Return to HOME page; www.jeffkagan.com

Jeff Kagan

Technology Industry Analyst

Industry Analyst  Tech Analyst Wireless Analyst   Telecom Analyst

Columns ~ 2014

Columns 2013- click here

Columns 2012- click here

Columns 2011- click here

Columns 2010 - click here

 

 

E-Commerce Times       

logo

                                   

 

Jeff Kagan is a Tech Analyst, Consultant and Columnist.

He writes a column for both E-Commerce Times with ECT News with 6 million readers and is carried on thousands of web sites, and for...

equities.com, a Global Financial Community magazine and now web site started in the 1950's.

Pick of the Week, is part of most columns and highlight a company or technology or something new, interesting and exciting that Jeff Kagan discovered and wants to share with you. 

 

As a nationally and internationally recognized industry analyst Jeff Kagan is also a highly sought commentator, columnist, speaker, author, professional agitator, opinion-ator and provocateur.

 


"Jeff Kagan became the single most widely quoted analyst in the telecommunications industry"

Dick Martin, Executive Vice President of Public Relations at AT&T (retired) said this in his book "Tough Calls: AT&T and the Hard Lessons Learned from the Telecom Wars"


 

 Analysis of high tech products and trends and the changes that are reshaping the industry

 

To learn more about Jeff Kagan visit www.jeffkagan.com

 


COLUMN TITLES (columns below)

 

Making Your CES Connections Count

Jeff Kagan: T-Mobile Recovery Strengthens

New York Cabbies May Try Operating Uber-Style

Jeff Kagan: Wireless Trends for 2015

Everything's Coming Up Broadband

Mobile Pay May Explode in 2015

C Spire Faces Telecom Giants in the Race for High Speed Internet

Nokia's Surprising 2nd Shot at the Wireless Game

AT&T Paves the Wireless Future's Way

Jeff Kagan: Internet of Things to Reach $30 Billion by 2020

Jeff Kagan: Give Sprint Time to Reinvent

The Do-Not-Call List's Maddening Loophole

Give Me That Old-Time Operating System, Apple - It's Good Enough for Me

Apple Pay, CVS, Rite Aid, CurrentC Battle for Expanding Mobile Payment Market

Divvying Up the US' Crucial Wireless Spectrum

Jeff Kagan: Can Cable TV Survive?

No More Wireless Mergers? No Problem

Jeff Kagan: Apple is Back

BlackBerry Tries, Tries Again to Remake Its Brand

Jeff Kagan: Tips for Briefing Industry Analysts

How Microsoft, Lenovo and Clickfree Damage Their Collective Brand Experience

Jeff Kagan: Why Masayoshi Son of Softbank wants DreamWorks

Self-Driving Car Security: No Room for Error

Jeff Kagan: The Future of Wireless, Telecom, and TV

What Is the Apple Watch if Not a Watch?

Jeff Kagan: Confusion on Sprint 2.5 Direction

Jeff Kagan: The State of Sprint Recovery

Apple's Cook Hits It Out of the Park

Jeff Kagan: Apple iCloud Short-Term, Long-Term Problems

Sizing Up the Cloud's Risks   

Comcast: Friendlier Attitudes Aren't Enough

Jeff Kagan: What Do AT&T Leadership Changes Mean?

Jeff Kagan: Tablet Sales Slump, Notebooks Come Back

Sprint's Moment of Truth

Jeff Kagan: How Sprint Will Succeed

What's Next for Sprint?

Google's Great Big Ideas Camp

Jeff Kagan: If Tablet Sales Are Crashing, Whatís the Next Growth Wave?

Thanks, C Spire - for Leading Mississippi Schools to Tech's Fast Lane

Jeff Kagan: Verizon Slowing Wireless Data Speeds

Jeff Kagan: Wireless Industry Wave Changing Industry

The Slow but Steady March to the Cloud

Jeff Kagan: Comcast Gives Self Black Eye with Poor Customer Service

Are You There Corporation? It's Me, Customer

Jeff Kagan: Whatís Next for Aereo and TV?

Will the Smartwatch Finally Get Hot or Not?

Shame on Facebook

Jeff Kagan: Status Report of Sprint Network Upgrade

Will NEST Get Too Nosy?

Jeff Kagan: Aereo Lost, But Broadcasters Should Not Think They Won Either

How Will Regulators Chaperone the Big Merger Dance?

Jeff Kagan: Will Amazon.com Fire Phone Be a Success?

Apple's Crucial Marketing Challenge

Jeff Kagan: Netflix Says Verizon Slowest of All ISPs

EU Smacks Google Upside the Head Over Right to Be Forgotten

Jeff Kagan: Whatís Special About Samsung Curved TV?

Destination Cloud: Are We There Yet?

Jeff Kagan: Hedge Funds and Investors Want to Know Whatís Next

AT&T Catches a Wave

Jeff Kagan: Next Wave in Mergers and Acquisitions Has Begun

Pulling Google Back to the Right Side of the Privacy Line

Jeff Kagan: Is AT&T-DirecTV the Next Big Merger?

New Car Tech: Smartphones In, Privacy Out

Jeff Kagan: Companies Are Rushing to the Cloud

AT&T In-Flight WiFi Could Soar

Jeff Kagan: 3D Printing is Huge New Opportunity

Is Square Mobile Payments in Trouble?

Jeff Kagan: AT&T, Verizon, Sprint Connected Car Opportunity

Jeff Kagan: Why Did Google Disappoint and Whatís Next?

The Ultra High-Speed Internet Race Is On

Which Wireless Network Is Best for You?

Jeff Kagan: Microsoft, Yahoo, Sony Follow Netflix Into TV

BlackBerry's Coca-Cola Moment

Jeff Kagan: Status Report on Vonage VoIP

HTC Needs to Turn Up the Heat

Jeff Kagan: Every Company Rides Growth Wave Up and Down

Jeff Kagan: Cloud Based Computing Winners and Losers

Why Didn't Fliers on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Call or Text?

Jeff Kagan: Sprint Chairman on Ultra Fast Internet and T-Mobile Merger

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370: False Hope in the Sound of Ringing Phones

Jeff Kagan: Can Radio Shack Recover Before Itís Too Late?

Sprint Softbank's Jockeying for the Inside Track

Comcast-Netflix Deal: Watershed Moment for Web Content

Jeff Kagan: Will Facebook WhatsApp Voice Calling be a Winner?

Comcast-TWC Merger Is All About Investors  

Cable TV's Chilly Customer Relationships

Jeff Kagan: Sprint, T-Mobile Deal Fading - Whatís Next?

The New Wireless Wave: Prices Falling, Cloud Rising

Jeff Kagan: Why Does Lenovo Want Motorola?

AT&T's Gently Simmering Vodafone Ambitions

Jeff Kagan: When Will Apple Start to Grow Again?

Wireless in Autos: The Delicate Balance Between Change and Choice

Jeff Kagan: Will Aereo Win at Supreme Court?

T-Mobile, the Rip Van Winkle of Wireless

Jeff Kagan: Is Cable TV Winning Again?

CES 2014: Wireless Digs Deeper Into Our Lives

 


COLUMNS

 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Making-Your-CES-Connections-Count-81495.html

ANALYSIS

Making Your CES Connections Count

CES is a zoo. It's not the place for a real, in-depth briefing about any company or any technology. CES is not the time to expect any presentation to be useful or memorable compared to an individual briefing for analysts or investors. CES, and any trade show, actually, should be viewed as a social experience. Strike up a relationship, and discuss business in more detail later.

By Jeff Kagan

12/17/14 6:38 AM PT

It's that time of year again. The Consumer Electronics Show will rock Las Vegas in early January. Companies are gearing up and hoping to do a good job of cutting through all the loud and distracting background noise to share their messages at the show. It's a tough job, since CES is full of industry analysts, media representatives, investors and customers -- and they all want something different.

One of the big goals of companies at the show is to get lots of positive attention from attendees in order to punch their way onto the 2015 map. They all hope to get lots of good media and analyst coverage to help them build their businesses. That's the goal, anyway. Reaching that goal is more difficult.

I am a technology industry analyst. I have been to countless shows over countless years and attended countless briefings by countless companies. They are all trying to break through all the noise and be seen. I have found that only a few actually accomplish that goal.

Expect a Circus

As an industry analyst, every day I get calls from the media requesting comments on the stories they write. I also write weekly columns, publish daily press releases, give keynote speeches at meetings, and so on.

Here's what I've been doing for the last 25 years: I simply follow our changing tech industry, companies and technologies. Then I turn around and share with the world what I have learned and what I think about it. Since I've been doing this for a long time, I have developed my own best way to do things.

That's a problem. All good analysts have developed their own best ways to do things. In order to get good coverage, it's up to the companies to understand each analyst.

So, you would think it would be easy for any company to completely understand what I am looking for, right? To help me gather information that I can then write and talk about. To convince me why it is an active leader in its space.

Most companies don't do a very good job of this at all. Some do -- but they are the standouts.

There is so much money being spent at CES, you would think every company would hit a home run. However, only a few actually either do a fair job or hit a home run. The rest try, but they strike out.

The reason for their failure is the difficulty of giving a personalized presentation to each visitor. Yet that's exactly what companies must do in order to be successful.

Some companies spend a fortune on booths at the show. Others have leggy booth girls, entertainers, costumes, and lots of lights and music to catch your attention.

They think this is all that is necessary to grab attention. That's great -- except once they catch your attention, then they have just a brief nanosecond to say or do something intelligent and keep you there, before you are drawn away to the next loud booth.

How does a company capture your attention and keep you there?

Take Advantage of the Calm Before the Storm

One thing that works well with me is to schedule a brief phone briefing before the show. That's because there are too many interesting companies to meet with -- and meetings are scheduled all over the place, making it difficult to keep a schedule.

An individual, one-on-one personalized briefing is still the best way to go. This is actually a good way to schedule an initial meeting, allowing each party to concentrate on the other.

This also respects the time limitations and restrictions both parties face. That is something that most wish they could do at the show. Fortunately or unfortunately, the show is huge and loud and like a zoo -- for both parties.

At CES in years past, I used to get swept off my feet attending company meetings; joining breakfast, lunch and dinner briefings; and checking out smaller shows within the big show where select analysts, customers and media were invited to experience a more intimate event. I went to gala evening events as well -- and more.

Oh, and did I tell you each of those events was in a different hotel or restaurant all over the Las Vegas strip?

It was exhilarating, exhausting and MADDENING! That's the atmosphere companies are trying to stand out in. Every company tries to be bigger than it was last year. That's the challenge.

After seeing many companies each day, trying to process and make sense of what you heard at the end of each day, as well as at the end of the multi-day event, is incredibly difficult. It's like trying to find the orange and banana after they have been blended into a juice drink.

So, as much as executives want to use CES to promote their companies, it's important to pull back the camera and think about the show's real opportunities and challenges. Then, create a way to successfully connect with the people you want to meet.

My best advice for companies trying to have a successful show at CES is simple: KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid.

Get Up Close and Personal

Realize that CES is a zoo. It's not the place for a real, in-depth briefing about any company or any technology. CES is not the time to expect any presentation to be useful or memorable compared to an individual briefing for analysts or investors.

Some can do a good job hosting an in-depth session -- but they are the few. There are shows inside CES, and there are separate shows held in Las Vegas at the same time. The companies and organizations that participate in them hope to capture a slice of the analyst or investor pie.

However, the vast majority of meetings should be light, simple and general.

CES, and any trade show, actually, should be viewed as a social experience. Think of the kind of atmosphere where you invite analysts or customers or investors to a day at a golf tournament, or to a resort in Palm Beach. Sure, business is discussed -- but it is mainly a way to get closer on a personal level.

That's the home run. If you can strike up a successful relationship with your guests, one step at a time, then you can discuss business in more detail later. That discussion will be between people who have a greater interest in listening to each other.

CES is not the place to close a new order or win over a new analyst or investor. Rather, it should just be considered a great first step or a place to further bond if you already have met with or worked with the analyst.

It's a place to discuss what you do, and learn what the analyst covers and how. Then both of you can decide on best next steps. You can determine whether you are on the same page, and whether you want to take the relationship to the next step, which would be a more private, in-depth meeting and briefing.

If so, then CES could be the first step in building a long-term and high-quality relationship that benefits you both.

Now, excuse me -- I have to pack.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Making-Your-CES-Connections-Count-81495.html#sthash.79MsCSUz.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-t-mobile-recovery-strengthens

Jeff Kagan: T-Mobile Recovery Strengthens

By Jeff Kagan +Follow December 16, 2014 3:28PM

Tickers Mentioned: TMUS VZ S T

T-Mobile USA CEO John Legere has been busy during the last two years rebuilding the once failing wireless carrier. Today, they are focusing on three strategies. One is bringing the T-Mobile (TMUS) network up to speed. Second is reinventing the brand with an entirely new approach. Third, their heated and sour-mouthed PR strategy. Whether you love them or hate them, T-Mobile is punching their way back onto the map.

Today they launched their latest effort called Un-Carrier 8.0. I guess this is the eighth change they are making to their offerings, with the goal of attracting more users. Apparently this "Un-Carrier" strategy is working. They have been growing over the last year and thatís the bottom line. Un-Carrier 8.0 is their Data Stash or Data Rollover feature. What that means is wireless smartphone customers buy some kind of data plan. If they buy an unlimited plan this new Un-Carrier 8.0 wonít be of interest.

However, if they buy a certain size wireless data plan, Legere says customers are wasting money. He says at the end of the month the customer loses whatever data is unused. This is the plan every wireless carrier currently offers. This new idea letís customers keep their unused wireless data for up to 12 additional months before it disappears. Great idea. Not perfect, but better.

An Old Idea, Repurposed Through Innovative Leadership

AT&T Mobility (T) introduced a similar idea with unused wireless call minutes several years ago. When customers bought a bucket of minutes of calls, they could keep their unused minutes from month to month. They called it Rollover Minutes. However, these Rollover Minutes didnít expire after 12 months. The Rollover Minute idea was very popular with AT&T for voice calls, so I expect to see T-Mobile having similar success with wireless data usage.

Will other carriers join them? Well, AT&T never had any other carriers join them in their efforts so I would say no, but weíll see. This is another way for T-Mobile to attract users. While the feature is not interesting or valuable to all users, some will love it, and they will be the target customers of T-Mobile going forward.

T-Mobile has shown solid growth over the last year or so with this younger and lower budget user group. Legere is very active with Twitter. Traditionally, challengers must offer lower costs to win. In todayís market, AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless (VZ) are the leaders with 34% market share each. Sprint Corporation (S) has 16% market share.

T-Mobile has 15% market share, so they are in the challenger position. Thatís good for T-Mobile customers, it means they can expect lower prices. What about quality of service, speed, reach and dropped calls? If you asked that question two years ago the answer would have been sad. Back then, they were still a 2G carrier when AT&T, Verizon and Sprint were rushing to bring 4G to their entire network. However, since Legere stepped in as CEO, T-Mobile has gotten much better.

T-Mobile still has plenty of network to upgrade. They need to speed up and get better reach in many areas, and under the leadership of Legere, they are doing precisely that. So far, it looks like T-Mobile is in a strong recovery mode over the last 12 months. They have not only stabilized the company, but they have grown their customer base and are upgrading their network.

So while they are still in the early stages of their turnaround, it sure looks like they are heading in the right direction. They are creating curiosity and excitement surrounding their recovery. Next I guess weíll have to wait and see what the next Un-Carrier move will be. Stay tuned.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan +Follow December 16, 2014 3:28PM

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-t-mobile-recovery-strengthens#sthash.XvpK9uam.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/New-York-Cabbies-May-Try-Operating-Uber-Style-81468.html

ANALYSIS

New York Cabbies May Try Operating Uber-Style

A Manhattan lawmaker introduced new legislation a few days ago requiring the city to launch an e-hail app for yellow and green cabs in the city. The most interesting question is a simple one: Is this an effort to improve service for customers, or is it more an effort to protect an old industry, putting newcomers like Uber and Lyft out of business?

By Jeff Kagan

12/11/14 6:30 AM PT

Uber and Lyft are two new, rapidly growing competitors in the taxi and limousine space. They are upending the traditional taxi and limo model in city after city. Now the taxicab industry in New York City is fighting back. NYC cabs could be getting their own app.

This is something that should have happened years ago. If the traditional cab industry were innovative on its own, it would have come up with this idea years ago. However, it was happy to keep things just the way they were.

After all, why change if there is no competition to worry about? Why innovate if there's nothing capable of taking away business? The cab industry was happy keeping things where they were -- in the dark ages.

A Broken Industry

This is not just a taxi problem. This happens in every industry that does not have competition.

Decades ago, it happened with telephones when Ma Bell was the only provider. When competitors entered the phone space 25 years ago, Ma Bell grew up. Companies like AT&T and Verizon emerged to become some of the most innovative and customer-loved companies in the space.

Cable television is wrestling with its own problem area today. When consumers had no choice, cable TV could care less about whether we were happy or not. Today, that attitude is causing the industry to lose business to new competitors that advertise a softer, more customer-caring image. Customers don't quite believe them yet, though.

Companies and industries can lead without caring about the customer only if they have no competition. If they do have competition, and if they still don't care, then they lose. Period. Of course, they often try to improve once they recognize the competition, but it's very tough.

So, Uber and Lyft are two innovative companies reinventing the taxi and limo space in city after city. They are rapidly growing, which says to me the traditional industry is broken and hasn't innovated and taken care of its customers. It still does things the same way it has for decades.

An example of this broken industry is how riders are forced to stand outside trying to flag down a cab in the pouring rain, getting drenched in the process. If the traditional industry doesn't care about improving the lives of riders, the competition will.

Companies like Uber and Lyft are winning market share, something that is starting to worry the traditional taxi and limo industry.

What's Their Motivation?

Now the NYC taxicab industry wants to compete with Uber and Lyft in their territory -- with an app. Will this app improve customer care and service in this tired old industry? Can it be successful?

Good question. This is an old industry, and just because political leadership has this new idea doesn't mean the industry will go along.

A Manhattan lawmaker introduced new legislation a few days ago requiring the city to launch an e-hail app for yellow and green cabs in the city.

The most interesting question is a simple one: Is this an effort to improve service for customers, or is it more an effort to protect an old industry, putting newcomers like Uber and Lyft out of business?

This new app would let users call a cab in the city without having to stand on the curb on a rainy day and get drenched -- just like Uber and Lyft users already can do.

The idea would require the Taxi and Limousine Commission, which is the regulatory body for this industry, to create the new app and compel taxicab drivers to use it.

When this sort of initiative comes from a government agency, it generally is not as good as when it springs from the free market -- but at least it's a start.

We'll have to keep our eyes on this latest skirmish as the taxicab battle heats up. 

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/New-York-Cabbies-May-Try-Operating-Uber-Style-81468.html#sthash.ZHKjb2S0.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/five-wireless-trends-for-2015

Jeff Kagan: Wireless Trends for 2015

By    Jeff Kagan   

December 10, 2014 12:23PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T  S  TMUS  VZ  AAPL  GOOG  BBRY

When I speak at industry meetings, one of the most popular topics is whatís coming next. The wireless industry grows and changes all the time. Itís a much different place than it was just a few short years ago. In fact, every five to 10 years the industry reinvents itself. The last big shift was the smartphone explosion. Now the next big shift is starting.

So what will this industry look like over the next few years? Here are a few of the top issues and challenges I talk about and we will be wrestling with. Some of these you may be familiar with, but I would guess there are several that may be a surprise.

So letís take a look at what 2015 and beyond has in store for us. Letís look at this from a variety of perspectives, including the wireless networks, handset makers, app makers, workers, partners and investors.

ONE: Wireless Pricing Will Continue to Drop

Wireless has always been an incredible innovation, but it has also been very expensive. There is a reason. It costs networks a fortune to continually pour billions of dollars into upgrading the networks for more network reach and at faster speeds.

However, we have seen that pricing is getting much more attention during the last year or two. Today AT&T Mobility (T) , Sprint (S)  and T-Mobile (TMUS)  lead the way with lower pricing. Customers love this.

Verizon Wireless (VZ)  has not joined the low cost party yet. They are still the high cost carrier, but I would imagine they will join the party as their growth slows because of their high prices as the rest of the industry moves in this direction.

Will this trend continue long-term is the question.

TWO: Will Lower Customer Cost Slow Corporate Network Investment?

Initially customers love low cost, but will it impact earnings enough to slow down the continual investment in the networks? Wireless carriers have been pouring billions of dollars into their networks to expand their reach and speed them up from 3G to 4G and next to 5G.

If there is a slowdown in innovation and speed, will this affect how customers feel about the wireless industry? Will this affect how customers buy services?

We could see the industry split into different segments. One offering higher speeds at a higher price, and the other offering lower speeds at a lower price.

There is a market for both. It will be interesting to see how this industry develops over the next couple years.

THREE: Will We Run Out of Wireless Data Spectrum and Will It Cause Customer Complaints?

Wireless never had a wireless data spectrum shortage problem before. Thatís because there were not enough smartphones to matter. Years ago Blackberry (BBRY)  was number one and they only had a small slice of the market.

However ever since the Apple iPhone (AAPL) , Google (GOOG)  Android and Samsung Galaxy entered the space a few years ago, the marketplace has changed. Suddenly there is explosive demand for wireless data spectrum. Apps on smartphones have jumped from a few hundred to more than a million in the last few years. Every app sucks data.

This is becoming a worry with carriers. The limited supply of wireless data spectrum is threatening to cause this information superhighway to develop potholes in the road. Will 2015 be the year we start to see occasional slowdowns and outages?

Unless we can come up with a real and long-term solution to this problem, this threat will continue.

FOUR: Will Leadership in Wireless Change?

Smartphones like Apple iPhone, Google Android and Samsung Galaxy continue to lead the handset space. However, we have not really seen anything brand new in a while. Will a newcomer change the industry once again? It has happened before with iPhone and Android.

Network changes are starting to occur as well. Over the years the largest and fastest growing networks have been AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless. Sprint and T-Mobile were struggling.

However, now that may be changing. I donít see any trouble at AT&T or Verizon, but I do see Sprint and T-Mobile waking up and starting to grow once again.

In fact, Sprint is now waking up and could start to show rapid growth if they can keep coming up with terrific new marketing ideas like the half-off special they have in the marketplace for a limited time today.

It will be good to see the wireless industry in the USA have four, healthy, growing companies. I have a sense that is the direction we are heading.

FIVE: New Strategic Directions for the Wireless Industry

Over the years we have watched with awe how change in the wireless world led to rapid growth in the industry for both carriers and handset makers of smartphones and tablets.

Those same kind of changes will continue to sweep across and transform the wireless industry with new devices like glasses, mobile watches and more, but there is much more than that coming.

Wireless is beginning to transform other industries as well as its own. Take a look at industries like automotive, healthcare, retail and many others.

Leaders are reinventing their space. These leaders will have a competitive advantage for a while. Eventually, over the next few years, this will transform and companies who are not diving into these new waters will be at a competitive disadvantage.

The Bottom Line

There are many more trends and predictions in wireless, telecom, television like cable TV and IPTV and the Internet. I hope this gets you excited for the incredible year ahead.

