts. Both Apple and RIM operate completely independent of the carriers, including billing, while Microsoft has chosen to integrate with carrier billing systems. All three vendors plus Nokia (which recently acquired the Symbian OS) and Google are attempting to foster active developer communities. Famously, the iPhone store already boasts over 30,000 independently created applications offered through its storefront. The Symbian OS had nearly 10,000 applications developed on it as of Q2 2008.
Who will be the ultimate winners and losers as the market takes off? In the end, the common denominator for success may not be at the customer interface, and there are likely few new killer apps that could drive traffic. If the storefront is not important, and the applications are neutral, what is the potential silver bullet for success?
Billing systems may determine winners and losers.
Experienced marketers agree that it is easier and more profitable to sell new services to current customers than it is to attract new customers. Carriers have a long billing history with millions of subscribers, and experience in exploiting the data channel. Content and application downloads are a simple extension of current carrier subscriber billing. A game, song or ringtone is simply added to a subscriber's monthly or prepaid bill with minimal effort by the consumer. More interestingly, carriers are masters at service bundling. As the market evolves, carriers are in a favourable position to offer service bundles for consumers that include mobile applications with household services packages. Such bundling may be difficult to counter by independent application stores.
Notwithstanding the recent entry by handset manufacturers and the future entry by OS vendors, the vast majority of the $60 billion in annual revenue to date has been realized by carriers. Mobile content and applications are core revenue stream that will grow in importance to carriers as voice becomes increasingly commoditized. Once the euphoria of the current development rush is over, and developers actually want to make money, applications will need to reside and operate equally on all enabled devices and networks. At some point in the future, as the market matures, the easiest way for consumers to discover, buy, and use the most popular and widest selection of applications may still be via carriers and their off-portal partners.
Over the next few years, major carriers are likely to accelerate investment in appropriate infrastructure to exploit their billing advantage in an effort to maintain or grow share of the application market. Third party infrastructure players such as Denmark's End2End, Canada's Wmode, Italy's Bournjourno (BNG.MI), and Seattle's struggling Motricity (which merged with InfoSpace (INSP) last year) may benefit from an upsurge in carrier, off-portal and MVNO investment.
Many could predict that off-portal retailers, especially ones that rely on the the fading ringtone market, may be at the beginning of an extinction cycle. This may be true with one goliath exception...Microsoft. Microsoft has been lost in the background to the iPhone/Blackberry hype. However, it is currently forming relationships and is building out infrastructure to become a primary off-portal partner to most carriers in North America, Europe and Asia. Although Microsoft may give up some margin to its carrier partners in return for easy billing, carrier alignment may help to accelerate Microsoft's land grab of the apps market. This marketing approach is in Microsoft's DNA and is a variant of earlier channel marketing that helped to drive MS-Dos and Windows success. Microsoft has proven to be a master product bundler, which should align well with carrier bundling.
mobile application storefronts tend to fall into 3 primary categories.
The most entrenched retailing group continues to be the carriers (or operators in Europe), that have, for several years, been involved in ringtone, games, music, video and, more recently, application downloading . In North America, there are a handful of carriers, while in Europe there are between 40 and 50 operators plus dozens more MVNOs (mobile virtual network operators) that have helped to pioneer the market. Downloads are considered a core business for most carriers.
Soon after the market began, another group of vendors emerged, which are often called "off-portal" retailers. These Companies have similar offerings as the carriers, but with independent storefronts and provisioning systems, albiet hooked directly into the carriers' billing systems. Typically, off-portal retailers such as Jamster, Playphone, Zed, and dozens of others like them generate high margin revenue for the carriers through revenue-sharing models and they are tolerated, if not embraced, by the carriers.
More recently, beginning with the iPhone application store in 2008, leading smartphone and mobile OS manufacturers have begun to launch applications storefronts. Both Apple and RIM operate completely independent of the carriers, including billing, while Microsoft has chosen to integrate with carrier billing systems. All three vendors plus Nokia (which recently acquired the Symbian OS) and Google are attempting to foster active developer communities. Famously, the iPhone store already boasts over 30,000 independently created applications offered through its storefront. The Symbian OS had nearly 10,000 applications developed on it as of Q2 2008.
Who will be the ultimate winners and losers as the market takes off? In the end, the common denominator for success may not be at the customer interface, and there are likely few new killer apps that could drive traffic. If the storefront is not important, and the applications are neutral, what is the potential silver bullet for success?
Billing systems may determine winners and losers.
Experienced marketers agree that it is easier and more profitable to sell new services to current customers than it is to attract new customers. Carriers have a long billing history with millions of subscribers, and experience in exploiting the data channel. Content and application downloads are a simple extension of current carrier subscriber billing. A game, song or ringtone is simply added to a subscriber's monthly or prepaid bill with minimal effort by the consumer. More interestingly, carriers are masters at service bundling. As the market evolves, carriers are in a favourable position to offer service bundles for consumers that include mobile applications with household services packages. Such bundling may be difficult to counter by independent application stores.
