Monthly Archives: October 2013

The iPad’s Disruption Of The Windows PC Market

Windows PC vs iPad
Chart via Horace Dediu

Now we can actually confirm that the day the iPad was introduced, Personal Computing changed forever.

Two years earlier, 2008 was the year of the netbook. Analysts would doubt whether Steve Jobs was right to dismiss netbooks when he insisted Apple would never launch one.

And once a gain his genius was spot on. In 2010 the iPad created a new category that made netbooks completely irrelevant. The rise of the netbook signaled a need for light computers with long battery duration and just powerful enough for everyday use. Now we know the answer was not going to be just a smaller PC.

The inevitable growth of broadband pipes and services in the cloud are a perfect fit for tablets, phablets and smartphones to become a more and more frequent replacement of laptops in our daily life. In emerging markets the leapfrog to wireless broadband and mobile computing is a reality. It will only accelerate the trend the chart shows.

Microsoft has a big problem with mobile and tablets. Windows 8 is a compromise to address tablets and desktops, but it is not working neither of them. Microsoft faces disruption in the personal computing space they used to dominate. Compromises have never worked well in face of disruption.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Online TV Vs. Traditional TV: Who wins?

adoption-of-pay-tv-services-in-the-us
You will find more statistics at Statista

Remember the charts in 2008 showing iPhone’s market share under 5% versus Nokia’s above 50%? Doesn’t the Cable TV chart above remind you to those Nokia charts trying to show that the inevitable won’t happen? And then, it is only a matter of time.

For TV, the shift to online might happen sooner than what a first glimpse at the chart may suggest. If you add Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and iTunes shares on the chart, you get that online TV has already surpassed Cable TV. Yes, data can tell many different stories depending on how you show it.

Internet bandwidth is less and less a bottleneck for online TV to offer the same picture quality as Cable or Satellite. As we get more connected TVs, the difference between traditional and online TV blurs. For live TV, the consumer TV experience is the same whether the signal is carried over a cable, a satellite or an IP connection.

Very soon the only difference between traditional and Online TV will be the technology that carries the signal. While live TV on cable and satellite use a broadcast carrier, live TV for online is unicast.

To a viewer that does not change much. For an advertiser that is a big difference.

– With broadcast, all consumers must watch the same ads. You can only target your ad by understanding what content/TV-show appeals to what demography.
– With unicast, each consumer can watch an unique personalized ad. That means that marketers can tailor their message to the segment of one.

It is not only that marketers could program TV ads with the same granularity as you can program a Facebook or LinkedIn Campaign (e.g. I want my ad to be seen only by male people working for AT&T in Illinois). It is that you could even imagine to personalize your ad with the name of the viewer, or if permission given, with his customer history.

What do you think will be more valuable to advertisers? A mass media ad, like those aired on TV today, or the possibility to target specific niches, and even persons?

That is the hidden power of online TV, and this is what traditional media agencies (and TV broadcasters) don’t want you to know… so that you keep wasting half of your marketing budget.

“Half of the money I spend on advertisement is wasted. The trouble is I don’t know which half.“
—John Wanamaker (1838-1922)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Can you measure TV Audience with Twitter?

chart-of-the-day-more-evidence-that-twitter-is-disconnected-from-the-mainstream

Trying to make a straight correlation between TV audience and Twitter activity is as nonsense as ignoring the potential Twitter provides to get insightful metrics for TV.

Some shows will trigger more Twitter activity than others. Granted. That does not make any attempt to map TV audience with Twitter invalid. It just shows that getting meaningful insights requires some more thoughtful analysis and modeling than the mere counting of tweets.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

2 Key Ideas on Marketing Disruption

These are the key points that Brian Solis makes about Marketing Disruption in this video:

1) How to equip marketers to deal with disruption?
The answer from marketers should also be disruptive. That means you should stop looking at the same companies you looked in the past and everybody looked.

By the very nature of the process, if you keep working with the same agencies and companies you won’t be very disruptive.

My comment: I can only agree. Incumbent players tend to protect the status quo and will have a conflict of interest to disrupt themselves. AT&T did not invent Skype, and Time Warner would have never invented YouTube. The disruptive guys are the ones that shake the established model.

A traditional media agency has no incentive to shift your offline dollars to digital.

2) What are the recent Disruptions in marketing?
One of the greatest disruptions is that of consumer behavior. The way I make a decision, how I use technology, where I go and what I share today Vs what I shared yesterday is different and it is changing over time.
“What I do, where I go and how I do it, this is what marketers should pay attention to. This is what should inspire them to get in front of consumers.”

My comment: Having a mobile and being connected everywhere has changed the way people buy, research or share what they like and dislike. This is an opportunity for marketers to better understand their customers. And this is why Big Data Analytics has become the key for marketers to understand the on-going changes in consumer behavior and the opportunities they bring.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why iOS is not doing that well in Europe?

platform-share-of-smartphone-sales
You will find more statistics at Statista

Among all regions, Europe is by far the worst for Apple, as the chart shows. Surprisingly even Windows Phone is getting close to iOS market share in Europe.

The reason is quite simple:

ipad-price-spain ipad-price-US

The price for the lowest spec iPad in US is $499 while in Spain is 499 Euro. For years Apple has maintained a pricing policy where prices for their products in Europe follow the 1 Euro = 1 USD rule. At today’s exchange rate, an iPad costs 36% more in Europe than in the US.

We all know the Apple target client is not price sensitive, but in a Europe in recession with an impoverishing middle class (specially in southern countries) it is not a surprise that Samsung and Android are doing pretty well.

If Apple wants their market share in Europe to resemble US, they’d better change their pricing policy in Europe. Otherwise they risk to be beaten by (shame on you Apple) Windows Phone!

 

Enhanced by Zemanta