The bottom line is this. Wireless has been and continues to be the center of the innovative universe. Wireless is growing and expanding. It is attracting the attention of not only companies, workers and investors in the wireless universe, but is now expanding into other industries as well.

Growth in the wireless industry will continue, but will also continue to spread and to change. Keeping up with the opportunities and the challenges is key to success and winning at this game.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          December 10, 2014 12:23PM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/five-wireless-trends-for-2015#sthash.pCZ2uF9M.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Everythings-Coming-Up-Broadband-81440.html

ANALYSIS

Everything's Coming Up Broadband

Today, we already have big investments in POTS and traditional cable television service, so change won't occur overnight. However, changes will occur. In fact, they already are occurring. Tomorrow, the communications world will rely on wireless and landline broadband networks. Tomorrow everything in our homes, our offices, our cars -- everything will be connected to this new broadband network.

By Jeff Kagan

12/04/14 5:00 AM PT

How is broadband doing as a market? The two largest providers in the United States are Comcast and AT&T. Broadband started as a service for people to surf the Web. Generally, it was a separate service offered by the telephone and cable television companies. However, things are changing and growing.

The changes that are occurring in the industry are groundshaking, but they don't get as much attention as they should. Understanding these changes is important, whether you are a service provider, an employee, an investor, a customer or a partner.

Although broadband used to be a separate service for surfing the Web, going forward it will be the connection to the service provider that will carry telephone, television, Internet access and everything connected to those worlds.

Example: Cable television is a service that delivers TV channels to the home over the cable-TV network. Going forward, however, cable TV will be delivered over the Internet connection, not the cable-TV network.

The same thing will happen with traditional telephone networks -- and Internet services will let customers talk on the telephone and watch television, as well as surf the Web.

This transformation will take years to complete, but it already has begun.

Customer Exodus

Just look at how the cable television industry is losing customers for the first time over the last few years. This is a big concern for that industry segment, as other companies and technologies are moving in and growing rapidly.

AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS and CenturyLink Prism are three highly competitive services. They are growing and winning business from the traditional cable television services like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox.

Why? There are several reasons.

One is that telephone companies offer better technology over their IPTV networks. This gives the customer the ability to do much more than view traditional cable television. This phone companies at a competitive advantage over the cable television world, for now.

Two is the fact that the cable television industry never took good care of the customer. There was no competition, so cable companies didn't see the need to care about anyone other than the investor.

Investors loved cable television companies. Customers didn't.

That's why the cable television industry is losing customers today as new technologies and new competitors are moving into the space. Better quality, more innovation and better customer care always win.

This is a big opportunity for big competitors like AT&T, Verizon and Centurylink. This is also a growing opportunity for companies with new technologies and ideas, like Amazon, Netflix, Hulu and more.

Today, if you look at the traditional cable companies, they are losing market share for television customers to competitors. The only part of the cable television world that is still growing is Internet services.

That's good, because over the next decade that's where the competitive battle will be fought.

Remember Hurricane Sandy, which struck the Northeast coast a couple of years ago? It destroyed Verizon's landline telephone network, and the company decided not to rebuild it.

Instead, Verizon is using its wireless and Internet connections to deliver services. This is a sign of things to come.

Out With POTS

The networks of the future will not look the same as they currently do. Networks enabling POTS, or plain old telephone service, which most of us still use, would not be built today.

Instead, networks enabling Internet and wireless services are in demand. That is the future. That's why new competitors are those that offer fast Internet and wireless services.

Wireless companies like AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile will be players going forward.

Wireline companies like AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink, Windstream, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox also will be competitors.

Forget about the old-fashioned cable television or local telephone networks we use today. The future will bring spanking new technology.

There will be many companies that compete. Perhaps that means we can expect more consolidation in the industry as well.

Of course, that's not the world today. Today, we already have big investments in POTS and traditional cable television service, so change won't occur overnight. However, changes will occur. In fact, they already are occurring.

Tomorrow, the communications world will rely on wireless and landline broadband networks. Tomorrow everything in our homes, our offices, our cars -- everything will be connected to this new broadband network.

So who will be the leaders in this new broadband world?

The next 10 years will be very exciting. We are still in the very early part of this new movie that will run over the next decade. When we started, we did everything over traditional telephone and cable television networks. When we finish, we will do everything over new and fast broadband networks, both wireless and wireline.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Everythings-Coming-Up-Broadband-81440.html#sthash.fi9pYKdq.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/mobile-pay-may-explode-in-2015

Mobile Pay May Explode in 2015

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          December 1, 2014 1:28PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T  VZ  T  S  VZ  TMUS  S  EBAY  TMUS   BBRY  EBAY  AAPL  BBRY  WMT  AAPL  BBY  WMT  GOOG  BBY GOOG

Mobile payments are not new. However, they have not really taken off like expected yet either. Year after year we keep hoping that this will be the time when mobile pay finally breaks loose and explodes with growth. But year after year we are disappointed with only incremental growth. Could 2015 be the year that Mobile Pay really takes off?

Over the past decade I have been contacted several times by wireless carriers like AT&T Mobility (T) , Verizon Wireless (VZ) , Sprint (S)  and T-Mobile (TMUS)  promoting their mobile pay offerings. I have offered comment to the media as they write stories and have always been excited about this new form of mobile banking and mobile payment. I have even written about this topic in my columns from time to time.

However, over the years, every one of these steps turned out not to be growth waves, only ripples. So the question remains: when will mobile pay become real and go big time?

Though mobile pay still feels new to many consumers, online payments have been with us for many years now - think PayPal (EBAY) for example. Like ATM cards from a few decades ago, paying with a mobile device will take users time to get used to it and feel comfortable trusting it.

There are also conferences in this growing space like the Mobile Payment Leadership Summit, coming in January. They talk about seizing new market opportunities, overcoming consumer concerns and barriers and creating wider adoption. This is some of what the new segment is wrestling with today.

I have no doubt that Mobile Pay will start to grow, and when it does, it will grow rapidly. But when?

Could More Players in the Mobile Pay Space Mean this is the Right Time for Growth?

An apt comparison to the likely mobile pay boom coming soon is the smartphone explosion in 2007-2008. The smartphone revolution is only seven years old, but we had been using them for a decade before that.

Years ago, Blackberry (BBRY)  was number one and there were quite a few others with smaller market share. The smartphone sector grew slowly to roughly 15% market share. There were only a few hundred apps. In fact, no one knew what an app was back in those days. It was not in our vocabulary.

Seeing lots of potential growth, carriers and handset makers had been trying to prime this pump for years, with very limited success. Everyone wanted it to become real because that meant growth for carriers and smartphone makers. Still, growth was very slow.

Everything changed around seven years ago when the first iPhone from Apple (AAPL)  hit the marketplace. Then it was quickly followed by the Android from Google  (GOOG) , and the race was on.

Suddenly there was excitement and buzz around this growing smartphone sector. Before this time, smartphones were only viewed as business devices. After entering the consumer marketplace, growth started to explode.

Today, smartphone market share has jumped from roughly 15% to more than 60%. Further still, the app market has jumped from a few hundred to more than one million, Everyone knows what an app is, and as apps mature, they become more useful to the user and to companies who want to interact with them. People use them for more than just accessing the web, but also for keeping track of expenses, staying in touch with their doctors reporting their diabetes numbers or weight. It only seems logical that smartphone users will be warming to making payments on their phones and tablets.

Signs of Mobile Payment Growth on the Horizon

Today I see mobile payments growing, but more slowly. Sort of like the smartphone growth before the first Apple iPhone or Google Android. PayPal has been around for more than a decade and has not been the catalyst for growth, but will benefit when things do start to grow. Google Wallet launched and has seen good, not great acceptance. That will also benefit once the marketplace starts to explode. Apple Pay is now out and is starting to be a catalyst for Mobile Pay. This is important, but not the only factor leading to an explosion in mobile pay. However, a quick look at Black Friday sales say that things may indeed be starting to change.

Early reports say that mobile shopping over smartphones and tablets is increasing. Thatís the space where mobile pay can really grow once users sign up and start to use it. However, mobile pay is still a separate category within that space because users can just use their credit card to pay on their mobile device. They donít need to use Apple Pay or competing technology.

Early reports also say Apple iPhone and iPad have roughly four times as many purchases as Google Android smartphones and tablets. This is very interesting. It suggests Apple customers are more likely to trust and use this new technology, to start anyway. So Apple Pay may be the technology that really starts to launch this entire sector. Add to this, another new competitor called CurrentC which should be rolled out in the next few months. The Merchant Customer Exchange will operate CurrentC. Members include roughly 50 chains so far, including Wal-Mart (WMT)  and Best Buy (BBY) .

This holiday shopping season shows mobile pay is starting to make real progress as more users shop and buy using their smartphones and tablets. So it seems that 2015 may be the year when all this mobile payment promise will finally start to become real, and hopefully grow rapidly.However, weíll have to keep our eyes on this space to be sure, because the promise has been there for years.

Stay tuned. 2015 could be a very fast growing year in the mobile pay space.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          December 1, 2014 1:28PM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/mobile-pay-may-explode-in-2015#sthash.awjVwH1V.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Nokias-Surprising-2nd-Shot-at-the-Wireless-Game-81387.html

ANALYSIS

Nokia's Surprising 2nd Shot at the Wireless Game

nokia-n1

By Jeff Kagan

11/20/14 6:40 AM PT

Many thought after Nokia sold its wireless phone business to Microsoft earlier this year, the company simply would fade away from the space. However, all of a sudden it's starting to look like Nokia is coming back. It just took the first step back into the wireless and tablet market with its new Google Android tablet.

It appears Nokia is getting ready to re-enter the smartphone space in 2016, competing with industry leaders like Apple iPhone, Google Nexus, Samsung Galaxy and Microsoft, which acquired its smartphone business, including the Lumia line.

What a turnaround. Will it be successful? Stranger things have happened, haven't they?

Second Time Around

This is not Nokia's first time up to bat. Remember, it was No. 1 in the traditional handset space for roughly a decade. It won the No. 1 spot when Motorola lost it in the late 1990s, when networks switched from analog to digital.

In the 1990s, Motorola was king with the StarTac, but it began failing years before the first iPhone was even on anyone's radar.

Motorola has been trying to make a comeback, but it hasn't done so in a meaningful way to date. So will Nokia be successful its second time up to bat?

After Nokia sold its handset business to Microsoft, we all expected it would no longer operate in this space. However, the smartphone space is still one of the hottest around -- if you can figure out a way to carve out some market share.

So, since Nokia still has a very strong brand name in this space, it is going to re-enter the tablet space, then the smartphone space. Tablets are the first test to determine whether it will be a successful player.

The smartphone, tablet and smartwatch space continues to grow and to change over time. When the first iPhone and Android handsets hit the market seven years ago, it changed the marketplace very quickly. Leaders like Nokia and BlackBerry were clobbered.

They tried several smartphone devices, but they just barely carved out a few percentage points of market share.

What will be different this time?

Another Chance at Bat

One, Nokia still has its brand to build on. There will be no confusion, since Microsoft has stopped using the "Nokia" name on its smartphones.

Two, Nokia has had the chance to recognize the new smartphone world. It no longer is rushing to deliver something just to hang on. Instead, it can start thinking in advance of about creating smartphones and tablets that can capture a slice of the market share pie.

Three, the smartphone space is maturing, and users may be looking for more than just an iPhone, Nexus or Galaxy.

If Nokia can do this, then I think it can indeed become a player and a competitor once again in this new world. It has the potential, if it hits home runs, to reinvent its company and start a growth track once again.

Whether it will is the question. That is what no one can predict. It all depends on its strategy, its marketing, its advertising and so on.

Does it understand the new and changing marketplace? Does it understand the strengths and weaknesses of its brand in the marketplace? Does it see certain areas it can capture and own on the business or consumer side?

The big question is, can it reach out and grab a slice of the market share pie with a new OS, new handset and new software? If it can, and if it somehow can win a slice of the pie, then it could indeed grow from there.

That is the question. We'll just have to wait and see.

Either way, it's good to see that Nokia has not thrown in the towel and will get back into the ring once again. It's good to keep things shaken up.

I hope it does well, and I wish the company the best.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Nokias-Surprising-2nd-Shot-at-the-Wireless-Game-81387.html#sthash.wmGHqFkz.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/c-spire-faces-telecom-giants-in-the-race-for-high-speed-internet

C Spire Faces Telecom Giants in the Race for High Speed Internet

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          November 20, 2014 12:38PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T  GOOG  VZ  CTL  S  CMCSA  TWC

Ultra-high speed 1 GB Internet service has been starting to capture serious attention from individuals and companies in the United States. So far, it looks like AT&T (T)  and Google (GOOG)  are most aggressively building out this capability in the largest number of cities from coast-to-coast. This has created a very hungry marketplace that really wants this speed. Now C Spire has joined the race and is bringing this ultra fast service to Mississippi.

Rural Mississippi Becomes the Unlikely Hub of Online Innovation

This ultra fast Internet service is wanted in cities and states all over the country. Customers in the initial cities love the speed. However it is important to realize we are just in the beginning of this major industry-wide build-out and transformation.

This has created an appetite for the service from coast to coast. So far, AT&T is offering this fast Internet service in the most number of cities and has the most number of cities they are building. Google Fiber is next. You would expect another big name company like Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL)  or Cox to be in the number three position, but not so fast..

The number three spot seems to belong to C Spire in Mississippi. C Spire Wireless is an independent wireless carrier based in the Ridgeland, MS area that offers service to a few southern states.

Then a year ago, they made news by announcing they were going to build out a wire line Internet service to one lucky Mississippi town. They held a contest to choose the first city that would win this ultra fast service. However, when they announced the winner, it was more than one city, it was several within Mississippi.

Now, the first cities are coming online. It seems this first phase is for commercial service in cities like Ridgeland, not for individuals. However, I would expect individuals will come next. I would also imagine the geographic area within each city will likely be small at this early stage, but that it will expand over time as well.

This is C Spire putting their flag in the ground and building from there. Thatís exciting since C Spire is a small company. If thatís the case, why canít other small companies jump into the same space in other cities and states nationwide? If so, this could accelerate the build out.

C Spire says their "Fiber to the Home" customer launch offers Internet speeds 100 times faster than before. It also offers what they call Super HD TV and home phone service which is likely a VoIP service like what customers get from cable television companies. This is exciting for C Spire since they will start to offer all these new revenue-producing areas.

The Far Reaching Benefits of High Speed Internet

This is also exciting for companies and individual customers. They also say it promises to boost home values and prices and that it will attract high tech investment and provide for new and higher paying jobs. That's why every city in the USA wants this service now. These cities in Mississippi now have a substantial edge, the same as other cities like the ones offered by AT&T Gigapower, Google Fiber and a few others.

This is good news for Mississippi since no one thought this would happen there so quickly. If successful, I would imagine we will see other smaller states and markets as the next potential cities to receive this ultra-fast Internet service with a variety of other small and large companies.

We are just at the very early stages of this new Internet revolution, so we will have to wait to see the results. However, the good news is, we wonít have to just judge results from larger cities and states, but also smaller ones. This should be very interesting to keep an eye on. Also itís important to remember, this ultra fast Internet is just one of many new services that large companies like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint (S) , CenturyLink, Comcast (CMCSA) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) , Cox, Google and small companies like C Spire will be rolling out over the next few years.

The next decade in wireless and telecom should be very interesting and exciting indeed. However, it will undoubtedly look different than what we have grown used to over the last decade.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          November 20, 2014 12:38PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/c-spire-faces-telecom-giants-in-the-race-for-high-speed-internet#sthash.eDb119cx.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-Paves-the-Wireless-Futures-Way-81349.html

ANALYSIS

AT&T Paves the Wireless Future's Way

AT&T will be at the core of many industry changes. AT&T used to be just a phone company. Today it's in a variety of new businesses, and tomorrow it will continue the expansion story. AT&T is positioning itself in a variety of different categories including software, cloud, mobile, video, the Internet of Things, and what it calls the "Oil of the Internet," or big data.

By Jeff Kagan

11/13/14 7:04 AM PT

AT&T shared plenty of powerful information and insights about growth for the company and the industry in general at last week's industry analyst meeting. The wireless, telecom, television and Internet businesses will continue to grow and to change in 2015 and beyond.

Whether you are a customer, a worker, an investor or a partner, understanding the growth and change of the industry or industry segments is key to success.

AT&T -- in fact, every competitor in this space -- must be evaluated differently moving forward. Things are changing. Then again, things are always changing. The opportunities of the 90s were different from those of the 2000s, which are different from those of today.

Looking back, we evaluated AT&T and other providers on their own performance, period.

However, looking forward, we must pull the lense back and take a much wider and deeper view. Growth will continue, but not in the same way. However, its potential is much stronger than before.

In With the Old, In With the New

AT&T will continue to offer the same services, but it and the entire industry will expand into exciting new areas as well.

AT&T will play a key role in transforming other industries. That is just one of the key areas of growth going forward.

AT&T is a major player in the communications marketplace. It started out on the telephone side and has expanded to take a leadership position in a variety of industry segments, like wireless, Internet and television. Its IPTV service, called "Uverse," successfully competes with the cable television industry.

While growth going forward will include offering services to consumers, companies and governments, there are several new growth spaces AT&T is rapidly moving into.

Wireless networks, like AT&T Mobility, seem to be at the core of many new and emerging growth opportunities. However, the wire line, Internet and television sides also will power growth in different areas.

The wireless industry has transformed itself in the last decade. Smartphones are now a key growth engine going forward. Now many different industries will transform themselves and integrate wireless into their ways of doing business. It already has begun.

Industries like automotive, healthcare, retail, software, banking and more are modernizing, and they all require wireless networks to connect to customers using smartphones.

Brand new and exciting services like Apple Pay and the upcoming CurrentC, which could reinvent how we pay for things, require a smartphone and wireless network.

AT&T is continuing to expand its vision. It wants to acquire DirecTV and deliver satellite television service on a nationwide scale.

AT&T last week announced it was going to acquire Mexican wireless carrier Iusacell as part of its plan to expand internationally.

AT&T is positioning itself for growth going forward. That growth may look different from the traditional wireless growth of the past decade. However, it will be the same, in many respects, since the company will continue to offer wireless and wire line services, Internet and television -- both with its existing Uverse and new services that could come through ownership of DirecTV and Iusacell, with its very fast GigaPower Internet service.

Not Just for Phones Any More

AT&T calls itself the most reliable 4G LTE wireless network in the U.S. It currently claims to provide coverage for more than 300 million people with its LTE. It launched VoLTE and HD Voice in May 2014, which offers excellent quality and is expanding. It has nearly 20 million connected devices in service today.

AT&T GigaPower, a 100 percent fiber connection, provides super fast speeds of up to 1 Gbps to home networks.

It currently is operational and available in three Texas markets -- Austin, Dallas and Ft. Worth. AT&T has announced plans to expand to an additional 14 markets and is exploring even more.

At its analyst meeting, AT&T shared an aggressive growth plan for years to come. Real growth will come from new areas, like the few I have mentioned.

These are exciting areas, but we are still in the very early stages of this changing game. Just like the growth from the smartphone explosion over the last several years, these new areas of growth are going to be just as important in reshaping industries.

Companies like AT&T, with its wireless and wire line networks, are going to be at the core of making change happen. AT&T used to be just a phone company. Today it's in a variety of new businesses, and tomorrow it will continue the expansion story.

AT&T is positioning itself in a variety of different categories including software, cloud, mobile, video, the Internet of Things, and what it calls the "Oil of the Internet," or big data.

These are all new areas of growth that could serve as great barometers for the future growth of AT&T and the industry in general, as we look toward tomorrow.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-Paves-the-Wireless-Futures-Way-81349.html#sthash.yyLjIRLH.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/nternet-of-things-to-reach-30-billion-by-2020

Jeff Kagan: Internet of Things to Reach $30 Billion by 2020

By  Jeff Kagan

November 11, 2014

internet of things, internet of things stocks, iot billion dollar market, new tech stocks

One of the very exciting areas of tech is the Internet of Things. The IoT is a very rapidly growing sector and will start to pop up on everyoneís radar sooner rather than later. Some say growth is expected to reach $30 billion by 2020. Thatís just five short years from now. That sounds great, however, thatís just what companies are spending to be a player. Revenue opportunities for companies in the IoT space are not as clear at this early stage.

The IoT seems to be on everyoneís mind these days from investors to companies who are building it and growing rapidly themselves in the process. Thinking about what the IoT means is a very exciting prospect.

Itís like thinking about the Internet in the mid 1990s. We know it will be big. We just donít know all the ups and downs we will experience along the way. And we donít know the direction it will follow in advance.

This is like building the highways before we build the cars to travel on it. Thatís always the case isnít it? We have to take things in this order because if we build the cars first, they would have not road to drive on.

While that is always the case, itís also always a little uneasy as we watch the billions of dollars feeding this growing beast before we see any profitability, which is years down the road.

The buildout is big news for companies in many sectors like software, hardware, services and security. These are all players in the IoT buildout. When itís complete, all this will be connected just like we do with the Internet.

However, the IoT is going to be huge and itís going to be important. Already, IoT is a trillion-dollar industry. It's still in the buildout stages and we are just in the very beginning. Over the next several years we will see tens of billions of connected devices start to log on. Growth could be very rapid.

Although, as always, there are many different definitions of what IoT actually is. Any way we slice this beast, today not everyone knows what the Internet of Things is, but tomorrow it will be second nature. Uptake could be very fast.

Smartphones, tabletís, smartwatches will all be connected. So will computers, televisions and radios. Thatís not all. Every device will be connected including our cars, refrigerators, homes and everything that can be operated with electronics.

As you can imagine, I think this is going to be huge.

During this buildout stage, this is an enormous growth opportunity for industries like telecom, wireless, computer, network and more, on the consumer side, business side and government side of the ledger.

Then when we start using the IoT, it will be an equally enormous, but different opportunity for these same sectors.

With all that said, there will be winners and losers at all times.

While there is no leader today, but this is a very important piece of our future whether we look at this as a consumer, a business user, or a government user.

This has enormous potential growth opportunities and that makes it attractive to workers, partners, governments and investors.

Iíll be writing about individual companies and new technologies of interest as time passes. This should be a very exciting area to follow for investors, customers and partners for small, lesser-known companies and big, brand name companies as well.

So keep the Internet of Things on your radar during the initial buildout stages, and when we all start to use it. This network of networks is going to be important going forward for decades to come.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

Signup for our daily newsletter and get our best articles emailed right to you!

By  Jeff Kagan            +Follow                     November 11, 2014 12:06PM

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/nternet-of-things-to-reach-30-billion-by-2020#sthash.OME4PiFq.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/give-sprint-time-to-reinvent

Jeff Kagan: Give Sprint Time to Reinvent

By  Jeff Kagan                +Follow                                November 5, 2014 2:00PM Share:

Tickers Mentioned: TMUS S VZ HPQ AT SFTBY

Sprint stock price, Sprint Recovery Strategy, Sprint Turnraround, Best Telecom Stocks,

Sprint Corporation (S) is a wireless company that is going through a very important reinvention. Think about Sprint as a caterpillar, which wrapped itself in a cocoon and will soon re-emerge as a butterfly. At least, thatís the plan if you listened to new CEO Marcelo Claure during his first earnings conference call earlier this week.