Notwithstanding the recent entry by handset manufacturers and the future entry by OS vendors, the vast majority of the $60 billion in annual revenue to date has been realized by carriers. Mobile content and applications are core revenue stream that will grow in importance to carriers as voice becomes increasingly commoditized. Once the euphoria of the current development rush is over, and developers actually want to make money, applications will need to reside and operate equally on all enabled devices and networks. At some point in the future, as the market matures, the easiest way for consumers to discover, buy, and use the most popular and widest selection of applications may still be via carriers and their off-portal partners.
Over the next few years, major carriers are likely to accelerate investment in appropriate infrastructure to exploit their billing advantage in an effort to maintain or grow share of the application market. Third party infrastructure players such as Denmark's End2End, Canada's Wmode, Italy's Bournjourno (BNG.MI), and Seattle's struggling Motricity (which merged with InfoSpace (INSP) last year) may benefit from an upsurge in carrier, off-portal and MVNO investment.
Many could predict that off-portal retailers, especially ones that rely on the the fading ringtone market, may be at the beginning of an extinction cycle. This may be true with one goliath exception...Microsoft. Microsoft has been lost in the background to the iPhone/Blackberry hype. However, it is currently forming relationships and is building out infrastructure to become a primary off-portal partner to most carriers in North America, Europe and Asia. Although Microsoft may give up some margin to its carrier partners in return for easy billing, carrier alignment may help to accelerate Microsoft's land grab of the apps market. This marketing approach is in Microsoft's DNA and is a variant of earlier channel marketing that helped to drive MS-Dos and Windows success. Microsoft has proven to be a master product bundler, which should align well with carrier bundling.
Despite its exclusive deal with AT&T, and its "walled-in" billing system, the App Store from Apple should maintain the momentum of its early success. It owes much of its future to the past. Without the success of the iPod and the iTunes media sales platform before it, the App Store would be challenged as an independent app retailer. As it stands now, the App Store is a simple extension of one of the largest billing account bases around...iTunes. Apple and the carriers are utilizing similar product line extension strategies.
With RIM's launch of App World, it introduced a completely new account base which is fundamentally unaligned with carriers. or with media. Paypal requires a new account commitment by mobile subscribers, which may be a barrier to uptake. With no "killer app" such as iTunes, consumers may find it too much trouble to download the App Store and set up a new billing account (if it does not overlap with a current paypal account). Are eBay (EBAY) buyers/sellers likely to download Blackberry apps? How much alignment is there between Paypal account holders, Blackberry users, and a desire to download an application? Whatever the number is at that intersection, the potential account base is probably a small fraction of any of the major US carriers, or of the Apple iTunes account base.
During its launch year, RIM may find difficulty gaining market traction. It is a smart company, and it is possible that the Management could find a way to integrate into the carrier billing systems at some future date in a similar way as Microsoft is preparing. However, based on conversations with industry insiders, there has been some resistance by RIM to integrate with carrier billing systems.
Within a broader strategic framework, RIM may simply be biding its time until an effective mobile payment system begins to proliferate, which could remove the need for intermediaries such as Paypal, and change the future dynamics of the entire market once again.
There is speculation that Google Android may come to market with Google Checkout as its billing backbone. The size of the Google Checkout account base does not register among the largest account bases among research sources at this point. If the speculation is true, there would need to be some heavy lifting on the billing side if Google were to compete head-to-head with the carriers.
Billing Systems for the Mobile App market ranked by scale.
- Cingular: 82 million mobile accounts
- Verizon: 78 million mobile accounts
- AT&T: 75 million mobile accounts
- Paypal: 70 million payment accounts (active)
- iTunes: 65 million media accounts (active)
- Sprint: 40 million mobile accounts
Sources: IE Market Research, Piper Jaffrey, Wikipedia,
Based the data above, although Microsoft would give up margin through carrier billing agreements, it could have nearly 5 times the reach as Apple would with iTunes in the United States alone. However, Apple is likely pleased with the scale of its iTunes account base because branding strength and focus should generate more revenue and margin per account then any other competitor. It does not need as much scale to be really successful. By introducing a non-aligned payment system into the mix, albeit a large one in the form of Paypal, RIM may be limiting its initial scaling capability. Although it is likely that the Company will adjust tactics as it gains more experience. A go-it-alone billing strategy may impede Google's future launch because Checkout does not appear to have the acceptance and scale of other billing systems. It is more likely that Nokia would follow Microsoft and align with carriers, especially since there are so many players in the European market where it is strongest.
The carriers and MVNOs will defend what they already consider to be a core business. Investment in infrastructure and marketing should increase. In the end, those entities with the largest and most advanced billing systems should prevail, which may suggest that the carriers could end up being major players in the space despite the hype surrounding the market entry by handset manufacturers. The ongoing decoupling of applications from hardware may also help to strengthen the future position of carriers and OS vendors like Microsoft and Nokia.