Sprint is the nation's third largest wireless carrier, but they have been struggling with growth over recent years. The Sprint of tomorrow will still be a wireless carrier, but they also have the opportunity to grow in new areas, as other industries like automotive, health care, retail, hotels and others go wireless.

This represents significant growth opportunities for the entire wireless industry. One year ago, Sprint started to change when 80% of the company was acquired by Softbank (SFTBY) and CEO Masayoshi Son. At that time, Softbank started to invest heavily to transform Sprint. From there, Sprint and Softbank wanted to acquire T-Mobile US, Inc.  (TMUS) , the nations fourth largest wireless carrier. When it became clear the US Government wouldnít let that happen, Sprint had to start on a new and different path for growth.

Sprint's Journey Toward Sustainable Growth

A little over two months ago, Masayoshi Son of Softbank decided to replace Sprint CEO Dan Hesse with Marcelo Claure. Suddenly Sprint's growth track had changed. So far itís been like pouring a glass of gasoline on a small fire. Flames grew, and now Sprint has to keep those flames growing. In the last couple months, Marcelo Claure has been really shaking things up at Sprint. There were plenty of questions about Sprint under new leadership, and there still are as we get to know him.

During his first earnings conference call this week, Claure did a great job of explaining to the marketplace the ways he plans to transform Sprint. Marcelo Claure calls this "Sprint's transformational journey". Claure discussed many of the early changes, which he has already implemented in order to turn things around. It appears that these changes - which the marketplace seems to like - are just the start.

One example of the big three carriers, Sprint now offers the lowest price for traditional, post paid service on the new iPhone 6. So apparently Marcelo Claure intends to make Sprint the lowest cost provider. With that said, I think we can expect to see much more change at Sprint in the coming months and quarters. Claure said he just arrived and is still formulating longer-term strategies. This makes sense. Sprint is complicated and has several areas of strength like wireless, and weakness like wire line. There is plenty to sort through at this company.

A Long-Term Mobile Market Transformation

So after listening to this first call with Claure as new CEO, I think the answer is obvious. He is asking forĖand we need to give himĖthe time and opportunity he needs to transform Sprint. This is similar to what Meg Whitman is doing at Hewlett-Packard Company (HPQ) . She continually talks about a multi-year turnaround plan and the street seems to be giving her the space she needs to transform the company. Turnarounds take time. Especially when the company and the industry itself has gone through major changes. You have to admit that Sprint and the entire wireless industry have gone through, and continue to go through, major changes.

The US Government says they want there to be a big four wireless carriers in the United States. If thatís the case, so far, AT&T (T) and Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) have been growing the fastest and strongest over the last decade. Sprint and T-Mobile have struggled with growth during that same time. T-Mobile started their turnaround last year. Sprint is just starting their turn around now.

Just as T-Mobile has started to grow once again, and just as HP has asked for and is receiving the time it needs to turn around, I think Sprint should be given that same opportunity. Sprint has shown a good couple months in the marketplace as they are beginning their transformational journey. Plus they are still planning their longer-term strategies. So letís give Sprint the time they need to develop and implement these new strategies and start their path to growth once again. If the US marketplace will have four top players, I think we can agree the marketplace would be better with four very strong and growing competitors. With all that said, itís up to Sprint to make this positive future a reality and come out of its cocoon as a beautiful butterfly.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By  Jeff Kagan                +Follow                                November 5, 2014 2:00PM

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/give-sprint-time-to-reinvent#sthash.SmgT6fXe.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Do-Not-Call-Lists-Maddening-Loophole-81311.html

OPINION

The Do-Not-Call List's Maddening Loophole

The U.S. National Do Not Call Registry exempts political robocalls. Why is it wrong when others invade our privacy over the phone like this, but the same practice is OK for politicians? Why don't we demand our politicians and lawmakers protect us from this invasion of privacy? The reason is simple. The lawmakers won't cut off their own right arm. This is how they reach us.

By Jeff Kagan

11/06/14 6:22 AM PT

What are you thankful for? Me... I am very thankful that this year's Election Day is finally over! Why? So I can get some peace and quiet in my life once again. I don't know about you, but my phone has been ringing constantly for weeks, and every call has been a political call. All I can say is... ENOUGH ALREADY!

I am so happy this election had clear victors. The reason is simple. If it were close, then we'd have to go through another annoying period of political calls interrupting our lives. We can all breathe a sigh of relief.

What's Good for the Goose

I understand elections are important. They help us direct the flow of our government and our lives.

However, every election becomes so darn distracting -- and year after year it gets worse.

In the weeks leading up to this week's election, most of us received dozens and dozens of recorded calls from governors, members of Congress, actors, and in fact anyone with a brand name. This campaigning is getting abusive. Something has to be done.

I understand this is not illegal. I understand this is a way for people running for office to get elected. I understand it is a great way to inform voters of issues. What I don't understand is why this has to be so damn intrusive and distracting to us, election after election.

Why is it wrong when others invade our privacy over the phone like this, but the same practice is OK for politicians? Why don't we demand our politicians and lawmakers protect us from this invasion of privacy?

The reason is simple. The lawmakers won't cut off their own right arm. This is how they reach us, and they aren't going to get in their own way.

It's like when members of Congress vote for their own pay raises. After all, do we really expect politicians not to vote for their own pay increases? Of course not!

I think if politicians can vote themselves a raise, we should be able to do the same thing. It's only fair, don't you think? I think if politicians don't have to be forced into Obamacare, the rest of us should have the same out if we choose, right?

So why can't we get the same perks as our politicians? The reason is because they write the rules. What this actually means is the whole political system seems very unfair and even abusive to the average American.

Breathing Space

Back to these annoying calls. All these distracting political calls are simply trying to convince us to vote for a certain candidate or issue.

OK, I understand. However, I also understand this is America, and we should have the freedom to choose whether to be interrupted or not.

There should be two different call lists. One for people who don't mind being called and the other for people who opt out. Many already know what they are going to do on Election Day. If these would prefer not to get bombarded with calls every stinking election day, it should be their right, don't you think?

After all, who do these people in government think they are, anyway? Why do they think it's OK to invade the personal space of every American? What gives them the right?

We should be able to opt out of all this craziness. I know all these calls are legal, but this is getting out of control. It is also being abused and is getting worse year after year.

All I can say now is thank goodness the Republicans swept this election, if for no other reason than all this craziness will end and we can finally get back to our lives, business as usual.

At least for the next year and a half before we get back on this crazy ride once again.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Do-Not-Call-Lists-Maddening-Loophole-81311.html#sthash.uzBKwttu.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Give-Me-That-Old-Time-Operating-System-Apple---Its-Good-Enough-for-Me-81278.html

ANALYSIS

Give Me That Old-Time Operating System, Apple - It's Good Enough for Me

When updating to a new version of iOS, users should not have to hold their breath and hope everything still works when it's over. If there is a problem, they should be allowed to revert to the old iOS so they can continue to use the features they need, right? Reverting is something Apple forbids for some aggravating reason. So customers who have problems sit there and steam.

By Jeff Kagan

10/30/14 6:36 AM PT

OK, I admit it. I both love and hate Apple's new iOS 8 -- and apparently so do many others, based on the online searches for help I've done. I've had a love-hate relationship with iOS for years.

There's much about the new iOS 8 to love; however, I hate that updating to it screwed up so many features I regularly use. What's worse is that Apple does not seem to care.

Updates - Hah!

If you updated an older iPhone model to the new iOS 8, rather than purchasing the latest iPhone 6 or 6 Plus, I am sure you have your own issues and delights. Mine have to do with things like the talk feature on the Google search app no longer working, and loss of the ability to sync with Microsoft Outlook, which I need and have been doing for years.

Regarding the sudden syncing problem I have with Microsoft Outlook, this is the same problem I had with iOS 6. My iPhone would not sync with the calendar on Outlook with iOS 6.

After months of dealing with Apple representatives, the problem persisted. Apple people were very nice and very helpful. They did not let me disappear. However, they were not able to solve the problem either.

Something like this simply should not stop working. The calendar is one of our very important features.

Along with my iPhone, I had to carry an older BlackBerry -- just for the calendar. This problem lasted until iOS 7 hit the streets a year ago. Suddenly, it was solved. Hooray. It has been a good year.

However, now that iOS 8 is out, the problem is back. This is like a sick Halloween horror story. Can't Apple fix a problem for good? Boo! If it can't fix it, can't it let users revert to the previous iOS?

The key question is, does Apple just want to keep moving ahead -- or does it want happy customers? This is a clear distinction -- and so far, Apple is failing.

Like everyone else, I need my calendar -- so much so, I was thinking about pulling out my ancient BlackBerry once again. Not that it was ever perfect either, believe me -- I've had problems with BB over the years as well.

Slipping Loyalty

Another broken feature: The Google search app voice feature no longer works properly after the iOS 8 update either. So I have to go backward and type search terms onto the screen. That's so... yesterday and very frustrating.

In fact, the voice feature on other apps seems to be giving me some trouble as well.

So what's the sudden problem? It's the update to Apple's operating system. The problem is iOS 8. It's full of great innovation -- but it also has several hiccups, which drive many users nuts.

When updating to a new version of iOS, users should not have to hold their breath and hope everything still works when it's over. It should just be a smooth transition, right?

If there is a problem, users should be allowed to revert to the old iOS so they can continue to use the features they need, right?

Reverting is something Apple forbids for some aggravating reason. So customers who have problems sit there and steam because of Apple. Is this a way to build a good relationship with customers? I don't think so.

I am continually thinking about switching to another phone to fix this problem. Is that what Apple really wants from its customer base? I don't think so -- yet that's the result of its actions.

Why can't Apple -- and for that matter, Google and other mobile operating system developers -- leave well enough alone? Why do they want to change everything every year?

Early adopters may like this, but most user don't like the struggle year after year. Apple and every OS developer should let customers upgrade or not -- and if they try, and it doesn't work, they should be able to revert to what they previously had. That's only fair.

Show Me the Way to Go Home

What Apple should do is create updates to the operating system but not reinvent the entire platform every year. It would be OK to reinvent everything every year, if it would give customers who get unpleasant surprises an out, so they could revert to an OS that worked.

This problem is not just a smartphone issue. It's with other technology as well, like computer operating systems. Consider Microsoft Windows. There is such a huge difference between XP, Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8.

Many users would just prefer to stay on their existing OS with updates. So companies should leave users alone already, for crying out loud!

This is too much change for users. We all have our lives to live and our businesses to run. We don't need to become software engineers every year just to use our dang computers.

One solution is moving everything to the cloud. That's something I have tried and like, but I am still concerned about security and access when I don't have an Internet connection.

I understand Apple wants to keep moving ahead. However, users who have problems should be able to use a previous version of the operating system to continue to enjoy their devices, don't you think?

Wireless should not be this difficult or complicated for the user. I've checked, and there are plenty of frustrated users out there who simply want their iPhones to work.

So come on, Apple -- take better care of your customers. This is so frustrating. It is hurting your brand.

Don't get me wrong... I love Apple products. Heck, I love the entire wireless industry and all the competitors and devices, from networks to handsets.

What I don't love is getting more dependent on these things and then having them stop working. If the wireless industry wants us to stop carrying wallets and keys and just use our smartphones as the remote control for our lives, the devices will have to get much better and more reliable, or we customers will revolt!

For now, just give me iOS 7 back. Please.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Give-Me-That-Old-Time-Operating-System-Apple---Its-Good-Enough-for-Me-81278.html#sthash.jnhIFGoK.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-pay-cvs-rite-aid-currentc-battle-for-expanding-mobile-payment-market

Apple Pay, CVS, Rite Aid, CurrentC Battle for Expanding Mobile Payment Market

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 28, 2014 3:38AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL  CVS  RAD  GOOG  WMT  BBY  T  VZ  S  V  MA  EBAY

apple pay, currentc, mobile payment, nfc technology, google wallet

 

With all the attention suddenly being paid to the mobile pay space you would think itís all brand new. While it is brand new for services like Apple (AAPL)  Pay, the space itself has been around for many years already. Just think about services like PayPal (EBAY)  and youíll see what I mean.

Will Apple have the same impact on the mobile pay space as they did with iTunes several years ago? They want to, thatís for sure. However there are other heavy hitters in this space as well.

Apple was not the first company into the changing music space either with their iPod and iTunes, but they were the company who caused the rapid change in the space when they entered. And they eventually had the vast majority of market share as well.

With Apple Pay we see the skirmish between Apple, CVS (CVS) , and Rite Aid (RAD)  drug stores playing out right now. And I think this will be the first of many similar events as we reinvent and reshape the wireless and mobile pay space.

Itís important to understand that these kinds of opportunities have a life span. Where the Apple iPod and iTunes ruled the industry, today they are not as important as they were a few short years ago. In fact in Apples recent earnings statement you can see how this area is now shrinking for Apple. Every market has a life span.

With regards to mobile pay, this is a space that has been trying to break through and transform the industry for years. There are many companies competing in this space like PayPay, Google  (GOOG)  Wallet, and now Apple Pay.

In fact there will be another big and important competitor in the space next year called CurrentC. Lotís of big retail corporations are partnering and investing heavily into a competitive pay technology.

Thatís why CVS and Rite Aid turned off the Apple Pay technology over the weekend. They are part of this very large partnership of retailers.

CurrentC is the competing mobile payment system, which will be rolled out in 2015. The Merchant Customer Exchange will operate CurrentC. Other members include roughly 50 chains so far including Wal-Mart (WMT)  and Best Buy (BBY) .

These technologies use NFC or near field communications to interact with point-of-sale terminals at retail stores. This allows us to wave our mobile phone and pay for things, like magic. Itís very attractive, although there are differences between the systems and what they do.

Customers and companies will have to decide what they like and what they donít and then decide which they want to use.

The technology is different, but the result is similar. These are competitors. And I expect there to be more competitors bubbling up over coming years. This will grow in to a very big and very attractive space.

There will be successes and there will be failures.

In the winnerís category are companies like wireless carriers like AT&T  (T)  Mobility, Verizon Wireless (VZ) , and Sprint (S) . This is an enormous opportunity for them. They can work with all these different technologies.

So itís important to understand that this will be a very important growth engine for many industry segments. However, itís also important to understand how some of these new mobile pay entrants will be big successes and other will not.

I think customers will pick and choose the companies and applications they prefer. There will be several different options and it will be like choosing their favorite smartphone.

I think stores will have a choice. Some will only accept one while others will accept several. Weíll have to see how this evolves and eventually pans out.

Just remember, even though this technology has been with us for years with services like PayPal, I expect things to change and grow very quickly going forward. This is definitely an interesting space to watch.

If mobile payments do grow and do become successful, I see them impacting the entire industry. That means we will see new options from industry leaders like Visa (V)  and Mastercard (MA) .

Even though this space has not grown as rapidly as we expected years ago, I think we are about to see things change and quickly. Mobile payments that are made at the retail store cash register should rapidly grow going forward.

Today the level is around $2 billion, but over the next few years thatís expected to rapidly grow to near $200 billion. And it will continue growing. Thatís a big jump and a quick jump.

Thatís the enormous opportunity that every company wants a piece of. Will there be many competitors that split up the opportunity, or will it be more like the smartphone world, with many competitors, but only two owning the vast majority of market share?

There are lotís of questions and no answers yet. Weíll have to wait and see. This is the early days. This is the wild-wild-west. This is like the Internet in the 1990ís.

No one really knows at this early date, which ideas will win. The only thing we are all expecting is that this is going to start growing and it will be an important sector to keep an eye on and to participate in.

2015 could be the beginning of a very exciting acceleration in the Mobile Payment space. Finally.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 28, 2014 3:38AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-pay-cvs-rite-aid-currentc-battle-for-expanding-mobile-payment-market#sthash.DJSdy8vh.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Divvying-Up-the-US-Crucial-Wireless-Spectrum-81240.html

ANALYSIS

Divvying Up the US' Crucial Wireless Spectrum

If carriers don't have access to all the spectrum they need for growth, they will stop growing. If they stop growing, that means some will not grow and might even fail. If that happens, the competition would love it, but that would hurt the industry. We need to keep, not lose competitors. But they have to be successful and that means they need access to spectrum.

By Jeff Kagan

10/23/14 6:17 AM PT

The U.S. government is about to hold another wireless spectrum auction. Why is spectrum so important? If you owned a brand new car with brand new tires, you would still need air in those tires in order to drive, right? That's wireless spectrum. It's the air inside the tires that lets you drive. Without spectrum, you can't use smartphone features like apps.

The problem is, wireless spectrum is not unlimited. There is a definite limit to the amount of spectrum we have available to use for a variety of industries. Wireless is just one of them.

There was such a shortage several years ago that the FCC directed some cable television spectrum to the wireless industry. That helped, but it did not solve the problem. It only bought some time. You can be sure the cable television industry wants its spectrum back.

Over the last few years, the amount of spectrum used has increased. The smartphone you carry uses wireless spectrum to connect to the Internet so your apps work. Without wireless spectrum, it would be like having a very high-speed superhighway right next to you, but no on or off ramp. That's wireless spectrum.

Since spectrum is so limited, and the need is so great, how do we split it up? What's fair? That's the question faced by many companies. How do we split up and auction off the available spectrum?

Sprint's in the Pink

I expect both AT&T and Verizon to acquire the majority of available spectrum for their growing needs. That would be only fair. They are the two largest wireless carriers, splitting up roughly 70 percent of the marketplace. So of course they need more, because they have more customers.

Sprint, interestingly, is not bidding on this spectrum because it already has plenty. The path Sprint took in the last several years now seems brilliant in hindsight.

Like AT&T and Verizon, Sprint had its own spectrum. However, its slow growth during the last decade meant it didn't use all its available capacity. Add to that the spectrum it got through recent acquisitions, like Clearwire, and you can see Sprint now has plenty as its growth picks up.

T-Mobile needs spectrum -- suddenly, it is growing once again. That's the good news. The bad news is it needs spectrum to keep its customers happy, and it has little to spare.

Then there are all the smaller, regional Tier II wireless carriers like U.S. Cellular, C Spire Wireless, and Tracfone.

If carriers don't have access to all the spectrum they need for growth, they will stop growing. If they stop growing, that means some will not grow and might even fail.

If that happens, the competition would love it, but that would hurt the industry. We need to keep, not lose competitors. But they have to be successful and that means they need access to spectrum.

So, in order to keep the marketplace healthy, we have to make sure the smaller Tier II players have access to wireless spectrum.

The Value of Sharing

Note that I didn't say "ownership" -- just access. Smaller players may not be able to afford all the spectrum they need, anyway. However, they can arrange access to it from the larger players.

AT&T Mobility recently gave some smaller competitors access to wireless spectrum so they could continue to grow and compete.

You may think it makes no sense for a competitor to rescue another competitor, but it makes enormous sense.

I remember when Microsoft gave Apple funds through an investment in the 1990s when Apple was failing. Now we see that was what Apple needed, because today it is one of the largest and most important U.S. companies.

That is not only a good way to keep competition alive, but also to keep regulators off your back. That has lots of value in itself.

Verizon Wireless and others should do the same thing as AT&T Mobility. Will they?

The U.S. has a very serious problem. This spectrum problem is caused by success and growth, but the shortage is a problem. The shortage of on and off ramps is occurring at a time when the need for spectrum is zooming off the charts.

The upcoming spectrum auction will be very helpful to AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile. Sprint is in good shape already. However, we have to keep the smaller carriers in mind as well, so they can continue to compete.

As long as all the players are fair and not abusive, I see the wireless industry continuing it's rapid growth for many years to come. Let's hope everyone does the right thing going forward -- one step at a time.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Divvying-Up-the-US-Crucial-Wireless-Spectrum-81240.html#sthash.UHJySyRp.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/can-cable-tv-survive

Jeff Kagan: Can Cable TV Survive?

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 21, 2014 5:53AM   

Tickers Mentioned: CMCSA  TWC  DISH DTV T VZ CTL CBS NFLX AMZN S

cable tv stocks, cable tv or online streaming business, netflix versus hbo, netflix versus cable, best cable company stocks

The earth is shaking under the feet of the cable television industry. Traditional cable TV is facing an earthquake that is changing the entire industry. When the dust clears, everything about the traditional industry will be very different. A new television industry is emerging. Can Cable TV survive?

This has been building for years, but all of a sudden new technology with the Internet, new ideas and new competition, have all reached the point where they are now starting to negatively impact the cable television industry.

Weíve been complaining about cable TV forever. However, even with all that noise about poor service and rising prices, the cable television industry continued to grow. Why? No competition. Customers had not choice.

Today things are changing. Competition is finally starting to impact the industry. In this new marketplace, since the cable television industry has treated customers badly over time, they are at risk.

So now competition is finally starting to take away cable televisionís exclusive marketplace position. Cable TV is losing market share and competitors are growing.

So what does this mean for customers and investors?

Take a look at cable television companies like Comcast ($CMCSA), Time Warner Cable ($TWC) and Cox and you can see the pressure they are facing.

The cable television companies should not have been taunting customers over the years. They should not have been fighting users desire for ďa la carteĒ services. If they gave customers what customers wanted, their current predicament would not be as bad.

However the industry turned a deaf ear. Now they are beginning to face the wrath they have created. They can pull up before they crash, but there is no sign of that so far.

The average user watches five to 10 channels, but has to pay for hundreds. This is one area where cable TV really screwed up. A la Carte letís users choose the channels they want to watch and pay for only those. This idea has always been pushed back by the industry.

Because they didnít give customers what they wanted, the cable television industry has started to lose customers. This will continue as far as I can see unless the industry does an about face.

There has been so much change over the last decade that has really started to eat into Cable TVís dominance. Letís take a look.

- It started with satellite TV from companies like DISH Networks ($DISH) and DirecTV ($DTV).

- Then the large telephone companies jumped in with their IPTV services. This was the first type of service that used the new technology and the Internet to provide a better television experience. These are services like AT&T Uverse ($T), Verizon FiOS ($VZ) and CenturyLink Prism ($CTL).

How is IPTV doing? A year ago AT&T gave an example in an analyst meeting that they have won more than 50 percent market share in Dallas to make their point. Thatís incredible performance. I canít wait for an update.

This shows how cable television has shot itself in the foot. It shows how much resentment customers have developed because of the industries attitude toward them. It shows how they want something new. And more change is coming.

- AT&T is in the process of acquiring DirecTV.

- Verizon says they will launch a WebTV product next year.

- Last week HBO said they would launch their first web based television offering letting non cable TV customers watch for the first time.

- Last week CBS ($CBS) also announced it will let viewers watch their programming on the web without a cable TV subscription.

And this is just the beginning. We are just in the first inning of this revolution, which is transforming the industry. So as you can see everything surrounding the television business is being reinvented. And all this change suddenly seems to be on the fast lane.

What will the cable television industry look like going forward?

- I see traditional cable TV continuing to lose. It will stick around for a long time, but it will not be a growth business. Unless and until they are willing to cannibalize themselves in order to win long term. So far I see no sign of that happening.

- I see competitors to traditional cable TV continuing to grow. That means telephone companies like AT&T, Verizon and CenturyLink, as well as newer companies like Netflix and Amazon.com.

- I see new technology and the Internet continuing to change the world as we know it. Who would have imagined ten years ago that companies like Netflix ($NFLX), HULU, Amazon.com ($AMZN) and others would be transforming cable television? Yet they are.

- I also see the wireless industry playing a growing role in this growing and changing space. Companies like AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless and Sprint ($S) are going to let us watch television wherever we are on our smartphones, tablet computers and smart watches.

The world of cable TV is changing. We used to rush home to watch our favorite program at a certain time. Tomorrow we will be able to watch whatever we want, whenever we want, on what ever device we want, wherever we are.

We are turning the world of traditional television on its head.

Cable TV does not have to lose like they currently are. They can lead the way with innovation. However they have to be willing to do what other market leaders do on a regular basis. They must cannibalize themselves and reinvent themselves for the future.

Will cable TV cannibalize itself in order to win going forward? Will they cut off their arm in order to continue to live and grow? That is the question. I see no sign of this yet.

I donít see them vanishing short term, but I donít see them growing as rapidly either with all these new technologies and companies offering innovation.

The future of the cable television industry is at stake. Everything is changing. There is no time to waste. Whether the industry succeeds or fails is ultimately up to the industry itself. What we will do next is the question.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 21, 2014 5:53AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/can-cable-tv-survive#sthash.0ypE1jis.dpuf

 

 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/No-More-Wireless-Mergers-No-Problem-81205.html

OPINION

No More Wireless Mergers? No Problem

It's good to clear all the merger activity off the table so we can focus on the industry changes that are occurring right now. AT&T, for example, is aggressively rolling out its ultra-high-speed Internet service in a growing list of cities nationwide. This is a game-changer in many respects. Other companies also are installing high-speed Internet in certain markets -- like Google.

By Jeff Kagan

10/16/14 6:28 AM PT

Big news: The new wireless world in the United States, which has been led by AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile, will stay exactly the same. That's right -- Iliad no longer is interested in T-Mobile. There will be no changes -- for now, anyway. So can we finally forget about all the merger distractions and focus on competing again? Please!

There has been so much merger distraction over the last year or two surrounding the U.S. wireless marketplace that not enough attention has been paid to actual innovation, growth and plans for the top four wireless carriers and the entire industry.

So where do we stand today and what's coming next?

Who's Losing Customers?

Both AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless are still in the No. 1 and 2 positions. Based on the good performances of both, I don't see that changing. They are both very active with innovation. They are growing -- and moving into new areas of growth as well.

Both Sprint and T-Mobile have been suffering during recent years. However, both are re-engineering their companies and expectations are getting stronger.

Sprint, which is No. 3, is just starting its recovery. It is under new ownership and has a new CEO, and there are quite a few changes going on at the carrier. I would not be surprised if we begin to see the same kind of growth and recovery as we suddenly are seeing at T-Mobile.

T-Mobile, which is No. 4, started its recovery a year ago and has been growing at a healthy clip. It was in terrible shape for years but has begun its recovery.

So if Sprint and T-Mobile are recovering, where are their new customers coming from? Initially, the thought was that customers would come from AT&T and Verizon, but that does not seem to be the case. AT&T and Verizon continue to show strong business.

Could it mean that Sprint and T-Mobile growth is coming from smaller carriers in the space -- like U.S. Cellular, C Spire Wireless, Tracfone and others?

We'll have to keep our eyes on this space for more clues. Things are just starting to get interesting.

Different Strokes

There is an interesting distinction between wireless carriers. Some offer wireless as part of a larger bundle while others offer wireless as their main course. Others are expanding to offer wireless as part of a new kind of bundle.

Example: AT&T and Verizon are the two largest telecommunications carriers in the United States. They offer all kinds of services from wireless to telephone, Internet, television using IPTV, and many other new businesses as well.

In fact, AT&T is also very aggressive at rolling out its ultra-high-speed Internet service in a growing list of cities nationwide. This is a game-changer in many respects.

Local phone companies like CenturyLink want to be a player as well. Windstream, while still wireline only, continues to expand.

Sprint and T-Mobile are strictly wireless carriers. Keep your eyes on these two as rapid growth could be in the cards going forward.

C-Spire is a company that, while small and offering services only in a limited area, still is growing by adding services. It offers wireless, but also is building out a wireline high-speed Internet in a few Mississippi cities.

Other companies also are installing high-speed Internet in certain markets -- like Google, and some in the cable television industry, which is struggling with losses caused by new competition.

More Pie

So as you can see, things are changing. The speeds of wireless Internet continue to increase, and there is a growing number of apps, which users are starting to love to use. That means change will continue in the coming years.

Competitors in the space look like they will continue to expand their offerings. However, all competitors are not created equal, as you can see. There are definitely different slices of the pie.

However, don't let that fact lead you to believe that growth is not there. On the contrary, I see rapid growth opportunities for all competitors. It's just a different kind of growth, depending on the company.

Of course, each competitor must make all this come true -- but it's good to clear all the merger activity off the table so we can focus on the industry changes that are occurring right now. That's the exciting part.  

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/No-More-Wireless-Mergers-No-Problem-81205.html#sthash.7JRJVvQP.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-is-back-ipad-air-iphone6

Jeff Kagan: Apple is Back

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 16, 2014 2:50PM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL

apple stock price, apple ipad air, apple iphone 6, apple cool again, apple new products, apple pay, apple watch

The new iPad and iMac were both just unveiled. As always, the next natural question is what impact will it have going forward for Apple (AAPL) ? I think this will be another home run following the successful launch of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus from last month. Apple is on a tear right now. Will it last is the question.

Apple is a company who has lived through many ups and downs over their lifespan. It almost crashed and burned in the 1990s. Then it came out with the first iPod and changed the music industry. Next it came out with the first iPhone and changed the smartphone industry. Then it came out with the first tablet with their first iPad.

So for years Apple has been super successful and living high. However the last several years since Steve Jobs passing has been rough on the company. The good news right now is current CEO Tim Cook seems to have taken control of the organization.

Apple is back.

The last couple years, Cook's presentation at these product unveilings has been weak. However, last month when he introduced the new iPhone 6, he hit it out of the park. He seems to be getting comfortable with his position.

And now with his brand new introduction of many new Apple items like the iPad, iMac, Apple Pay, updated operating systems and more, Cook seems to be hitting his stride. Itís not unlike watching a thoroughbred hit his stride during a race. Itís a beautiful thing to watch.

With that said, I have not really seen anything revolutionary in any of the new Apple devices. Rather than revolutionary, Apple seems evolutionary.

If this were any other company I would say this would translate into weaker sales. Not with Apple. This performance is enough to put Apple into orbit once again.

Why? The Apple customer. Thatís why.

Apple customers are different than ordinary customers. Most times customers need to see something totally new in order to pony up money to by the updated model.

However Apple users are always there, year after year. Apple has a very unique and special relationship with its users.

Something interesting Tim Cook mentioned during this iPad announcement. He said the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus have sold more in the first 30 days than any other iPhone. And he said, a lot more. That says volumes.

So we donít have details, but we do have plenty of evidence that Apple is back.

So while I donít see Apple playing at this level forever, simply because no one company does, I do see them still at their best. Thatís good news for customers, partners and investors today.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-is-back-ipad-air-iphone6#sthash.qwmno1N8.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/BlackBerry-Tries-Tries-Again-to-Remake-Its-Brand-81170.html

ANALYSIS

BlackBerry Tries, Tries Again to Remake Its Brand

BlackBerry still may be the most secure technology. That would be a key feature to stress in its advertising and marketing. Offering a wider variety of products would be another key. That means offering devices that reflect new thinking, like the Passport, alongside traditional, updated devices like the Bold and Torch models. BlackBerry also must reach the marketplace in a variety of new ways.

By Jeff Kagan

10/09/14 6:20 AM PT

BlackBerry is trying to rebuild itself by remaking its brand. A successful brand is one of the most important parts of any success story. However once a brand has sprouted roots, it's very difficult to remake it. It's easier to start from scratch. So what is the plan at BlackBerry -- and will it be successful?

The BlackBerry brand has grown and evolved over the last 10 to 15 years. It started life as a text pager, then eventually added a phone. The company had a growing number of corporate customers and one of the hottest brand names in the wireless industry -- for a while, anyway.

Then its leaders got full of themselves and thought they were bulletproof. The last seven years have shown they were not.

Early on, in speeches, columns and media interviews, I warned BlackBerry execs of the coming iPhone and Android growth monster that was threatening their business. They paid no attention to the threat. They thought they were invincible.

Even after they had been struggling for several years I warned them again over a dinner, but my words seemed to go in one ear and out the other. They just couldn't believe the earth they stood on was that fragile.

However, as we all know, it was. BlackBerry began to collapse and it's been on life support for the last few years. It tried to remake itself under a new CEO. Its leaders made a valiant effort, but they kept failing. The problem was they stretched far beyond what their customers wanted.

Another Shot

Now, with new CEO John Chen, BlackBerry has another chance. Will it succeed this time? Yes -- if its executives can understand their existing customers, and if they can give them exactly what they want. Whether they can is the question.

Chen seems to have stabilized BlackBerry for the time being, but its global market share is less than 1 percent. BlackBerry is a shadow of its former self. However, if he can start to build, then perhaps BlackBerry can start to grow once again.

BlackBerry has to do two things right, not only to survive, but also to grow. One is that it must have products that its current customers really want. Two, it must refresh and reignite its brand fire.

These are two very big jobs.

The technology is key. Sure, it can have several new devices with new thinking, like the BlackBerry Passport, but it had better also have the familiar technology many of its customers still want -- like an updated Torch or Bold.

Remember, the majority of BlackBerry customers are longtime loyal users. Many just want an updated BlackBerry they are familiar with -- not some totally new design and technology.

There is room for both. However, BlackBerry is heading down the new path exclusively, and that may be a problem. That's the part that BlackBerry missed over the last several years. It's not too late -- if the company gets it.

The brand is the other key. BlackBerry's brand evolution over the first decade was a result of growth with customers and technology. If BlackBerry is going to try and re-cast itself to win today, it must reach for new growth -- but at the same time make sure its existing customers are comfortable.

That's difficult, but it can be done. Whether BlackBerry will be able to do it is the question.

Missing Pieces

BlackBerry has tapped the skills of a B2B agency, Gyro, in an effort to remake its brand and start the growth engines once again. It used to work with BBDO.

BlackBerry wants to focus on the enterprise side to start, which is a good move. It has been out of the mainstream long enough. It has a new opportunity to remake its brand in the hearts and minds of its customers.

I have asked many in the industry, and most don't think BlackBerry will ever recapture its growth. I hope they are wrong, because BlackBerry still can be an important piece of the puzzle going forward, if it can get that growth spark back once again.

As far as anyone knows, BlackBerry still may be the most secure technology. That would be a key feature to stress in its advertising and marketing -- something I have been advising for years. Offering a wider variety of devices and technologies would be another key.

That means offering devices that reflect new thinking, like the Passport, alongside traditional, updated devices like the Bold and Torch models.

BlackBerry also must reach the marketplace in a variety of new ways, including advertising, media and the analyst community. This is key.

Like other analysts, I get email press releases from BlackBerry, but the company very seldom ever goes beyond that.

That screams that BlackBerry still does not understand the market and the basics of achieving success going forward -- not yet, anyway.

It takes more than a new ad agency to build a successful brand. Yet that's all BlackBerry seems to be hedging its bets on. That is my concern for the company.

I want BlackBerry to win going forward. There is room in the industry for BlackBerry as a meaningful competitor. Whether the company ever gets it is still the question.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/BlackBerry-Tries-Tries-Again-to-Remake-Its-Brand-81170.html#sthash.zbjbtlS0.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/tips-for-briefing-industry-analysts

Jeff Kagan: Tips for Briefing Industry Analysts

By  Jeff Kagan 

October 7, 2014 2:20PM   

communicating with analysts, how to deal with analysts, corporate communication advice, investor relations advice,

 

Successfully briefing the industry analyst community is key for every company who wants to have a good, strong and positive image in the marketplace. First they must have a positive image with the analyst community. Thatís why companies want to brief as many analysts as they can.

However only a very few actually do this correctly and get good results. So let me give you a better understanding of the process and how you can win.

The most successful way would be to get close to every analyst. Easier said than done since most industries have dozens or even hundreds of analysts and firms.

I have been a technology industry analyst for more than 25 years. Many companies have done a good job of working with me on an ongoing basis. Initially briefing me and keeping me up to speed over time.

However many more companies completely fail. Itís so important for every company to understand and get this right and not blow this opportunity.

First, itís important to understand the analyst community and how it works. There are two distinct groups. One is financial or investment analysts. The other is industry analysts. Itís also important to understand there are many different types within these two groups.

The investment analyst community is typically handled by investor relations. The industry analyst community is typically handled by analyst relations or as part of the marketing organization.

Industry analysts are interested in different things. They have their own distinct groups. Each does things differently. That makes a companyís job harder if it wants to be successful interacting with them all.

Think of the industry analyst community as having two parts. One is smaller group of key analysts, most influential and most important to your company. The other is the much larger group of the entire analyst community that follows your company and your space.

Both groups are important, but they must be handled very differently.

Analyst Briefing

It is important to get close to and fully understand everything about the small group of key analysts that most influential in your space. This is key. They can be most beneficial or most harmful to your company.

Remember, your customers, investors and the media read the thoughts of industry analysts. If you blow this, it could be very costly.

If you do not have a good and ongoing relationship with the analyst, and share your thinking on different topics, their opinions will be self generated. So whether or not their coverage is positive or negative is at stake. Thatís why its important.

Learn what each analyst focuses on and learn their business model. They are often very different from each other. Every company has a small group of key analysts who are most influential to their business and their space.

It is also important to understand that if you line up this small group of industry analysts, they will all do business differently. They will all focus on different areas. They all have different business models.

Example, some will focus on the technology itself helping businesses understand whatís available. Others focus on the competitive landscape, whoís winning, whoís losing and why. Most earn income from clients on a retainer basis who are interested in their thoughts and recommendations. So as you can see, all are important, but all are different.

So assume all industry analysts are different. And take the time to get close to each. To better understand each. Give each what they want and the way they want it. Let them follow you at their own pace.

Too many companies donít do this. Instead they have one single presentation for every analyst. This is a big mistake. They expect the analyst to pull the parts that interest them out of the big hairball of a presentation. They donít typically get good results that way.

Remember, analysts follow many companies in the industry and have little time to conform to your way of doing things. You must conform to the way each analyst works in order to have a chance to get good results.

Industry Analyst Meeting Agenda

As a general rule, the industry analyst community is all interested in basic information about the company. How you are doing. How you are competing. Are you winning, losing and why. And whatís coming next.

So the initial portion of any briefing can be this high level, general information presented by the CEO and other senior executives.

However part two of any briefing should be more personalized and targeted to different groups. Itís impossible to create a separate presentation for everyone. However companies can have different breakout sessions focusing on different areas. Companies who do are more successful.

Then let the analyst choose the areas they want to focus on. That way every analyst getís a general update, and then specific updates depending on the part of the business they focus on with very little waste. This works best.

Key Analysts Have Their Own Brand

With regards to the smaller group of key analysts that are most important, the strategy is quite different. These are the top analysts and often have the attitude that goes along with that stature.

I have learned this because I have been an analyst and consultant for more than 25 years and have developed a powerful brand in my business. That means many companies put me on their short list.

This gives me the ability to participate in analyst relations from several different perspectives, the larger group, the smaller group and as an individual.

I will not discuss which companies do a great job and which do a poor job here, but trust me, there are many in both categories.

Every company wants to win the hearts of analysts, but most simply donít know how to do so. With that said, they try, but they are only partially successful.

A very few actually do a great job. No one company is perfect, but some come very close. Itís important for a successful analyst relationship to be an open, two-way door.

So itís important for the company to expend the effort to understand every single key analyst that follows them, and is influential in their space.

Companies, who donít do this, run the risk of swimming upstream rather than flowing with the stream. Key analysts to your company and your space are such an important ingredient to your story of success or failure.

Itís not in the analyst job description, however they can help tell your story if they understand and agree with what you are doing. Itís important for you to make the effort.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          October 7, 2014 2:20PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/tips-for-briefing-industry-analysts#sthash.b6oMxGg7.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/How-Microsoft-Lenovo-and-Clickfree-Damage-Their-Collective-Brand-Experience-81143.html

ANALYSIS

How Microsoft, Lenovo and Clickfree Damage Their Collective Brand Experience

I've been experiencing a mysterious tech problem, but I don't know if it's with Lenovo on its Thinkpad or Microsoft with its Windows 7 Professional or Clickfree with its backup device. These three companies should work together to make sure everything works well for the customer. If they don't, the result is they damage their own brand in the collective brand experience.

By Jeff Kagan

10/03/14 6:40 AM PT

What is a collective brand experience, and why is it so important for companies to understand and manage it correctly? It can't be ignored, because it will grow on its own and in harmful ways. However, most don't even understand the concept and are shooting themselves in the foot on a daily basis.

Companies understand the brand. Even so, only some do a good job at building, nurturing and protecting their own brand. A collective brand experience goes beyond that. It's something we all experience on a daily basis, but don't realize. It can either build or break a brand.

A collective brand experience is when in order to use one product you must rely on another product -- for example, peripherals, software and add-ons to your computer.

A customer's good experience with one product depends on other companies. If the product works, great. If the product does not work, that's a problem. There is no way for the customer to figure out where the problem lies and how to fix it -- and that damages every participant in the collective brand experience.

Finding the Source

Take Microsoft, Lenovo and Clickfree, for example. Separately, they have strong brands. However, when you try and make them work together, sometimes there are problems. Finding out where the problem lies can be impossible for the customer, which results in lasting brand and loyalty problems.

This hurts the brand experience of each company. So companies must work hard, separately and together, to solve customer problems.

Why don't they? Good question, since not doing so hurts their brand.

I love innovation. What I don't like is when things stop working after innovation. Typically there is a busy period after any new product cycle when every company tries to catch up.

For example, every time Apple updates it's iOS, all the apps must be updated over the first few weeks to make sure they still work well.

That annoys the average user. That's why only early adopters typically jump right in. They find the problems, the companies fix the problems, then the next waves of users jump in. Over the next couple of years, users are generally happy.

So after a few years, you would expect the bugs to be worked out, right? Wrong.

Somebody should tell that to Microsoft, Lenovo and Clickfree, because they are continually damaging their own brands in this process. Consider this:

Microsoft Windows 7 Professional has been around for years and generally works well.

Lenovo has an excellent line of computers, laptops and tablets, but even its best devices are limited by the operating system they use from Microsoft.

Clickfree is a terrific backup device that connects to the computer and sits on the desk.

Over the years, I have used all three and they seldom let me down. However, I started to experience problems during the last year.

So where is the problem coming from -- Microsoft, Lenovo or Clickfree?

Compatibility Problems

A year ago, I bought two new Clickfree devices because they were larger and faster. They worked great for several months, but then both simply stopped working. Curious. That never happened before. That was one chink in my loyalty to Clickfree.

Fortunately, I had older Clickfree devices that still worked, so I used them while waiting for the new devices I just purchased to arrive.

The two new devices worked great for a few weeks, but then one of them stopped working. Very curious. Another chink in Clickfree's armor.

After spending hours trying everything I could think of, I eventually called Clickfree for help. After spending too much time on the phone, I finally asked them to replace the unit. They agreed.

After nearly a month of waiting, my new replacement finally arrived. That was another problem. The exchange should have been much quicker. After all, companies shouldn't tick off good customers if they want them to remain customers.

Bottom line: The new device didn't work either. However, the other Clickfree device of the same model name still worked. Very curious -- it just doesn't make sense.

I started thinking that perhaps the problem was not just with Clickfree. The problems with the two I purchased last year are still a mystery, but I am getting closer to figuring out the problem with this new device.

What is it? It works, but it is not compatible with one of my T430 laptops.

Even though that is hard to believe, that must be the problem. What's hard to believe is that I have two identical Clickfree devices and several nearly identical T430 Thinkpad computers all using Windows 7 Professional.

The reason I have the same devices is so I don't have to spend time learning the quirks of each -- or so I thought. As it turns out, even though all these devices have the same name, they are not the same.

Fading Customer Loyalty

The Microsoft Windows 7 Professional OS is obviously a different version on each computer, even though the computer name and model say they should be the same.

So the question is, where is the problem? Is it with Lenovo on its Thinkpad or Microsoft with its Windows 7 Professional or Clickfree with its backup device?

To answer the question, let me just say at this point that after investing so much time, I don't really know and I don't really care. I simply want the system to work. Period.

The strong brand experience I have with each of these companies now has been weakened. That can't be their goal, but that's the result.

I'm busy running my own life and business. I don't need to be an expert on computers, software and peripherals. They should simply work. Period.

These three companies should work together to make sure everything works well for the customer. The reason is simple. They want customers to stay customers. If they don't, the result is they damage their own brand in the collective brand experience.

When customers call on Clickfree -- or any company -- for help, it should be able to determine the problem and quickly solve it with a download so its customers are up and running quickly.

When I had a problem with my Apple iPhone last year, a tech support person walked me through several fixes over several weeks until it finally worked. Why can't Clickfree, Lenovo and Microsoft do this to make the customer happy?

Since I have not been able to fix this problem, I blame all of them. Is that what they really want? I don't think so, but that is what they got.

The collective brand involves every company that works with other companies to make its product, software or service work. That's why companies need to pay close attention to this customer experience.

Currently I still use Microsoft, Lenovo and Clickfree, and I don't see myself changing -- not yet, anyway. But to tell you the truth, if you asked me the question five years ago, I would have said I would be with them for life. Today, I am not so sure.

That means customers are at risk of being lost. That's the power and importance of successfully managing the collective brand experience.

That's also an example of the problems that occur if companies ignore it. So, are you doing a good job with this? Think about it. This is a very important question for every company to ask itself.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/How-Microsoft-Lenovo-and-Clickfree-Damage-Their-Collective-Brand-Experience-81143.html#sthash.pyJvGdFm.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-why-masayoshi-son-of-softbank-wants-dreamworks

Jeff Kagan: Why Masayoshi Son of Softbank wants DreamWorks

By Jeff Kagan

September 29, 2014

Tickers Mentioned: SFTBF  TMUS  S  DWA  AAPL  GOOG

A curious thing seems to be happening. Masayoshi Son, CEO of Softbank ($SFTBF) and majority owner of wireless carrier Sprint ($S), seems to be on a tear to acquire other US companies as well. Why? It sounds like he wants to create a new category in the wireless space, and become a real player in the US in a variety of industries.

Two years ago if you said the name Masayoshi Son, hardly anyone in the USA would have known what you were talking about. Today, the name alone is on everyoneís radar.

Masayoshi Son is quickly building a brand name in the US. We didnít know this two years ago when we first heard the name, but he has become the wealthiest individual in Japan. So he must be doing quite a bit right.

In addition to that, he has his hands in quite a few different and very successful buckets. We just learned that Alibaba ($BABA) is just one of them and that alone increased his value by billions of dollars when it went public a couple weeks ago.