The mobile applications market is not well-formed yet, and there is a potential for some really interesting developments over the next 6 quarters as the mobile apps market goes through an adoption phase.
12/3/08
RIM miss should not surprise.
This morning RIM (RIM-TSE) reported that it sold 300,000 units less than analyst expectations of 3 million.
Its a pretty big miss, but it should not surprise investors for the following reasons:
1. RIM and Apple (APPL-Q) are relying subscriber upgrades from regular cellphones to smartphones. In uncertain times, people are slower to make those decisions. The mobile subscription is essential; the latest and greatest handset is not.
2. RIM has lost a significant buying group. The financial services sector has been one of RIM's major customer segments. With the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, mergers and consolidations, this previously lucrative market cannot be relied upon to drive device sales, or BES server sales.
3. For similar economic reasons, RIM's entry into Europe and Asia should not be as explosive as originally expected. Although everyone seems to have a mobile device, fewer businesses or consumers are likely willing to spend the money to switch from their cheap and cheerful (mostly Nokia) devices to the more feature-laden RIM smartphones.
I expect to see dissapointing unit sale results from RIM along with Apple and Nokia (NOK-NYSE) for the next couple of quarters. Until US consumers feel confident enough to buy bling again, sales of the latest smartphones are likely to disappoint. For long-term investors, it should be noted that, despite reduced short-term performance, these three vendors are likely to consolidate their market dominance coming out of the recession. I suspect that the share price for RIM could be at multi-year lows for the next few weeks, which would be a good entry point for those who like the story, but couldn't swallow an $85.00 shareprice earlier this year.
As per my last blog entry, look for carriers to:
1. Maintain subscriber bases with lower churn rates.
2. Disappoint on growth in data services (related to lower smartphone growth)
3. Disappoint on migration from 2G to 3G networks.
4. Slow down investment into FTTH and FTTC initiatives.
5. Begin consolidating wideband and broadband wireless infrastructure.
Bottom line, unlike device manufacturers, many consumers are tied to long-term subscriber contracts, and those that are not, are prepaid and, due to economic conditions, are not likely to switch. Downchurning is the biggest risk, where post-paid consumers are no longer able to manage subscriptions, and need to move to prepaid services. One can anticipate that this is the major churn risk for carriers.
Due to credit constraints, and balance sheet caution, we should see a decline in the big capital intensive upgrades to the carrier networks in the short-term. The future of network upgrades is likely linked to President-Elect Obama's stimulus packages. If Internet is included (as it should be) in infrastructure related stimulus packages, then carriers are likely to go forward with plans.
See my previous post.
I do not own shares in any of the Companies that have been mentioned in this post, nor do I receive any compensation from these Companies.
Its a pretty big miss, but it should not surprise investors for the following reasons:
1. RIM and Apple (APPL-Q) are relying subscriber upgrades from regular cellphones to smartphones. In uncertain times, people are slower to make those decisions. The mobile subscription is essential; the latest and greatest handset is not.
2. RIM has lost a significant buying group. The financial services sector has been one of RIM's major customer segments. With the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, mergers and consolidations, this previously lucrative market cannot be relied upon to drive device sales, or BES server sales.
3. For similar economic reasons, RIM's entry into Europe and Asia should not be as explosive as originally expected. Although everyone seems to have a mobile device, fewer businesses or consumers are likely willing to spend the money to switch from their cheap and cheerful (mostly Nokia) devices to the more feature-laden RIM smartphones.
I expect to see dissapointing unit sale results from RIM along with Apple and Nokia (NOK-NYSE) for the next couple of quarters. Until US consumers feel confident enough to buy bling again, sales of the latest smartphones are likely to disappoint. For long-term investors, it should be noted that, despite reduced short-term performance, these three vendors are likely to consolidate their market dominance coming out of the recession. I suspect that the share price for RIM could be at multi-year lows for the next few weeks, which would be a good entry point for those who like the story, but couldn't swallow an $85.00 shareprice earlier this year.
As per my last blog entry, look for carriers to:
1. Maintain subscriber bases with lower churn rates.
2. Disappoint on growth in data services (related to lower smartphone growth)
3. Disappoint on migration from 2G to 3G networks.
4. Slow down investment into FTTH and FTTC initiatives.
5. Begin consolidating wideband and broadband wireless infrastructure.
Bottom line, unlike device manufacturers, many consumers are tied to long-term subscriber contracts, and those that are not, are prepaid and, due to economic conditions, are not likely to switch. Downchurning is the biggest risk, where post-paid consumers are no longer able to manage subscriptions, and need to move to prepaid services. One can anticipate that this is the major churn risk for carriers.
Due to credit constraints, and balance sheet caution, we should see a decline in the big capital intensive upgrades to the carrier networks in the short-term. The future of network upgrades is likely linked to President-Elect Obama's stimulus packages. If Internet is included (as it should be) in infrastructure related stimulus packages, then carriers are likely to go forward with plans.
See my previous post.
I do not own shares in any of the Companies that have been mentioned in this post, nor do I receive any compensation from these Companies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)