He tried to also acquire T-Mobile ($TMUS), which did not work.           

DreamWorks ($DWA) is next on his list. So what does this mean? Is he interested in Hollywood, or adding value and content to Sprint?

Itís impossible for any of us to know at this early stage. However from what I have seen so far, I would say we should expect both.

If we recall what Masayoshi Son has been talking about during the last year or two, itís reinvention. It started with reinvention in the wireless space, but is not limited to wireless.

It could mean acquiring other companies in other industry segments and having them all play together in unique and valuable ways.

DreamWorks could play a role in Sonís new industry direction.

In addition to that, companies like DreamWorks will continue doing what they currently do, so Son could be stepping into the Hollywood space as well.

We didnít have that in mind when he was purchasing Sprint, but now, in retrospect, it certainly makes sense.

Remember, we have had a wireless industry since roughly 1980. But itís only been in the last seven years or so since the Apple ($AAPL) iPhone and Google ($GOOG) Android hit the market and changed the industry. Itís only been in a few short years since the app market has grown from a few hundred to well over a million.

So we are still only in the very early stages of this new wireless, smartphone revolution. It is still in the first inning. There will be plenty of new ideas and changes in the marketplace.

And it looks like Son wants to play a major role in that industry-wide growth and transformation.

Itís impossible to predict exactly what this will look like a few years from today. It largely depends on what Son is allowed to acquire. Remember, this entire smartphone sector is only a few short years old.

However, even though he is Japanese, there is something so, well, American about Masayoshi Son. He has that unique and special creative entrepreneurial spirit that America was built on.

It looks like starting with Sprint as a wireless network, Son wants to continue to expand both in the wireless industry, but also in other industries as well. And those other industries will both help Sprint grow, and grow on their own.

So will everything Masayoshi Son touches work? Well I have never seen any individual get every move right. However I do get the sense that Son will build something big and different. These are his goals based on speeches during the last year or two.

I would say based on what we have seen so far, he wonít hit a home run with every swing, but it doesnít make sense to bet against him either. I would say he is committed to being successful in the US market and based on that he will be.

In addition, we seem to be very early in Sonís acquisition spree. So expect to see many more companies to follow as he builds and grows.

Keep your eyes on Son. We are very early in his new game. Batter up!

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          September 29, 2014 1:21PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-why-masayoshi-son-of-softbank-wants-dreamworks#sthash.kI5yanpG.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Self-Driving-Car-Security-No-Room-for-Error-81098.html

ANALYSIS

Self-Driving Car Security: No Room for Error

Technology has given us many reasons for awe and inspiration. However, we all need to be alert to the other side of the coin. A little fear and concern around new technologies may be warranted. How will we protect ourselves? Will the protection come from the car manufacturer, or from the information technology provider -- updated through the wireless Internet? Or will it be up to the driver?

By Jeff Kagan

09/25/14 9:56 AM PT

Walk into any store that sells software and you will find antivirus software from companies like Norton, ESET, McAfee and Kaspersky. Over the last few years, the risk has spread from our computers to our smartphones and our tablets. The next thing we will have to protect may be our cars -- and our lives could depend on it.

We used to think the computer was the only device that needed virus protection since it was connected to the Internet. We surfed the Web, exchanged email, and shared attachments with family, friends -- and unfortunately, foes as well, thanks to viruses and other online threats.

Then that risk spread to smartphones like Apple's iPhone, Samsung Galaxy line and others running Google's Android OS. Next it spread even further, to tablets like Apple's iPad, Samsung's Galaxy Tab and countless other Android devices.

As information technology expands to include smartwatches and other devices and services -- like self- driving cars -- the risk continues to spread.

Autonomous Cars

The self-driving automobile is one of the next new things I think we need to protect. We need to be very careful going forward with autonomous cars.

We already are seeing advances in wireless connectivity in the auto industry, which are providing an incredible experience with additional features and functionality, including Internet connectivity and in-car WiFi.

So far there seems to be little virus risk, but we need to keep our eyes open for potential threats as this new area expands. The risk for viruses and other threats will grow as more connected devices are built in.

An area of major concern may be a brand new technology companies like Google are experimenting with: the self-driving, or autonomous, car.

Google's driverless car is amazing, but it could come with many threats to our safety and privacy.

Imagine telling the car you want to drive to the store. Then you sit back and enjoy surfing the Web while your car does the driving.

Now imagine a virus affected the programming, and instead of avoiding other cars, you seek them out like a heat-seeking missile. Or instead of turning right to the store, you instead turn left and your car drives you into the river.

Bad Maps

Don't laugh -- these types of things have happened in the recent past. Remember when Apple dumped Google Maps from the iPhone and forced users to use Apple's own maps for navigation?

Do you remember all the stories of the nav system telling drivers to turn into a river or worse? This was not even a bad guy -- just bad programming. Now add all the bad guys into the mix, and you can see the real problem.

Technology has given us many reasons for awe and inspiration, and that is good. However, we all need to be alert to the other side of the coin. A little fear and concern around new technologies may be warranted.

How will we protect ourselves? Will the protection come from the car manufacturer, or from the information technology provider -- updated through the wireless Internet? Or will it be up to the driver who must shop for and buy the latest version of auto antivirus software on an annual basis, the same as we do with our computers today?

Raising concern to an even higher level, there is no current antivirus protection for self-driving cars. Don't worry, though -- not yet, anyway. The reason is there are no self-driving cars on the market yet.

High Stakes

That's good, because we are not ready. However at the current rate of experimentation, I can see Google rushing out the first version of the self-driving car, and before long there will be other competitors in the same space, city by city. Some will be vulnerable to bigger threats than others.

It is bad enough getting a virus on our computer or tablet. At least it's not deadly. However getting a virus on our self-driving cars may be a different story.

Fortunately, cars like George Jetson drove in the cartoon series The Jetsons are still in the future -- just not as far down the road as we may think.

As this self-driving car phenomenon unfolds over the coming years, it's important to keep in mind that these vehicles will require the same kind of protection that we put on our computers, smartphones and tablets -- actually, even more, since car safety is a matter of life and death.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Self-Driving-Car-Security-No-Room-for-Error-81098.html#sthash.tpZCt3OG.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-the-future-of-wireless-telecom-and-tv

Jeff Kagan: The Future of Wireless, Telecom, and TV

By Jeff Kagan

September 23, 2014 2:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL  GOOG   BBRY  T   VZ  CTL  S  TMUS  TWC  CMCSA

telecom stocks, smart phones, wireless, wi-fi, First Monday Breakfast

At a speech last week the audience learned that only one-third of American homes are still using landlines, more than 170 billion text messages are send every single day, and 45% of all US adults own a smartphone. With stats like that you can quickly see how companies like AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL) , Sprint (S) , and T-Mobile (TMUS) have unique challenges and opportunities ahead of them.

The president of AT&T Georgia, Beth Shiroishi, spoke at the First Monday Breakfast at the Cobb County Galleria. This breakfast meeting is a regular event at the Cobb Chamber of Commerce in an Atlanta suburb.

AT&Tís Shiroishi talked about the innovation and changes that have been occurring in the telephone and wireless marketplace. This was an eye-opening presentation in plain English, meant for an audience who was not in the telephone, wireless, IPTV, or Cable Television business.

This was a great presentation because it shines a bright light on changes in the industry segments across the entire USA. It talks about innovation and change. It talks about new technology, new products, new services, and new competition. It talks about what it takes to win going forward.

This speech may have been given in Georgia, but it applies to the entire United States. Looking backwards, telecom meant telephone. Today it means wireless, wire-line, television-like cable TV and IPTV, and the internet as well. However, tomorrow it means communications will be the center of our universe and give us remote control for our lives.

Shiroishi said AT&Tís goal is to integrate different aspects of customerís lives using a variety of new technologies.

Remember, the vision of tomorrow is a connected world. Right now only two companies, AT&T and Verizon are the largest and most innovative communications companies in the United States. However both have a geographic footprint for their wire line services. Their wireless services however are nationwide.

These companies are in the business of connecting people and their things to companies and networks through technology in industry after industry.

She discussed how AT&T Mobility has a commitment to bring ultra-fast and wireless features to every aspect of our lives. How it will be highly secure to threats and invisible to users.

She also said something that I have been saying for years. The wireless phone is becoming the remote control for our lives. And I say she is absolutely right.

I have said countless times, today we donít leave our homes without three things: our keys, our wallet, and our smartphone. But tomorrow, all weíll have to remember is our smartphone. It will open our doors and start our cars. It will be our electronic wallet and have our digitized drivers license, insurance ID cars, credit cards, and everything else we carry in that leather pocket pouch.

Shiroishi said on Monday consumers are adopting new technologies at a faster rate than ever. She said how Apple (AAPL) and Google (GOOG) Android technologies have been adopted ten times faster than computer adoption. She also talked about a Ďnew economyí that is developing thanks to this quick adoption by consumers, and how this economy will continue to transform America.

There were very few mobile apps in 2007. Basically it was Blackberry (BBRY)  and thatís about it. However, today there are more than one million apps and more than 25 billion app downloads and growing.

She says the app economy was worth $53 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $143 billion by 2016. And these new technologies are replacing traditional telephone service.

She said only 25 percent of homes in Georgia use traditional landlines. The national average is 33 percent. This is a big challenge and opportunity for AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink, and many smaller phone companies from coast to coast. I see the larger cities adopting this technology faster, but it is happening everywhere. Everyone wants it.

Thatís why wireless and telephone companies must work hard to ensure the networks and infrastructure is ready for this unrelenting surge. Wireless only carriers have an ongoing job staying ahead of this demand, but larger wireless and wire line carriers have a much larger job.

Shiroishi wrapped up by saying companies like AT&T and AT&T Mobility are always evaluating customer needs and demands, both today and tomorrow so they can be there.

I think thatís a great presentation for the non-telephone and non-wireless world so they can increase their understanding of the challenges and opportunities going forward. The world we all grew up with is changing and wonít look the same a few years from now.

Companies like AT&T and Verizon are heavy hitters in both the wireless and wire-line world.

Companies like CenturyLink and Windstream are more limited to the wire line side of the business.

Companies like Sprint and T-Mobile are on the wireless side.

Cable TV companies like Comcast (CMCSA) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) , and Cox are offering some telecom services are part of the mix as well.

So the way we do everything in our lives is in the process of changing and reinventing itself. We no longer have to rush home to make a call or watch a TV program. Today, we can place or receive a call from anywhere with our wireless phones. We can also watch TV at home or on our tablet or smartphone from wherever we are.

Place or time means less as we enter this anytime and anyplace reality. All we need is a connection to the Internet, either wireless, wire line or through technologies like Wi-Fi.

The cloud is also a growing part of our technology future. We will store our information on a cloud server rather than on our devices. That way we can get access to our info wherever we are, as long as we have connection to the Internet. Once we solve the always-on need and security threats.

There are plenty of advantages and new risks in that world, so we must tread carefully going forward. However the future is a very bright, but very different place.

So which companies will be the leaders going forward? Will it be todayís leaders or will new companies jump in and change things? Most likely it will be a mix. Stay tuned.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-the-future-of-wireless-telecom-and-tv#sthash.2I8xoYIx.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/What-Is-the-Apple-Watch-if-Not-a-Watch-81063.html

ANALYSIS

What Is the Apple Watch if Not a Watch?

I see a market for smartwatches, but it's not the market we think about when we use the word "watch." I wish the industry had thought of a different name so this wrist-based technology could expand the brand identity without confusion. There are many ways these new smartwatches eventually will change the marketplace. Apps are important. Users won't adopt smartwatches until they can do many things.

By Jeff Kagan

09/18/14 6:48 AM PT

The Apple Watch is not a watch. So what exactly is it? Or for that matter, what is any smartwatch from any other maker? No one has done a good job of creating a brand identity for the new segment yet. That leaves the space wide open.

Rather than think of the smartwatch as a watch, we should think of it as a smartphone extension. It just happens to be strapped to your wrist, looks like a watch, and tells time along with many other things.

However, even though these devices tell time, they are not watches. They work through the smartphone on our belt or in our pocket. In fact, they are sort of like what cartoon character Dick Tracy wore for communication.

This is a brand new category. So far, no one company has done a good job of defining and owning this new space. However, riches and glory will go to the company that can do that.

Wide Open Category

What do I mean? Hachoo! Excuse me. Thank you for giving me a Kleenex. Did you know that "Kleenex" is not the brand identity? "Tissue" is the brand identity. However we think of "Kleenex," which is just one of the competitors.

That's a powerful marketing victory for Kleenex the tissue maker. Remember, it is just a tissue, but we think the entire category is called "Kleenex." That's a big win.

That's the same powerful opportunity we see before us right now with this smartwatch space.

Having a brand identity is crucial for the success of any new category. The Apple Watch was introduced last week. There are already other competitors in this new space, like the Samsung Galaxy Gear S, Motorola Moto 360, LG G Watch R, Sony Smartwatch 3 -- and more are joining all the time.

This activity is all good, but no one has really created a brand identity for the smartwatch or for its brand name yet. One company eventually will do this. The question is which one? And what will it be?

The next question is will the smartwatch impact the watch category?

Any watchmaker will tell you the truth. There are regular watches, which the vast majority of people wear to tell time. There is also a luxury market, which consists of timepieces that are fine jewelry or collectibles. In fact, the luxury Swiss watch market reached US$23.3 billion in 2013.

Most people don't wear multiple watches on their wrists. They choose one.

I don't see the luxury watch market being affected at all by this smartwatch revolution. Luxury watches are collectible.

Smartwatches will be traded in and updated on a regular basis -- the same as we do with our iPhones and laptops.

No Emotional Connection

Over the last few decades, I have acquired a few Rolex watches. I enjoy them, but all they do is tell the time and look good. However, they remind me of the times in my life when I acquired each. They mean something to me when I look at them to see what time it is. There is a sentimental connection to each and to the memories they bring -- and I will pass them on to my children when the time comes.

I don't feel the same way about my laptop, tablet or smartphone. I trade up all the time. They are like my TV set. There is no emotional connection to technology Visit the VMware Tech Center, since we trade up on a regular basis.

That's how I think of the smartwatch. Even the nicest Apple Watch with real gold trim won't ever match the life and collectible experience of a Rolex or other fine watch.

On the other hand, I believe smartwatches will find a market with a slice of the consumer pie. They will compete with regular watches.

As for market share, the smartphone is king. Tablets are less so, and smartwatches even less -- at least for the foreseeable future. They will be very popular, but only with a slice of the market. We just don't yet know the size of that slice.

Smartwatches could disrupt the ordinary watch market, and they could find their way to the wrists of many in today's market who don't wear a watch.

Then again, if that happens, perhaps competitors in the ordinary watch market will embrace the smartwatch idea and start to integrate the technology into their watches over time.

Smartwatches could indeed transform this segment of the watch market. Who knows? Perhaps years from now, Rolex and other watchmakers will partner with Apple or Samsung, or any of the other smartwatch makers, and put certain features into certain watches.

Crazier things already have happened. Just remember, the smartwatch will not transform the entire watch industry, but it will change one slice of that pie.

Only the Beginning

Think of how automakers are partnering with wireless carriers to bring wireless connectivity to the car and the dashboard for information and entertainment, for example. AT&T Mobility is the leader in this space; however, Verizon Wireless and Sprint also are players.

I do see a market for smartwatches -- but it's not the market we think about when we use the word "watch." I wish the industry had thought of a different name so this wrist-based technology could expand the brand identity without confusion.

There are many ways these new smartwatches eventually will change the marketplace.

Cannibalization is one way. The smartwatch will cannibalize a portion of the tablet market. Just remember, it's best that companies like Apple cannibalize themselves rather than losing business to the competition.

Apps are important. Users won't think these smartwatches are useful until they can do things -- many things -- through apps. I do believe the app market will rush to Apple, Google and Samsung.

These smartwatches are starting life working with their own smartphones, but over time they could expand to work either independently or work with other manufacturers' devices. If that happens, it's years ahead.

The smartwatch industry segment will continue to grow and change over time. We are just in the very beginning, and there will be quite a bit more that this industry will grow into.

I don't see smartwatches affecting the luxury watch market at all. They do have the potential to impact the lower end watch market once the price lowers -- and we may see smartwatch features included in many plain watches in the market today.

So buckle up and keep your eyes on this market segment, because there's more to come.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/What-Is-the-Apple-Watch-if-Not-a-Watch-81063.html#sthash.cdsWmqBH.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-confusion-on-sprint-25-direction

Jeff Kagan: Confusion on Sprint 2.5 Direction

By Jeff Kagan

September 17, 2014 12:30PM   

Tickers Mentioned: S  VZ  T  TMUS

sprint recovery, sprint stock price, sprint strategy, sprint telecom stocks

 

There seems to be some confusion and misinterpretation about Sprint (S)  in the media during the last few days. I spoke with Sprint for clarification. You will be interested in what I learned.

I am a technology industry analyst and as such follow many companies in the wireless industry from a competitive point of view. Sprint is one of those companies as one of the top three wireless networks in the United States.

Last week I wrote a column here titled Jeff Kagan: The State of Sprint Recovery. I shared thoughts and opinions on Sprints future after their new CEO Marcelo Claure spoke with reporter David Faber, live on CNBC that same morning just before giving a speech at Communacopia, the Goldman Sachs (GS)  annual communications and media conference.

I thought the CNBC interview was clear and impressive. However at Communacopia some analysts and media seemed to misunderstand the Sprint.

So I spoke with Sprint to get a clarification. Dan Wright from Sprint Corporate Communications said nothing had changed about their plan so there should be no confusion. That was good to hear.

My thoughts on Sprint under new leadership so far are positive. Whether they are successful long-term we will have to wait to see. Itís important for us to keep in mind that Sprint is now a new and different company going forward under new leadership.

In an effort to clear things up, Wright shared the text of CEO Marcelo Claureís speech at Communacopia.

"What I think we are going to do different I think we are going to move to a smarter model in terms of how do we deploy our network?Ē Says Marcelo Claure.

ďWhen I got there, the initial plan is, letís just deploy 2.5 across our 33,000 sites. What it means is it takes you too long to be good anywhere. So we are changing our deployment plan thatís going to be really, really focused on 2.5.Ē

ďFirst we are going to focus in areas where our network is congested. There are parts, everybodyís network, Verizon (VZ), AT&T (T), T-Mobileís (TMUS)  network, there are certain peak times that the network gets congested. But what we have that nobody else has is we have that rich spectrum on 2.5 that brings additional capacity.Ē

ďSo, we are going to focus first and foremost to make sure that we are building 2.5 for our current 3G and 4G networks capacity. So that way you are going to enhance the experience.Ē

ďAnd then secondly, we are going to go strong after a few cities rather than building out the 33,000 sites, we are going to first focus on getting the Ė getting a certain amount of cities, where we can provide customers our end to end experience.Ē

ďWhen you look at what the vision with Spark is, itís about we have the compelling advantage that identifies what is the Ė which spectrum, which band we are going to use to better serve you.Ē

ďSo, now once we build 2.5 in some selected markets that we will be announcing soon, we are going to focus on those markets and provide an experience of the speeds that havenít been deployed in the U.S. again before. So, you are going to see a really, really focused effort in terms of where do we deploy it and how do we use our capital and CapEx a lot more effective than we have had.Ē

ďThere is no need to plaster the nation with 2.5, because itís going to take us too long. So, we want to get some early wins by providing (2.5 in a more focused manner).Ē

So the misinterpretation is that Sprint is scaling back on itís original 2.5 deployment, but according to Sprint nothing could be furthur from the truth.

Wright says Sprint is still on track to cover 100 million POPs by the end of the year, as they have stated all along.

Claure was referring to the next phase of 2.5 deployment, during which they will focus on density builds in key markets.

Having the media and analyst community understand what you are saying is crucial to success.

This is an important lesson for every company to learn. Make sure every word that you say is clear and helpful. Any confusion will create a confusing mix of stories that will keep the marketplace confused.

And the marketplace does not like confusion. They like to understand clearly every step of the journey.

As for Sprint, they remain on a solid path to deliver 2.5 to the same key markets by year end. There may be some changes to the longer-term plan, but there always are with any company.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-confusion-on-sprint-25-direction#sthash.e0HmUegC.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-the-state-of-sprint-recovery

Jeff Kagan: The State of Sprint Recovery

By Jeff Kagan

September 11, 2014 11:43AM   

Tickers Mentioned: S T TMUS  VZ

New Sprint ($S) CEO Marcelo Claure spoke with David Faber of CNBC on the ďSquawk on the StreetĒ show this morning. It was a very good and eye-opening interview on the thinking of the new Sprint CEO and the new path he will be taking going forward to rebuild Sprint.

Over the last decade we have watched Sprint struggle. Early on they burned through several CEOís. Then they hire hired Dan Hesse as CEO who managed to save and stabilize the company. Growth however was another challenge. A year ago Softbank acquired the majority of Sprint and poured lots of money to speed up the network re-build.

Now Marcelo Claure is the new CEO as we turn the page and start the next chapter of the Sprint story. Not only are there big changes at Sprint, but there are also big changes at Sprintís competitors and in fact the entire industry.

There are many new CEOís leading the wireless industry into a new frontier. Many expect this next chapter to be a much more competitive and noisy place than wireless has ever been. A real battleground.

There are new CEOís at AT&T Mobility ($T), T-Mobile ($TMUS) and Sprint. I believe that means the competitive playing field will get much noisier as carrierís battle each other for customers and market share.

Remember over the last several years, many carriers were more interested in signing up new smartphone customers than winning existing customers from each other.

Things are changing. Now there are fewer new smartphone customer signups so carriers are competing with each other. They are stressing speed, quality, reliability, network reach and customer satisfaction to win customers from other carriers who are not as satisfied.

This is good for the customer. And it is a new challenge and opportunity for the carriers. Things are changing and will be very different going forward.

This is the new world that Marcelo Claure and Sprint will be competing in.

I like what I hear about the new Sprint from Claure. They are saying and doing the right things. They are now the low cost leader in the marketplace today. They are offering deals to individuals, families and businesses at a much lower cost than the competition.

This was the position that T-Mobile started a year ago and they have grown since. Remember T-Mobile was crashing and burning themselves. T-Mobile CEO John Legere says last month, August, was their best month ever, signing up more customers than any other month. That shows T-Mobile seems to have found their slice of the pie and are signing up customers.

Sprint is next. They must first find their slice of the pie and start signing up customers at that same rapid clip.

Claure said today that this is a game of watching customerís ads and losses. He said Sprint had more losses in recent years. However he also said that since he took over at Sprint it has suddenly won more customers than it has lost. Itís only been a few weeks, but itís a good start.

If Sprint can keep that up and build they can recover pretty rapidly as well. It is impossible to tell what any company will look like going forward, but over the last year I have been saying that both T-Mobile and Sprint would start their recovery and we would have four, strong and growing competitors to choose from.

T-Mobile started their recovery a year ago and continues to grow and to build. They have found their slice of the pie and many expect this to continue.

Now itís Sprints turn. I expect Sprint to recover just as quickly over the next year.

The next question is, as Sprint continues to win new business and grow, who will they win customers from? Will Sprint customers come from T-Mobile or will they come from smaller players like US Cellular, C Spire Wireless and Tracfone.

I donít see wins coming from larger players like AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless ($VZ) at this stage. Ralph de la Vega of AT&T was also on CNBC yesterday saying how their churn rates are the lowest ever. I think we can expect that to continue.

So there are still questions. Weíll have to watch this new game unfold, one step at a time. First, Sprint has to identify the slice of the pie they want to focus on, then they have to start winning business week after week, month after month, quarter after quarter. Then their path will become clearer for us to understand.

So far I like what I am hearing from Claure. Letís hope their early success continues to help Sprint recover and grow once again. It sure would be great if the US marketplace had four, strong and growing competitors, wouldnít it!

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          September 11, 2014 11:43AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-the-state-of-sprint-recovery#sthash.4Q8jA537.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Apples-Cook-Hits-It-Out-of-the-Park-81025.html

ANALYSIS

Apple's Cook Hits It Out of the Park               

Today we don't leave our house without our keys, our wallet and our smartphone. Tomorrow we will just have to remember one thing -- our smartphone. It will open our doors and start our cars. It will have our electronic driver's license, insurance information, pictures, and other things we stuff into a wallet. It will be able to buy things with credit cards assigned to it. That is our future.

By Jeff Kagan

09/11/14 6:41 AM PT

Apple made its annual iPhone announcement Tuesday, and there were several surprises, including one of those Steve Jobs "one more thing" moments. Now the question is, will the two new iPhones, Apple Pay and Apple Watch be a home run?

Generally speaking, yes -- but with some caveats.

The iPhone is coming in two new sizes. One is larger, meaning longer. The other is even larger, meaning even longer. The device itself is thinner, but the screen size is longer. That will help enlarge the images and text and make the iPhone easier to use.

Unfortunately, the iPhone is still not waterproof -- nor is the screen tougher. That's a potential problem, but it can be corrected next year.

The camera has been upgraded with several new features. However the device itself, except for the new size, it not really all that earth-shatteringly new.

Will that really matter for Apple growth? Nope. This will be a home run for Apple as it continues to grow. I don't see anything that will keep any potential buyer from acquiring one.

A Solid Hit

iOS 8 will be ready for every iPhone owner to download soon. It will provide users with much of what Apple just introduced. Other features do need the new hardware, however. That means you'll need to upgrade if you really want those features.

When current iPhone users upgrade is the only question. The early adopters will jump in right away. The rest will upgrade over the next year or so as their contract allows them to.

Other users simply will keep their existing iPhone. This iPhone is not much different from other iPhones. It will be a success for Apple, but it's not a revolutionary new device.

This also means that all previous models will drop in price, making them more affordable to more users.

The new Apple Watch will be a hit for perhaps a third of Apple iPhone users. This is similar to the iPad. Some of the new features, like health apps, can be used with the Apple Watch. Note, it must be used with an iPhone in order to work. Maybe someday it will work on its own -- but not yet.

New Highways and Byways

iPad sales should continue to slow, as many users will by a larger iPhone and carry one device instead of an iPhone and an iPad. The iPad will continue to be a player -- just not a growing player, as many customers will just buy a larger iPhone instead.

Apple Pay is another great opportunity. Apple should grow in this space, and it will play an increasing role in its future.

This kind of payment system is not new, but it is new for Apple. It is still young, and it will grow -- and Apple should do well with this.

Imagine walking into a store and buying things by pressing your finger on a button on your iPhone. It sounds like the Starbucks app. If it works well, users will start to try it. If there are no problems, they'll use it more and more. I always expect a few early glitches with new products. We'll see.

There is more, but you get the point. While this week's event was not really about reinvention, it was incrementally better in many ways than other product launches in the recent past, and it does allow Apple entry into new markets.

Think of this as Apple paving new streets for users to drive on going forward. I am not sure how much this will help Apple grow in the short term, but it is a great long-term move for the company.

Cook Hits His Stride

Apple CEO Tim Cook did a great job this year. He really hit it out of the park. He has stumbled in the past, but he really seems to be getting his sea legs. He blended the best of the old and the new. He seems finally to be finding the captain's chair more comfortable.

We have to consider what tomorrow will look like. Today we don't leave our house without our keys, our wallet and our smartphone. Tomorrow we will just have to remember one thing -- our smartphone.

It will open our doors and start our cars. It will have our electronic driver's license, insurance information, pictures, and other things we stuff into a wallet. It will be able to buy things with credit cards assigned to it.

That is our future, and Apple wants to play an important role in making that future become a reality.

Of course, if we are going to trust this kind of device with all of those tasks, then it ought to be waterproof and shock-proof and have a stronger screen to say the least, right?

As for cannibalization, that will be a part of the story. Yes this new, larger iPhone will cannibalize sales of the iPad. However, it is much better that Apple cannibalize than let competitors take its customers, isn't it?

The bottom line is that this week's event was a big success for Tim Cook, for Apple, for its investors and partners, and for its loyal customers.

Carriers like AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless and Sprint will be winners with this news -- as will every partner whose technology is connected to the iPhone, Apple Watch and Apple Pay.

So, congratulations to Apple and everyone the company touches. There is still plenty more to come -- so stay tuned.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Apples-Cook-Hits-It-Out-of-the-Park-81025.html#sthash.R38t5yse.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-icloud-short-term-long-term-problems

Jeff Kagan: Apple iCloud Short-Term, Long-Term Problems

By Jeff Kagan

September 5, 2014 10:35AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL

apple icloud hack, jennifer lawrence hack, kate upton hack, iphone photo hack

Apple  (AAPL)  is experiencing a real iCloud break-in emergency. Not just for the theft, but for the PR nightmare they are going through. What makes it worse is we are only days away from their big, annual, well-rehearsed iPhone unveiling event. This is the worst timing. So will this high profile cloud security problem hurt Apple next week?

I am pleased to see Tim Cook taking responsibility for recognizing that Apple, while not responsible for this break-in, is responsible for not informing users how to protect themselves. We would never just give a gun to a person without training them. Now Apple realizes their responsibility for the first time and hopefully they will talk more going forward. Thatís a good first step.

Bottom line I donít think this cloud security issue will hurt Apple long-term. Customers love Apple. One unfortunate reality is break-ins on wireless phones, retail store credit cards and banks are happening on a regular basis and are getting lots of attention. Itís a growing problem.

So long-term, this kind of new movement for Apple will help them blunt the blow. Because of that I think Apple performance will continue to be strong long-term.

Short-term however is another question. To blunt the short-term blow Cook said they are adding security alerts for iCloud users. Apple does not think the security problem is on their end, but they are taking this additional step to keep the user in the loop.

This trust damage is the big loss for Apple. We always heard of attacks on other systems, but always thought Apple was somehow impervious. Now we see that even though Apple is stronger and better they are also not impenetrable.

The fault may not be on Apple technology, but on user apathy. The problem is user apathy was not stirred up by Apple for their own protection. So in a ay, Apple did this to themselves.

Apple and their users must take precautions like everyone else. We just learned Superman has a Kryptonite weakness. We all know a chain is only as strong as itís weakest link. So Apple users must now be on guard.

Additionally Apple itself now has to spend more time and money making sure to keep an eye on all their back doors. Even if this problem had nothing to do with Apple systems, it was still an Apple user who got burned. And Apple will pay the price.

Users must be made aware of the potential problems they face if they take security issues lightly.

Next week Apple launches their new iPhone at their annual event. This is usually tightly choreographed. I understand Apple executives and staff has been rehearsing for weeks. They want to make sure this event is perfect because thatís what sells iPhones.

Unfortunately, this cloud break in even though itís not Apple fault will still do some harm to Apple short-term. However if Apple uses this as an opportunity to talk with and protect their customers, this disaster could actually turn around and become a golden opportunity for them.

Donít ever sell Apple short. They always seem to do the right thing and long-term they continue to win.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          September 5, 2014 10:35AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/apple-icloud-short-term-long-term-problems#sthash.BoXGb07Q.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Sizing-Up-the-Clouds-Risks-80991.html

ANALYSIS

Sizing Up the Cloud's Risks   

Data theft has happened many times to many people -- it's just that it doesn't always make the headlines. That leads to a false sense of security. That's why some companies that use cloud services don't put proprietary information up on the cloud. They put less sensitive information there and work with the cloud for a while until they feel comfortable.

By Jeff Kagan

09/04/14 6:35 AM PT

The iCloud security issue that's been in the headlines all week should be a great big wake-up call to everyone. The cloud is coming; however, we are still in the very early days. Security threats keep growing, so it is important for both individuals and companies to be prepared.

The news this week suggested an iCloud security flaw allowed private nude photos to be stolen. That was terrible, but it was just embarrassing. The information theft could have been harmful to our safety or financial security.

So whose fault is this particular break-in? Maybe it was a technology security flaw. If so, it won't be the last, since these things happen from time to time. It could have been easily broken passwords at fault.

There are many ways the bad guys can break into your account. So it's very important to understand how to protect yourself as best you can. Would you ever go to sleep and leave your house unlocked? Would you go away on a vacation and put a sign on your front lawn telling the world to come on in? No, of course not.

However we do just that kind of thing when it comes to securing our data. Maybe we don't think our data is interesting or valuable to anyone else. Maybe we think our simple password is sufficient. Whatever the excuse, we simply walk around on a daily basis, oblivious to the reality that our personal and private information is just waiting to be hacked into and stolen.

Loss of Control

All clouds are not created equal. Different clouds have different security levels. One thing is for sure, though -- what happened to Apple can happen to any company and any user. That means if we use the cloud, we are all at risk.

Password protection is all most of us ever use. If that's the case, it is very important to use long and chaotic passwords and change them regularly. Sounds great, but that's also a pain in the neck.

Until cloud security gets better, the cloud may not be the best place to store valuable personal and private information. Once we upload our stuff to the cloud, we lose ultimate control. When we have our information on our own computer disk, then that is the only place it can be accessed.

With that we need virus protection software, and we need to always keep it updated. In fact we should always keep all of our operating system and software updated for protection.

The cloud makes it easy to keep all our data in one central location so all our devices can access it. There are reasons the cloud sounds so good. However, once information is up on the cloud, it is at risk.

Companies spend a fortune advertising and marketing the wonderful cloud world. They spend little time talking about the risks and threats. That's a mistake. The cloud may be the future, but we are still in the very early days, and there are risks. So companies should spend time and money telling us about how to best protect our data.

The cloud won't go away. It will stay with us, and it will grow. We can expect more high- profile problems, so we should not go blindly into the cloud. The bad guys are waiting.

Step by Step

Cloud companies have to stay one step ahead of the bad guys. However, they can't catch everything. Every once in a while, a problem occurs like what happened a few days ago. In fact, data theft has happened many times to many people -- it's just that it doesn't always make the headlines.

That leads to a false sense of security.

That's why some companies that use cloud services don't put proprietary information up on the cloud. They put less sensitive information there and work with the cloud for a while until they feel comfortable.

Other companies have jumped all-in to cloud storage. It makes life much easier; however, it means the company and all the information on the cloud is exposed to this kind of disaster.

So if I could just make one practical suggestion: Go slowly. Don't avoid the cloud -- use the cloud. Just don't trust the cloud. Not yet. Don't put private and personal information there. That goes for businesses and for individuals.

The cloud will be with us going forward. We won't stop it. That means over time, as we use the cloud more and more, more of our information will be exposed to the bad guys. Our best bet is to take this one step at a time.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Sizing-Up-the-Clouds-Risks-80991.html#sthash.nxcHCWS5.dpuf

 

 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Comcast-Friendlier-Attitudes-Arent-Enough-80958.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80958.html?rss=1

ANALYSIS

Comcast: Friendlier Attitudes Aren't Enough

Comcast has improved the way it interacts with customers. However, service problems are still the key issue. They take several days or longer to get fixed, and then they are not fixed for good. Recurring problems cause more customer dissatisfaction. So, basically, Comcast may now have nice people to take care of customers, but its customers have to call too often for care due to ongoing problems.

By Jeff Kagan

08/28/14 7:03 AM PT

Comcast has been trying to improve customer care. It has made some headway, but reliability of its services still is a big issue. I like Comcast people. During the last couple of years, their performance has gotten better. However, the quality of Comcast's service is still unreliable, at best, and problems just don't go away.

Think of Comcast as a family-owned company that happens to be the largest cable television company in the industry. It wants to merge with Time Warner Cable, making it even larger and more powerful.

This is a family-owned business, started by Ralph Roberts and now run by his son Brian Roberts. It may be a family business, but it happens to be gigantic. It started small -- then, about a decade ago, it acquired AT&T Broadband, becoming the largest. The Roberts family has done an incredible job building the company for shareholders, and they can be very proud.

Put Employees First

On the other hand, Comcast has grown and changed over time -- both for better and for worse. The problem is, rather than focusing on the workers and the customers, it focuses on the investors. So, generally speaking, investors are happy -- but that does not spread to customers and workers.

Herb Kelleher, previous CEO and cofounder of Southwest Airlines, had it right. Put your employees first, he said. If you take care of them, then they will take good care of you. Then your customers will come back, and your shareholders will like that.

I think Comcast could improve dramatically with a dose of Kelleher thinking.

The problem started with the way the cable television industry grew up. This is an industry in which many small companies never had competition -- never worried about customer satisfaction. After all, where else could the customer go?

I'd say that is the source of Comcast's problems. It's not just Comcast -- it's the entire cable television industry, including Time Warner Cable and others.

It is worth noting that Cox seems to have a good relationship with customers, so it can be done. That raises the question -- if it can be done, why is Comcast having such a problem?

Some companies focus on keeping the customer and worker happy. That keeps the shareholders happy. Other companies focus on the shareholder first -- and that's the problem with many companies.

Over the last several years, Comcast has faced increasing competition from the telephone industry. IPTV services like AT&T Uverse, Verizon FiOS and CenturyLink Prism have been rapidly growing.

At an analyst meeting several months back, AT&T gave an example of how it was growing rapidly. In Dallas, it already had more than 50 percent market share -- more than the cable TV company.

That's impressive. However, phone companies are limited as to the regions where they can compete.

Other new competitors -- like satellite television, and those that use the Internet to deliver content, like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and many more -- are challenging the traditional cable television industry model. That's good for consumers.

Many customers have realized they can simply put an antenna up and get two or three channels -- or a dozen -- for free. They then simply buy the rest from some of the new Internet TV companies.

So something has to give, right? Cable television market share is on the decline over the last couple of years. It is a growing and serious problem for the industry.

Right now, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox and others are selling more high-speed Internet connections than regular cable TV. That's not only interesting, but also a sign of growing trouble.

A Long Road

So the marketplace is changing. It happens to every industry. Some companies do well in a changing industry. Others don't.

Comcast recognizes this, but it has not been able to change quickly enough to matter yet. Comcast has improved the way it interacts with customers. However, service problems are still the key issue. They take several days or longer to get fixed, and then they are not fixed for good.

Recurring problems cause more customer dissatisfaction.

So, basically, Comcast may now have nice people to take care of customers, but its customers have to call too often for care due to ongoing problems.

I have Comcast and Time Warner Cable and can see the difference. When service works, everything is fine. However, when there is a service problem, which happens on a regular basis, things break down quickly.

We got used to life with always-on phone connections from companies like AT&T, Verizon and CenturyLink. Our phones always worked. That's what we expect from cable television -- and, in fact, every company we do business with.

Unfortunately, we don't get it. Think about it. Think about all the services you use on a regular basis. Now think about which ones work well. They are great.

Now think about which ones work, but have regular problems. They are not so great -- and unfortunately, cable TV is at the top of that list.

Currently, Comcast is the "Worst Company in America" according to the Consumerist, and it ranks at the very bottom of the American Consumer Satisfaction Index, underperforming the entire cable television industry. This is an industry with high and increasing prices, poor reliability, and worsening customer service.

Comcast offers a fast high-speed Internet connection. That's great when it works. However, every few months something goes wrong, and you have to wait days for a fix to arrive either by service truck or delivery.

Comcast offers cable television. When it works, things are great. However, it often breaks down, requiring you to call customer care to restart the system for you. That's not a problem if it is just an occasional glitch, but it's actually quite regular. It's a bigger problem when you have to wait several days for a service call.

Comcast also changed from analog to digital over the last couple of years. That cost customers more money for set-top devices. Customers do get more channels, but they also have more problems. Yes, more calls to customer service.

Plus, since set-top boxes cost money, customers don't buy them for all their TVs. That means there are often several TVs in the house that are just paperweights. That is not what customers want.

This is what I mean about not caring about the customer.

After the switch to digital, Comcast turned off the analog signal. What would have been great would have been digital on most TVs, but the option to hook up to analog TV for the few remaining TV sets. That's what Time Warner Cable offered, and customers appreciated it. Comcast customers are out of luck.

I am afraid that is something Time Warner Cable customers will have to give up if Comcast acquires it. They may get faster Internet but no analog TV signal.

Bottom line, Comcast is the cause of much customer unhappiness. So, while I appreciate the improved customer service attitudes, that is not yet enough, because of the poor service.

Comcast must solve these problems and become reliable at a reasonable cost for customers to care about it. It won't happen on this course however.

Going forward, as the industry transforms itself with new technologies and new competitors, that's exactly what Comcast -- and in fact, all cable television companies -- must do to stay relevant.

I want the cable television industry to survive this transformation and do well, along with other competitors. However, they must start to focus on the customer. The question is, will it?

Remember, as Herb Kelleher said, take care of your workers and they will take care of you. They will take care of your customers, and that will make your investors happy.

That is the best advice I can give to Comcast today. You are doing much better than a few short years ago, but you still have a long way to go. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80958.html?rss=1#sthash.badtuOO3.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-what-do-att-leadership-changes-mean

 

Jeff Kagan: What Do AT&T Leadership Changes Mean?

By Jeff Kagan

August 27, 2014 12:25PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T  VZ  CTL  CMCSA  TWC  DTV

at&t restructuring, at&t growth strategy, at&t stock price, at&t versus cable

AT&T (T)  has enjoyed a very successful run over the last decade. Now the industry and competition is starting to change once again. AT&T sees this and has been making some changes themselves. Letís explore what changes AT&T is making in leadership and direction going forward and consider the impact on the company and the industry.

AT&T is merging its wireless and business units into one company. That company will be led by Ralph de la Vega, who was the CEO of AT&T Mobility. Glenn Lurie will replace de la Vega and now lead AT&T Mobility. He headed their emerging enterprises and partnerships unit.

Why all the changes? The easiest answer is the industry continues to change and AT&T needs to continue to reshape itself to remain successful. AT&T has been very successful the last decade and I think these changes say they want to repeat that performance.

New technology and new competition creates forces that could be costly to any company who is not ahead of the curve. Thatís the reason I think, that AT&T is making this move now. They are preparing themselves for the next wave of the competitive battle.

One threat is how the cable television companies continue to try and build their business segment. As companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox lose consumers to new competitors like AT&T Uverse, Verizon FiOS (VZ) and CenturyLink Prism (CTL) , they are also trying to find new areas of growth. Business services is one of the areas they are focused on.

Plus Comcast (CMCSA)  is trying to acquire Time Warner Cable (TWC) . If they are successful, this would create the largest and most powerful competitor in the mix against everyone else.

I think we will start to see more of a blending of wireless and wire line services going forward. AT&T is one of a very few companies who can do this by offering a wide variety of wireless, wire line, Internet and television services.

So as we go through the next several years, the industry will continue to change. Carriers will offer more services and these services will work together.

That means customers will be able to choose one company and say goodbye to the rest. Thatís the big opportunity and threat every competitor faces.

AT&T is also in the process of trying to acquire DirecTV (DTV) . This would give them the ability to start offering services on a nationwide basis, which is a big growth opportunity for them going forward.

AT&T has an advantage today in this marketplace against the cable television industry. AT&T Mobility is a significant advantage as a separate service and as a combined service, which will become clear as the next few years pass.

Will other competitors like the cable television industry get into wireless? Thatís the question. They tried once and failed. Not every carrier is into wireless. Of the top three telephone companies, only AT&T and Verizon are. CenturyLink is not.

So weíll have to watch how this industry plays itself out over the next decade. Things are getting very interesting again. Actually, they never stopped. And AT&T is refocusing on the new opportunities and challenges.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          August 27, 2014 12:25PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-what-do-att-leadership-changes-mean#sthash.RpxKiO4M.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/tablet-sales-slump-notebooks-come-back

Jeff Kagan: Tablet Sales Slump, Notebooks Come Back

By Jeff Kagan 

August 22, 2014 7:46AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL  GOOG  SSNLF  T  VZ  S  MSFT  IBM  HPQ  AMZN

So tablet sales are slowing. And notebooks, they are still with us. Hmm. Even though I donít understand my kids at all, it seems over the last few years I was right about this. I have been saying this growing tablet revolution might be short-term. Then the marketplace should settle down. Notebooks are not dead. Neither are tablets. All thatís happening is demand is changing.

It worries me how the entire marketplace can sway in one direction or another like this. All that has to happen is a new technology is introduced and everyone goes wild.

Sometimes new technologies are long lasting growth engines that do change the world, but for the most part they are not.

We have seen this happen so many times in the past. The entire marketplace seems to sway in one direction or another until it finally calms down. Some investors do well, but too many others get hurt.

You want a few examples? Remember Segway? They said it was going see such rapid growth that this personal transporter was going to change the world after itís launch in 2001. Sure itís cool and yes it works and is still in the market, but change the world? It has not disrupted anything has it?

Remember the Apple Newton from the 1990ís? Newton was like an early version of the iPhone and iPad. Timing is always an important piece of the puzzle and Newton was too early.

Remember the Netbook computer from a few short years ago? They were hot just before the tablet computers hit the streets. These were mini-laptops and are still for sale. Just stroll through any computer store and youíll see one or two.

However these kind of devices have a short growth wave. And itís all about the length of the growth wave.

Not All Tech Has Sustainable Growth

Some technology items have a long growth wave like the smartphone. Just look at the Apple (AAPL)  iPhone, Google (GOOG)  Android and Samsung (SSNLF)  Galaxy, which are still growing as examples.

Others have a much shorter growth wave like the Apple iPod, Netbook computers and now the tablet computer.

Itís easy to lose your way. Over the last few years all we could talk about was how the tablet was going to replace the PC. However suddenly tablet growth is slowing while and PC growth is still occurring.

Whatís happening? The marketplace is finding its level. Thatís all.

What I said several years ago was the tablet revolution would take a few years and then start to slow. Once everyone who wanted a tablet had a tablet there would be no reason to buy another until it was time to refresh, like with PCís.

The same thing could and should happen in the smartphone sector if nothing new and exciting is introduced. So far that has not happened yet.

We are always expecting great new surprises in the marketplace like the few that have had a long growth wave and changed the marketplace. Customers and investors look for them as the next, hot, new growth wave.

However itís important to understand what each new technology is. Only a very few are important enough to be long-term growth engines.

The tablet is still brand new. They were introduced a few short years ago by the Apple iPad. Then Google with the Android and Samsung with the Galaxy. Today Apple iPad still has the majority of market share with tablets.

Growth in the newer tablet section is actually quite different from the smartphone sector. Smartphones are still growing. However growth in the younger tablet marketplace is slowing.

The Apple iPhone has a very strong market share in the USA, but globally the Google Android has a much larger share. Thatís partly because Google Android is licensed with so many different smartphone makers and Apple is not.

The Next Growth Cycle in Tech Will Be...

So whatís next? The smartwatch, Google Glass, and all the other new innovations are coming. Will they be long-term or short-term success stories? They may stick around, or they may pass.

We must not assume every new innovation will be long-term and industry changing. More times than not they are not that important. Not that industry reshaping, and their growth curve is not that long either.

Now that tablet growth is slowing, and PC and notebook growth is still there, we can see what the marketplace will look like going forward. Maybe now the marketplace is ready to listen.

Every user will choose the devices they want to use. They will choose between desktop PCís, notebooks, tablets, smartphones, smartwatch, glasses and whatever is coming next. In fact some will own several of each.

Then when users have more than one device, which share the same data, the cloud becomes more important. So I expect the cloud to grow in importance going forward.

I predict cloud services will be sold by device companies like Apple, Google and Samsung and networks like AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , Sprint (S)  and others like Microsoft (MSFT) , Amazon.com (AMZN) , HP (HPQ)  and IBM (IBM) .

The cloud will be a big and growing space going forward. This will be a longer-term growth opportunity. Now we just have to decide which companies will see serious growth.

So while growth in tech will continue it is very important to realize not every sector will change the world. Itís important to stay focused on the long term growth engines like smartphones that just about everyone will have.

And itís important to stay focused on services like the cloud, which we will be using more and more over time.

Itís also important to have a strong understanding of each new technology and whether it is a long-term or short-term growth opportunity. After all, there is a difference.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          August 22, 2014 7:46AM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/tablet-sales-slump-notebooks-come-back#sthash.SPCri1sS.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Sprints-Moment-of-Truth-80925.html

ANALYSIS

Sprint's Moment of Truth

If the Sprint recovery has now begun, I expect that when we see the first numbers next quarter, we will see customers coming from T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and C Spire. Price-sensitive customers who also want more data and a faster wireless data network will be drawn to Sprint. If Sprint is successful at taking their business away, though, we will see the other carriers respond competitively.

By Jeff Kagan

08/21/14 5:00 AM PT

The good news for Sprint is the stars seem to be lining up for a recovery. Change is occurring throughout the entire wireless industry. Every player -- including AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and C Spire Wireless -- is changing. We will start to see lots of new services, pricing, competition and marketing going forward.

In the middle of that ruckus, Sprint has reached what may be considered its turnaround moment. Every change happens in an instant, but it takes some time before it's recognized. It may take a quarter or two to show up in the numbers, but Sprint's change may be happening right now, as you read this.

Of course, Sprint needs to continue moving ahead and growing, but if it does, we will look back at this time as Sprint's turnaround moment.

Hesse Out, Claure In

T-Mobile was crashing and burning -- worse than Sprint -- for many years. It got a new CEO and a new strategy a year and a half ago, and it has been growing since then. Today, T-Mobile's success is being celebrated by many of its users.

That same rapid recovery could happen at Sprint -- and could be starting right now.

A Sprint recovery actually could happen even more quickly than T-Mobile's. Sprint's network upgrade is almost complete. It has a new owner in Masayoshi Son and a new CEO in Marcelo Claure. It has just launched the first of what may be many service offerings with lower prices and more capacity.

Sprint last week replaced CEO Dan Hesse with Marcelo Claure. Hesse saved Sprint from certain disaster when he joined the company six years ago. He spent time, energy and money fixing its problems and preparing for the future.

Over the last year or two, customers have noticed the improvement. That's the good news. However, growth was harder to reignite.

Softbank last year acquired Sprint, and CEO Masayoshi Son poured money into rebuilding its network. Son and Hesse promised wireless greatness at every opportunity.

Then Marcelo Claure took over as Sprint CEO, and apparently he's been very busy. He not only took the ALS water bucket challenge with good spirit, but also announced Sprint's first new service plan, which could become very successful.

Lower Prices With a Bonus

The Sprint Family Share Pack takes a popular industry-wide idea and tweaks it with a lower price tag and double the data. That makes it very enticing for a segment of the user base.

Sprint previously had a plan similar to AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile in price and data. This new plan is the same basic idea, but it costs less and has double the data.

I think this will be very attractive to a slice of Sprint's customer base. It could be the start of the Sprint turnaround.

There are several reasons customers choose to buy from one carrier or another, but customers don't place their priorities in the same order. The main factors in decision making are reach, quality, speed and price. Some customers put price first, while others put quality first. Still others put speed first, and others put network reach first.

Typically the item first on a customer's list determines the choice of one carrier or another.

If Sprint Gains, Who Loses?

The first wave of Sprint's success likely will come from winning customers from companies like T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and C Spire. Like Sprint, these companies offer lower-priced plans than those of AT&T and Verizon.

The customer segment that puts price first may be attracted to Sprint by the promise of more data and a newer and faster network. Capturing this slice of the customer pie could help Sprint start building its recovery.

So, if the Sprint recovery has now begun, I expect that when we see the first numbers over the course of the next quarter, we will see customers coming from T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and C Spire. Price-sensitive customers who also want more data and a faster wireless data network will be drawn to Sprint.

If Sprint is successful at taking their business away, though, we will see the other carriers respond competitively. Game on.

Sprint's wireless data network transformation is near completion. I expect to see much more from Masayoshi Son and Marcelo Claure in the coming weeks, months and quarters.

We may be seeing the early stages of what may be remembered in years to come as the Sprint comeback -- so stay tuned. It sure would be good if the wireless industry were full of successful players once again, wouldn't it?  

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Sprints-Moment-of-Truth-80925.html#sthash.c5XeUVoh.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/how-sprint-will-succeed

 

Jeff Kagan: How Sprint Will Succeed

By Jeff Kagan

August 13, 2014 12:33PM   

Tickers Mentioned: S  SFTBY  AAPL  AMZN  GOOG  SSNLF  VZ  T

sprint strategy, sprint tmobile failure, sprint stock price, sprint new ceo, sprint softbank

 

The worldís eyes are now on Sprint (S) . They have a new CEO and Softbank (SFTBY)  is their new majority owner. The questions that the media, investors and workers are asking me are simpleÖ will Sprint succeed going forward, what will it look like, and how should we measure their success? Letís take a closer look and try to answer those questions and more.

To answer these questions, is it important to realize that Sprint is changing. That means a new owner Masayoshi Son of Softbank, a new CEO Marcelo Claure, and new strategies for growth going forward.

That means we can no longer look at Sprintís history for help. Going forward we must measure Sprint based on where they are now and how well they change, expand and grow.

While things look a bit confusing at Sprint right now, the new CEO Marcelo Claure and majority owner Masayoshi Son, CEO of Softbankseem to have a solid growth plan. And this plan is continually evolving.

What they have to do next is two things. One, make it happen and two, communicate well with investors, workers, customers and competitors. Everyone is watching very closely and evaluating Sprint. This is a critical time in their history and they have to get it right from the start.

Making it happen and making sure the marketplace understands Sprint success going forward is key. The US marketplace has cut off many companies and executives at the knees if they didnít understand this key principle.

So itís vital to make sure investors, workers and customers are included and all on the same team as the company. That will create a very important bond and avenue for growth going forward. These groups can be helpful for Sprintís growth going forward if they understand the path and the goal.

Just look what Apple (AAPL)  does as an example of success in this area. Every company faces the same challenges, but some rise to the top, quarter after quarter.

The Sprint Renaissance

This is Sprintís first opportunity in a long time to create a new brand and image going forward.

The new brand and shiny image is key to success going forward. This is a new chance to let the marketplace fall in love with the new Sprint story. The Sprint Renaissance.

Good emotion from workers, investors and customers often surprisingly plays one of the most important roles in a companyís success going forward.

Think of Sprint as a caterpillar going into a cocoon last summer. Now it is getting ready to come out as a butterfly. We donít know what to expect yet, but this is a unique opportunity to recreate the Sprint image and brand in the minds of the marketplace.

Sprint rebuilt their entire network. Now they must rebuild and freshen up their brand. Doing this well is key to Sprint success going forward. Sprint needs friends in the marketplace. This is a perfect new opportunity for them to do just that.

I think itís important to give Sprint some slack. A honeymoon period.

After all they not only have a new CEO and new owner, Softbank, but they are also rebuilding their entire network and promise to come out as a brand new kind of wireless company.

We must give the new Sprint the chance to finish this process so it can emerge and claim itís new place in the growing and changing industry.

You see itís not just Sprint that is changing. Itís also all competitors in the entire wireless industry. There are many examples I can give you, but just look at what is happening recently.

Amazon.com (AMZN)  has jumped into the smartphone market with their Fire Phone. The Fire Phone is not a direct competitor to the Apple iPhone, Google (GOOG)  Android or Samsung (SSNLF) Galaxy, but is an important part of the Amazon marketing mix.

Instead this is a device that will help Amazon.com sell more stuff from their web site. So this Fire Phone doesnít actually have win against Apple and Samsung to be a winner. As long as it makes Amazon.com more successful by selling more stuff, it will be a winner.

AT&T (T)  is very successfully re-pricing their line of phones and services. They are also moving into many new areas like the automotive industry, healthcare, retail, home security and automation and many more.

T-Mobile is changing who they are and how they compete over the last year as well. They are once again growing. They are not moving into all these new areas like their competitors, but they are growing and that is making their investors happy.

Verizon Wireless (VZ)  is not changing so quickly, but they never do. They are always dragged kicking and screaming toward new wireless opportunities and I am sure they will do the same thing now.

Sprint Looking Forward

So what will Sprint look like going forward? Thatís the question their new CEO must answer. He must get the marketplace behind Sprint rooting for their success. Thatís key.

I think Sprint will continue to be a provider of wireless services, but their customers will be very happy with the quality and reliability and speed of the new network. Thatís what Masayoshi Son CEO of Softbank has been promising for quite a while.

I also think Sprint will move into new areas of growth which should be very innovative. However weíll have to wait until new CEO Marcelo Claure and Masayoshi Son starts to roll them out.

Waiting is always the toughest part. But as long as they offer a good quality product with lots of innovation, and as long as they communicate well with the marketplace, I think Sprint has an excellent chance to see rapid growth going forward.

Just look at T-Mobile as an example. About a year and a half ago T-Mobile was crashing and burning. With a new CEO and new thinking they have very quickly turned that boat around.

The same success can transform Sprint just as quickly. This is what I see as Sprintís future based on what I have heard over this last year.

There is so much more to say about the New Sprint, but letís just keep our eyes on them and weíll talk some more in coming weeks.

For now letís just give Sprint the time it needs to complete itís transformation and come out of the cocoon as a beautiful new butterfly.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/how-sprint-will-succeed#sthash.dVgEsLOs.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Whats-Next-for-Sprint-80876.html

What's Next for Sprint?

I expect to see fresh and innovative ideas coming from the new Sprint. I expect to see the Sprint brand refreshed, re-energized and expanded. I expect to see advertising and marketing helping to redefine what the new Sprint will be going forward. This is a unique opportunity for the company. It's a restart -- and restarts can be very successful.

By Jeff Kagan

08/12/14 6:50 AM PT

 

There's a New Sprint in town. Last week the earth shook twice in Kansas City -- once when Sprint decided to end its pursuit of T-Mobile, and then again when it replaced CEO Dan Hesse with Marcelo Claure. What can we expect next?

The first thing is this: Sprint is going to be a very different kind of company going forward. New CEO Marcelo Claure and Masayoshi Son, CEO of majority owner Softbank, will take Sprint on a new path, which they say will lead to rapid growth and success.

Son has said many times over this last year that he sees a big opportunity here in the U.S., and I think he is right. The U.S. is an incredible growth opportunity for the changing wireless industry.

What the New Sprint Will Look Like

Son decided scale would be beneficial, so he wanted to acquire T-Mobile to speed up that process. However, pushback from regulators convinced him to back away for now.

So Sprint's merger with T-Mobile will not happen -- not now anyway. However I would not be surprised to see more M&A activity from the new Sprint going forward.

I've expected success for both Sprint and T-Mobile, whether they merged or not -- the merger would have made them different companies, though.

I have received countless calls from the media asking my opinion of the Sprint news. They ask how successful Sprint can be going forward alone.

That one is easy. Sprint has an enormous growth opportunity at its fingertips. The wireless industry is changing. Then again, the wireless industry changes every five to 10 years. The last major change was when Apple's iPhone and smartphones running Google's Android OS -- like Samsung's Galaxy line -- entered the scene.

If you want an example of how quickly Sprint can recover, just consider the sudden success T-Mobile has had over this last year with its new approach and new thinking.

T-Mobile was crashing and burning for years. It was the worst performer of the top four. Now it is suddenly successful, thanks to new CEO John Legere's new thinking and new passion. T-Mobile seems to be reborn.

Sprint can do exactly the same thing and see the same powerful growth. Sprint can start to achieve the same kind of rapid success over coming quarters. That's what both Son and Hesse have been talking about over this last year.

Turnarounds happen quickly. It seems that Sprint is setting itself up for just that kind of turnaround. Son said last week that we should prepare for Sprint to come out swinging. It sounds like it wants to undercut industry pricing.

So what else will the new Sprint look like going forward?

Well, after the acquisition of Sprint last summer, Softbank started investing billions rebuilding the network. It would take time, but when complete, Sprint would be the nation's newest wireless network. That sounded pretty exciting -- a player being reborn.

We are now waiting to hear from Son and Claure about next steps. What are Sprint's new plans and strategies going forward?

I think Sprint will continue to be a wireless carrier competing with AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile -- but based on what I've heard, it will be much more going forward.

CEO Dan Hesse Out

In the meantime, there was a major shift in leadership at the company. CEO Dan Hesse has been replaced by new CEO Marcelo Claure.

I have followed Sprint for the last few decades, and I believe Hesse saved Sprint when he was brought in six years ago.

Sprint was in trouble. It had gone through two CEOs and was still crashing. Hesse, who came from Embarq, ended up being its savior.

Dan Hesse kept Sprint alive. He reinvigorated the employees and their attitude, and he made Sprint proud of itself once again. He improved the network quality. He improved relationships with customers, partners and investors. He innovated with products, services and pricing.

Hesse strengthened and grew Sprint by acquiring Embarq and Clearwire, and now it has wireless spectrum to aid growth. Hesse led Sprint through a long list of events that breathed life back into its lungs.

Over this last year, he oversaw the rebuilding of the network made possible by the financial investment from Softbank.

CEO Marcelo Claure In

Now we must all get to know the new CEO, Marcelo Claure. He says that he has lots of innovative ideas and works well with Masayoshi Son. This means Sprint will be starting out in a new direction for growth.

This is exciting, since the opportunity in the wireless industry going forward is huge.

Claure has been on the Sprint board of directors since January of this year. He was the CEO of Brightstar, which he founded in 1997. A Miami-based wireless distributor, Brightstar grew into a global business with more than US$10 billion in gross revenues for the year 2013.

Claure's bio is full of very interesting and valuable information. He is young and full of entrepreneurial energy, and he could indeed be just what Sprint needs now -- which leads me to believe we may start to see the earth shake under the new Sprint.

Brightstar was acquired by Softbank last year, so Claure is already part of the Sprint and Softbank family.

I expect to see some exciting and different thinking and ideas coming from the new Sprint. It will be a very different company from now on.

Listening to Claure's initial comments is stirring the industry embers and getting the marketplace excited. We are all very interested to see exactly what's coming next.

Sprint Ahead

So what will Sprint look like going forward? This is what Claure and Son need to talk with the marketplace about -- and in detail.

This could be an instance when both Son and Claure act like Babe Ruth pointing to the outfield fence before hitting the home run.

We are seeing new directions in the wireless industry already. One example is Amazon, with its new Fire Phone.

This is a new approach in wireless -- and new marketing and new thinking for the smartphone market. Amazon is not competing with Apple's iPhone or Samsung's Galaxy in the traditional way.

Instead, Amazon simply considers every Fire Phone that it sells is another way to sell more stuff via its website and app. This is a great idea and brand new thinking for this industry.

I expect to see fresh and innovative ideas coming from the new Sprint. I expect to see the Sprint brand refreshed, re-energized and expanded. I expect to see advertising and marketing helping to redefine what the new Sprint will be going forward.

This is a unique opportunity for the company. It's a restart -- and restarts can be very successful.

Remember 10 years ago, when SBC acquired AT&T, Bellsouth and Cingular? It rebranded and refreshed its image, and as AT&T, it has been wildly successful ever since.

I think Sprint could be setting itself up for this same kind of opportunity. Just look at AT&T, Amazon and T-Mobile as three examples.

Now we wait to hear what Son and Claure have to say about the new Sprint, and their plans and strategies going forward.

This is an exciting time in the wireless industry, indeed. I think of Sprint as a caterpillar that entered the cocoon last summer and is getting ready to emerge as a butterfly. Let's keep our eyes on Sprint.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Whats-Next-for-Sprint-80876.html#sthash.tjVS3CuC.dpuf

 


http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80857.html?rss=1

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Googles-Great-Big-Ideas-Camp-80857.html

ANALYSIS

Google's Great Big Ideas Camp

The larger the deals that companies do, the more important a level of trust is with the buyer. Trust is not something that is merely objective. Trust comes from the heart. It's partly an emotional response. The best way to develop more personal, emotional, trusting relationships among business leaders is through events like Google's upcoming Camp. A fun few days can be the start of something big.

By Jeff Kagan

08/07/14 12:04 PM PT

Google is hosting a conference in Sicily this week simply called the "Camp." This is a different kind of conference. It's not just about business. Attendees are from business, politics and entertainment -- they bring their families. I was interviewed by Fox News about what will take place and what Google can expect from this event. You may find this interesting.

I have been invited to attend many of these types of events over the years. Big companies like Emerson, Lucent, Nortel, Compaq and more. They're held in glorious places like Palm Beach, Las Vegas and Maui and sometimes on cruise ships. These meetings are full of sun, sand, friendship and ideas. At some meetings, attendees are invited to bring their spouses; at some, the entire family is welcome.

That changes everything. So, how much business is done? As it turns out, plenty -- but not in a conventional way. In this case, the emotional side of business is built.

Business and Pleasure

These conferences are not typical business meetings. They are several days of bonding with other attendees. Everyone contributes their thoughts, and everyone learns new things they can take back to their work and life. Attendees typically are senior executives of companies the host company wants to bond with. Many are invited to mix and mingle and help stir thinking during business meetings and casual conversations.

The result is often very powerful. Since cream rises, this is a way for everyone to learn new secrets of success and take them back to their own businesses and lives. They learn things they may not have thought of before. Everyone wins.

There are business meetings every day, but they are limited in scope to, say, the morning hours. That's when business leaders mix and mingle, sit on panels, and talk about all sorts of things -- from business to technology to the economy to the direction of society. After the morning meetings, attendees often are free to participate in a prearranged activity like golf, swimming at the beach, shopping downtown, or touring historical sites.

At the end of the afternoon, guests return to their rooms to prepare for a festive dinner. This is usually a spectacular event, often with big name entertainment. Over a couple of days, many high-level people get to make new friends -- always a welcome benefit to all. Some of these events are on the smaller and more intimate side, with a couple dozen guests. Others are larger events with hundreds of guests -- and more if their families are invited. So what does Google or any host company get out of this type of event? Plenty.

Start of Something Big

These gatherings not only break down the walls of resistance to corporate customers, but also allow the human side seep into relationships -- especially in the more intimate settings. The larger the deals that companies do, the more important a level of trust is with the buyer. Trust is not something that is merely objective. Trust comes from the heart. It's partly an emotional response.

The best way to develop more personal, emotional, trusting relationships among business leaders is through these types of events. I don't expect any big deals to happen at Google's Camp. Deals typically are struck in a private meetings at other times and places.

This will just be a fun couple of days to relax, share and learn. Everyone will leave refreshed and loaded with new ideas. Some of these new relationships may last forever. Some may be the beginning of some big new thing down the road.

That's why these events not only are popular, but also valuable both to the host company and to every attendee as well. After all, companies are run by people -- and people need to share ideas and bond. This Google Camp event takes the typical conference to a higher level. Rather than just inviting corporate customers, I think Google wants to hear fresh thinking on the direction of everything from business concerns to those of individuals and society in general.

That way Google can start to think about new products and services for tomorrow. Remember, Google does not play in a game to be one of the crowd. Google leads. Even if it enters an existing space, it redefines the space, and it leads. So Google and attendees will get quite a bit out of this Camp. It's very good thinking on Google's part.

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-tablet-sales-crashing-whats-next-growth-wave

 

Jeff Kagan: If Tablet Sales Are Crashing, Whatís the Next Growth Wave?

By Jeff Kagan

August 5, 2014 7:45AM   

Tickers Mentioned: BBY AAPL GOOG SSNLF BBRY NOK SNE

 

So Best Buy (BBY)  says tablet sales are crashing. Not slowingÖ crashing. That means devices like the Apple iPad, Google Nexus and Samsung Galaxy. Actually this should not be a surprise. In fact this is exactly what we should have expected. Itís the nature of business. Everything rides a wave. Everything rises, then eventually crests and ultimately falls. What we should be asking is whatís the next wave?

We should not be surprised. Some waves last longer than others, but no growth wave lasts forever. Think about all the hot technology products and trends in your lifetime. Every growth wave like we have seen in tablets always follows a wave. It grows, crests then falls.

The smartphone growth wave lasted longer and was larger, but will ultimately follow the same growth wave pattern. Thatís why companies must think a few years ahead of the marketplace. They must create their next growth wave before the one they are currently riding crashes.

In fact this smartphone crash already happened once. Until a few short years ago Blackberry (BBRY)  and Nokia (NOK)  were number one. Blackberry was number one in smartphones and Nokia was number one in handsets. Then the Apple iPhone and Google's (GOOG)  Android entered the smartphone picture and suddenly changed the picture.

Soon after the Apple iPhone and Google Android were launched, they quickly rose to number one and two, forcing both Blackberry and Nokia to the back of the line, virtually overnight. That shocked many in these companies, and many investors as well.

The next smartphone transition could also occur at any time. And will.

This was not the first. We saw this same disaster with Motorola who was number one for decades, then collapsed in the late 1990ís after their ultra hot StarTac. They never had the next wave ready to go so they rapidly crested and fell as well.

Years later Motorola had another growth wave with the Razr. However that rose, crested and fell with nothing to replace it either. Then years after that Motorola next created the Droid. They are still around, but they have never recaptured past glory.

So did Motorola never understand this wave theory?

This is a key lesson for every competitor. Always have the next growth wave ready to go. In fact itís a good idea to have several growth waves in the market at once. Think about what Apple (AAPL)  did since the late 1990ís. First the iPod, next the iPhone, next the iPad, next the smaller iPad.

In fact Apple continued growing until they stopped creating the next wave. Riding current waves does not propel you forward. You must always create the next hot wave, then the next and so on.

Actually the same thing happened to many others over the last few decades. Want a few examples? Remember the Sony Walkman, the record industry with albums, followed by the cassette tape industry followed by the DVD industry. Did Apple win that battle with the iPod? Whatís next?

Also, this transformation not only impacted the providers of music, but the equipment manufacturers as well. When was the last time you saw a turntable or tape player? Ever try and play your old family videos of your children? You no longer have that kind of player do you?

And thatís the point. Innovation in technology continually wipes the slate clean and rewrites new rules for the next big industry wave. This impacts not only the core industry, but also other industry segments, which work with them.

Thatís what investors and workers and companies are always searching for. The good news is there is always a next wave coming. Itís important to understand your investments and where they ride on the growth wave.

Itís so important to understand if the companies you follow are on the growth side of the wave or on the falling side of the same wave.

Every wave has a life span. Some growth waves a long like smartphones while others are short like Netbooks.

Fortunately there is always the next wave starting. Remember the wireless industry, the Internet, smartphones and apps we have seen already. And also all the exciting new waves that are starting today.

So as tablet sales slow, what is coming next? Will we see a newer or better version of the tablet, or will growth come from another wave?

Ten years ago all we had was the computer, the laptop and the Blackberry smartphone. Today we have so much more with tablets, wireless notebooks, iPhones and Galaxyís, smartwatches, glasses and so much more. And they all access the same information.

That means the cloud will play a larger role going forward. Thatís one wave. There are plenty of areas where the next growth wave will come. In fact I see several growth areas getting ready to break.

I am sensing that we are just at the very beginning of the next big growth wave or waves. Keep your eyes open. The next wave is coming.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          August 5, 2014 7:45AM 

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Thanks-C-Spire---for-Leading-Mississippi-Schools-to-Techs-Fast-Lane-80818.html

Thanks, C Spire - for Leading Mississippi Schools to Tech's Fast Lane

 

We are at the cusp of a brand new communications revolution. Ultra-high speed Internet will transform not only the companies that offer it, but also the cities and towns where it is offered. That's why cities are standing on their heads trying to attract the attention of carriers. So far, there are only a few companies really embracing ultra-high speed Internet services. C Spire is one of them.

By Jeff Kagan

07/31/14 5:00 AM PT

If you have been following business and personal technology in recent years, you've seen a quantum leap forward. Unfortunately, education is not moving ahead as quickly. Technology can help, though, and C Spire is setting a good example, propelling Mississippi schools forward.

C Spire is helping schools and entire cities create a quantum leap of their own. The plan is to help students prepare for the future. A highly skilled workforce will attract companies, which will then help the state to grow.

This is a plan that every other state should learn from. It is key for growth not only in Mississippi, but also in every other state across the U.S.

Ripe for Reinvention

Hu Meena is the CEO of C Spire, which is a privately held, diversified wireless, telecommunications and technology-services company based in Ridgeland, Mississippi. Meena seems to be one of a few CEOs who is trying to improve his state -- at the core -- through communications technology.

Meena sees the rapid growth of technology and business and understands that improving education will improve citizen skills. That will attract companies. That will attract other citizens -- and all that will help Mississippi grow going forward.

That's why he has taken a leadership position bringing new networks, products and services to the marketplace that will help his state do just that -- grow.

This is a lesson every state in the United States can and should learn. Every state will compete with other states for the best people and workers. Going forward, that is what competition will look like.

This is the time for every state to reinvent itself and attract both citizens and companies. Going forward, states and cities that can do so will be healthy and growing.

This is a new and incredible growth opportunity, which every city and every state must embrace. Leadership tomorrow starts today.  

Meena sees the future as a place where wireless, wire line and Internet all work together to bring new growth opportunities. Meena is not only helping Mississippi, but also growing C Spire in a variety of new areas.

The Ultra-High Speed Race

A few short years ago, C Spire was only wireless, but now it is expanding into the wire line world as well, with ultra-high speed Internet and new services like home automation and security. Services like TV and more could be next.

The Internet will bring all sorts of new services and opportunities. While every city in America may have Internet access, only a very few have ultra-high speed Internet service.

We are at the cusp of a brand new communications revolution. Ultra-high speed Internet will transform not only the companies that offer it, but also the cities and towns where it is offered.

That's why cities are standing on their heads trying to be first to market with this new technology. They are trying to attract the attention of carriers to be put on the list.

So far, there are only a few companies really embracing ultra-high speed Internet services. C Spire is one of them. Others are AT&T, Google, and to a lesser extent companies like CenturyLink. I do expect to see this market heat up.

Even cable television companies like Comcast offer a version of their television services over the Internet or an IP connection. This follows what the telephone companies are doing with their IPTV services.

The first thing we have to do is get ultra-high speed Internet to every city. That will take years. Then we can bring a second or third provider to each market. That will lower prices as this new technology matures. It will take time, however.

Today, cities are falling all over themselves trying to become the next city to win this ultra-high speed Internet service. They are trying to get on the radar of communications companies in this space.

Magnet Cities

Meena has taken a very forward-looking approach. He wants to give Mississippi the core tools it needs to be a leader in this new space going forward.

That's why C Spire is rapidly building ultra-high speed Internet service in several key Mississippi cities. This is a very unique and valuable approach for the state. These cities will become like magnets -- attracting not only users, but also workers and companies and taxes.

This will attract new users from other states, and it will mean companies will relocate there. That means both companies and citizens will be new taxpayers in these cities and state. That means new revenue for a more vital and growing community.

So, going forward, technology and education are the first steps to a growing and healthy economy and future.

I am happy to see Hu Meena and C Spire lead this charge in Mississippi. I would hope this would be a great example to other states to understand what the world will look like tomorrow and prepare for it today. Each state should have business leaders like this preparing them for the future. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Thanks-C-Spire---for-Leading-Mississippi-Schools-to-Techs-Fast-Lane-80818.html#sthash.uGSwQN2R.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-verizon-slowing-wireless-data-speeds

Jeff Kagan: Verizon Slowing Wireless Data Speeds

By Jeff Kagan

July 28, 2014 1:22PM   

Tickers Mentioned: VZ  T TMUS  S  AAPL  GOOG  FB  LNKD  TWTR

Verizon slowing data speeds, wiresless data, AT&T Mobility, C-Spire, T-Mobile

Verizon Wireless (VZ)  is going to start slowing data speeds to the heaviest wireless data users. I have been warning about this for years. Itís the price we may all have to start paying as the spectrum shortage really starts to impact the marketplace. So what is the real problem and what solutions are there?

In the good ole days, wireless was all about making a phone call from a cell phone. However ever since the first Apple (AAPL) iPhone and Google Android hit the marketplace a few years ago, wireless is increasingly all about wireless data.

Wireless data is all the apps we use on smartphones. Everything from email, text messages, surfing the web, using Facebook (FB), LinkedIn (LNKD), and Twitter (TWTR) and a thousand other apps.

Actually itís more like a million other apps. Thatís right, the app marketplace has exploded in the last few years, from a few hundred to roughly a million in just the last few years. And there is no sign of that growth stopping.

Using these apps requires spectrum. Wireless bandwidth. Spectrum is the on and off ramps of the wireless information superhighway.

Itís what the carrier owns and users interact with you so you can use these wireless data services.

The big problem these days is we have a limit on the wireless data spectrum and usages continues to grow.

This is not new. We have had this shortage problem over the last several years. It potentially impacts every wireless carrier including AT&T Mobility (T) , Verizon Wireless, Sprint (S), T-Mobile ($TMUS), C Spire, US Cellular and more.

And that means it impacts every wireless customer as well. Anyone who uses apps may be affected.

What Verizon is doing is limiting the amount of wireless data their largest customers use at high speeds. They are doing this to make sure all their other customers donít get degraded service.

This is not new. Verizon has been doing this for awhile already. I guess they are just making everyone aware of this latest move so there are no big surprises when the door shuts.

This makes sense. Their heaviest users wonít like it much since they will get their usage limited. But thatís the real world problems we must deal with.

Large national carriers and smaller regional carriers all face the same potential problem. They need spectrum. This is vital for their survival and growth going forward.

However, there simply is not enough spectrum to satisfy every carrier. So itís time carriers learned to start working together. To share spectrum. Because without spectrum, carriers cannot stay in business.

Without carriers working together, I am sure the government will step in and start to direct. That overkill is something that every player wants to avoid.

I have read where larger, national carriers like AT&T are working with regional carriers, providing them access to spectrum so they can also continue to grow and be competitive.

Thatís exactly what has to happen to keep all competitors healthy.

However the next question is simpleÖ is that enough?

The simple answer is, no. As we go through the years, more customers sign up and use more wireless data. That means the limited spectrum will start to pinch everyone.

One answer is, as the technology advances, we will be able to use more wireless data services over existing spectrum.

Another answer is carriers getting their hands on more spectrum wherever they can find it.

However, there is no real long-term answer today. That means working together is the only way forward. Either carriers work together and share spectrum voluntarily, or wait for the government to step in.

And when the government steps in, they usually create more problems than they solve.

So we have no real long-term solutions. All we are doing today is just buying more to find a real, long-term answer.

The spectrum shortage is an industry wide problem that is growing. To date each carrier is trying to get their hands on as much spectrum as they can.

Companies who do get spectrum will have the ability to service customers. Those who donít wonít. So for now, sharing spectrum is the only real answer.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-verizon-slowing-wireless-data-speeds#sthash.GRECpCzS.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-wireless-industry-wave-changing-industry

Jeff Kagan: Wireless Industry Wave Changing Industry

By Jeff Kagan 

July 25, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: BBRY   NOK   AAPL   GOOG   TMUS   S   T

Blackberry, Nokia, smartphones apps, Apple waves, Motorola, Samsung tablets

The wireless industry has grown and changed many times over the last few decades. In fact, every five to ten years there is a major transformation that changes the trajectory of the industry. Growth continues, but on a new track. And this kind of change is starting to happen again.

The last major shift was to super smartphones and tablets that we all take for granted today. It was only a few short years ago this wave of change occurred. The iPhone was introduced in 2007, and the iPad in 2010.

All this dramatic change we have been experiencing with smartphones, tablets and a gazillion apps is only a few years old. Thatís incredible to stop and think about.

Until that point Blackberry (BBRY)  and Nokia (NOK) lead the wireless handset space. There were only a few hundred apps. However once the iPhone and Android were launched, they ravaged the status quo.

Previous leaders like Blackberry and Nokia suddenly had the rug ripped out from under them.

Today leaders in the smartphone and tablet space are Apple (AAPL) , Google (GOOG) , and Samsung with the vast majority of market share in every new category. And there are roughly one million apps.

I was recently interviewed by the Wall Street Journal and said that I think Apple will remain a powerhouse because of itís market share, but it may not see another growth wave as big and bold as the last several years with their iPhone.

Look at the iPad as an example. Successful, but not as successful as the iPhone. In fact I could add one more thought. Just as Blackberry, Nokia and Motorola lead the last wave, itís possible a new idea could transform the industry once again.

Thatís right. There is nothing keeping another breakthrough idea or company from changing the marketplace again. And the next idea may come from a newcomer to the space the same as Apple was.

That threat should keep todayís leaders like Apple, Google and Samsung awake at night.

Riding the Growth Wave

Everytime a company grabs the golden ring we think tomorrow will always be better. Well that hope does not always pan out. Typically a company rides a "Wave" to success. A product or a line rides a Wave. But remember every Wave rises, crests, then falls.

Apple has had several Waves including the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Each rides itís own path. Each rises, crests, then falls.

Apple has not introduced a new growth Wave recently, have they? The iPod is no longer growing. The iPhone is still the strongest and still growing, but not as rapidly. The iPad has shown rapid growth, but that growth is also slower than the iPhone. But nothing since.

Each rides itís own wave. Thatís why Apple must create the next growth Wave to ride.

And in fact that lesson should be learned by every company. There is no such thing as guaranteed long-term success. Today success is a very short-term thing. And it must be renewed year after year.

If a company does not introduce new Waves of growth, they will start to slow down. Once that slowdown happens itís tough to start the growth engines once again. Just look at companies like Motorola, Blackberry and Nokia as recent examples.

The wireless industry as a whole has gone through several different growth waves as well. Every five to ten years there is an event that takes the industry in a new direction of growth. The last was the Apple, Google and Samsung growth wave with smartphones and tablets.

And the next change Wave in wireless is starting now.

Over the next several years the wireless industry and all the competitors will change. They will continue to grow, but on a new path. They will grow, but they will look different going forward.

The wireless pricing model is one area of change. The way companies compete will also change.

There are fewer new customers to win today. That means companies must win customers from each other and hang on to the customers they already have.

This is good news for customers. This means quality, customer service and customer care will continue to improve. This means pricing will drop. This means new innovation and new thinking in the pricing models will transform the industry.

Wireless Industry Evolving

The first companies into this new space are AT&T (T) Mobility and T-Mobile (TMUS) . They are transforming their business models and changing the economics of their business. They are offering lower prices, promoting pre-paid and seeing growth.

AT&T earnings report shows they added more than one million post-paid subscribers during the second quarter. They said this was their strongest performance in five years.

I think their low churn rates are also impressive. If you are an AT&T customer you have to think thatís incredible. Thatís why you stay with AT&T keeping churn rates low.

Verizon (VZ)  also showed very strong smartphone performance this quarter. However Verizon is not changing anything yet.

Sprint ($S) is in the process of creating an entirely new network experience for their customers.

T-Mobile is also a player in this wave of industry change. They are not yet as large or as important as AT&T or Verizon, but they do have a very high profile and are driving attention of customers and the media to this industry change. Thatís good.

I expect this transformation in pricing to occur over the next several years. It may have started with AT&T and T-Mobile, but I think will spread to the rest of the industry as well.

How will the industry players compete going forward with fewer new customers and very low churn rates? Thatís the challenge.

Pricing may be one answer. Quality of service is another. Innovation is another. Weíll start thinking about wireless differently. Using wireless differently.

There are many areas where we will see competition going forward. Today AT&T and Verizon are both strong companies, but are on different tracks. AT&T drives industry change. Verizon follows a few years later.

I would say both Sprint and T-Mobile look very promising going forward. Sprint is in the process of replacing their entire wireless network for better performance and T-Mobile continues its recent growth wave.

These two companies may play a role in redefining competition going forward after their wave of transformation is complete.

I expect pre-paid to continue. I expect quality to improve. I expect low churn rates to continue.

This spells a very healthy industry. However investors always look to make money so we will continue to see innovation change the industry. That means change in strategy to keep growth levels high.

I think the next few years will be very exciting as the wireless industry emerges from its cocoon and comes out a butterfly. Not every company will be a winner, but the opportunity is there for all. The next Wave of change is just beginning.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-wireless-industry-wave-changing-industry#sthash.GEilE0QM.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Slow-but-Steady-March-to-the-Cloud-80781.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80781.html

ANALYSIS

The Slow but Steady March to the Cloud

The cloud rollout will be a long-term process over many years, but I think it's unstoppable. It's important to recognize that the cloud is more than just electronics. It's also people who understand how to operate in this new world. Executives and workers must understand. That's part of the process that slows down adoption -- people learning new skills.

By Jeff Kagan

07/24/14 6:12 AM PT

The cloud is an idea that actually has been with us for many years before we gave it the name "cloud." All of a sudden, it is growing into a large and important space. Most companies are dipping their toes in the cloud -- however, many corporate customers are going only so far. Why the delay?

Fear of the unknown is one reason. No doubt the cloud is going to be the way we do things in the future. However, the road to that future is full of bumps and turns. There is also an important element of trust that is just not there yet.

Stormy Weather

There have been high-profile problems with the cloud in recent years from big brand-name players. Sometimes cloud services go down, in part or in whole. Sometimes outages affect all of a company's stored information and other times just part of it. Sometimes they affects users' ability to access their data.

There are also security threats that companies are concerned about. These factors are creating the element of fear they have in jumping all-in to the cloud.

The areas where companies are testing are less vital areas of their business. However, key parts are still cloud-free and staying that way for a while.

We will see the cloud space continue to grow, but only for less sensitive areas of a business' operations. That's why the cloud rollout will continue in fits and starts over coming years. Parts of a company will go online while other parts stay far away.

We are seeing the cloud space really start to grow with competitors like Oracle, Salesforce, SAP, Microsoft, HP, Amazon, Cisco, IBM and many others.

The competitors in this space will continue to grow and change as this industry segment does. Leadership also will change over coming years.

Don't think today's leaders will be tomorrow's leaders. It is very early in this new cloud game, and like any horse race, leadership changes time and time again. That will make this an interesting market to follow.

There will be several brand new players in this space that will grow rapidly but are not yet even on the radar. That's the way business works. Suddenly newcomers with big ideas will challenge the industry and take us in new directions.

As security improves and innovation continues, expect to see more companies jumping further into the cloud space. Eventually, bit by bit, companies will start to put key applications online.

The Cloud's Learning Curve

There are different types of clouds. There are public, private and hybrid clouds. They each have their own unique security and operational challenges.

Companies will first put their most critical information in a private cloud. Then, when they feel it is safe, they will go hybrid, intermingling with the public space.

Companies in some industries will be first while others will take longer. Companies are already doing business without the cloud, so they have no real need to rush into the space.

The cloud rollout will be a long-term process over many years, but I think it's unstoppable.

It's important to recognize that the cloud is more than just electronics. It's also people who understand how to operate in this new world. Executives and workers must understand. That's part of the process that slows down adoption -- people learning new skills.

That's why educating and training the workforce to implement the cloud will be important going forward. Today it's an edge for an individual -- but tomorrow, it will be expected.

Many executives fear that if one of their key suppliers goes down, then that will shut them down as well, since they are all connected in the cloud space.

This is a real concern.

However, some companies are always first to the table. They are the early adopters. They take advantage of the benefits and wrestle with the problems first.

Then, over time, other segments start to jump in as well. This is how the cloud will expand over the next several years.

All of this and more explain why the cloud is the future of business -- but it also explains why the rollout will take time. Since this is such a large and important transformation of the business community, it's important to take things slow and get it right. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Slow-but-Steady-March-to-the-Cloud-80781.html#sthash.6uaIPtxA.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-comcast-gives-self-black-eye-with-poor-customer-service

Jeff Kagan: Comcast Gives Self Black Eye with Poor Customer Service

By Jeff Kagan 

July 17, 2014 1:16PM   

Tickers Mentioned: CMCSA   TWC   LUV

Comcast poor customer service, comcast cancel service, comcast investors, comcast digital

Why does Comcast (CMCSA)  keep punching themselves in the gut with poor customer service? With competition increasing and new choices popping up all the time, they should be trying to improve customer relations. Instead they are embarrassed by a customer care representative that simply wonít do as the customer asks and cancel service.

Is this any way to win in an increasingly competitive playing field? This customer service disaster was recorded by the customer and went viral this week. This real life scenario will hurt Comcast in their efforts to improve service and customer relations.

The problem is Comcast Ė along with the entire cable television space Ė has a well earned, lousy customer care reputation. Faced with new competitors, new technology and innovation the industry continues to lose customers and market share.

Thatís why the entire industry has embarked on an effort to improve their customer relations. Smart, since thatís exactly what they need to do in order to remain competitive and viable going forward.

Is it working? I have noticed an improvement over the last few years; however that improvement is only marginal. It is not strong enough and they have not done it long enough to make an impression on the customer yet.

This is the customer service time bomb they are trying to disarm now that it suits them. The bomb the industry created itself by not caring about the customer.

The problem is it takes a quantum leap improvement over an extended period of time, and efforts to date are simply not there yet.

I do believe if they continue this, they will improve over the course of the next decade, but thatís a long time. And until then, these customer service disasters only reinforce the poor reputation in the customers mind.

An apology from an embarrassed Comcast corporate headquarters is helpful. Itís better than ignoring this disaster. But itís not enough.

Real improvement in service and reliability and pricing is what will turn the tide. And that, while better, is still a long way from being goodÖ forget about excellent.

Digital Switch Still Hurting Customer Relations

Another recent problem is their transformation from analog to digital network design. This caused customers to have to lease monthly boxes for every television so they can watch TV. That increased customer costs.

Often one or more of these boxes simply lose signal. You then have to call customer service and they walk through a series of steps and often get you back online.

This problem is new and occurs on a regular basis. It causes affected customers to call Comcast time after time.

To the customer this says that Comcast is more concerned with making their investors happy than their customers. This may be good if you are investor in Comcast, but not so good if you are a customer.

Customer care reps always seem to be good natured and helpful. This is welcomed since customers often call with an attitude since this kind of problem keeps occurring. However a good attitude does not solve the problem.

Neither does PR. They run television advertising to improve their image with the customer. One TV commercial shows a ticked off customer with a Comcast service rep in a Comcast van. It starts with the customer hating Comcast customer service, but ends 30 seconds later ends with him changing his mind because of what the Comcast rep says.

If only life were that simple. The problem is after that commercial the customer still must deal with regular outages from one or more of their converter boxes on an ongoing basis.

Time Warner Cable (TWC) made the same switch from analog to digital. And customers have the same problem with the converter boxes.

However at least Time Warner Cable left their analog signal on so customers with service problems could at least fall back on a service that worked.

Comcast didnít. Comcast turned off their analog signal forcing their customers to deal with regular service outages.

This is the difference between a company that only focuses on the investor like Comcast, and another company who focuses on both the customer and the investor like Time Warner Cable.

Cable: Take a Cue From Southwest Airlines

Fortune Magazine called Herb Kelleher, past CEO of Southwest Airlines (LUV)  the best CEO in America. One thing Kelleher was famous for saying was simple. Take good care of your workers and they will take good care of your customers. Then the investors will be happy.

That makes so much sense if the cable television industry will just listen and learn.

Comcast does offer fast Internet service, but they also have many service problems to deal with. If Comcast is successful with their Time Warner Cable acquisition, customers will have to learn to deal with these problems as well.

Cable television is an industry we have all grown up with. They never faced competition before so they never cared whether the customer was happy. They only focused on the investor.

However, now that the industry is being challenged by new thinking, new competitors and innovation, the cable television industry had better start focusing on improving customer care or else it will turn around and bite them in the real end. Just like this embarrassing customer service disaster.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-comcast-gives-self-black-eye-with-poor-customer-service#sthash.uk2mjuDb.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Are-You-There-Corporation-Its-Me-Customer-80747.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80747.html

ANALYSIS

Are You There Corporation? It's Me, Customer

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

07/17/14 6:19 AM PT

 

Companies used to come out with updates and upgrades that made our lives easier and better. Today, too often, they make our lives harder and more aggravating. Companies no longer think about the user. That's why they continue to take two steps forward and one step back with their updates and upgrades. They continue to slap their customers in the face, yet expect good results.

 

Why do so many companies keep slapping their customers in the face and expect them to stick around? Remember the good old days, when an update or an upgrade was good news? It solved problems. Today, updates often create new problems in their wake. Today, updates are two steps forward and one step back.

Updates and upgrades used to be welcome news. They used to build a company's brand. Today, however, they often negatively impact the usability of products and services -- and that hurts the brand.

Think I'm crazy? Let me run through a list of a few updates and upgrades that may open your eyes.

Good-bye Traffic Reports, Good-bye Surfing

Toyota and Lexus make great cars. I have been buying them for years and have loved them. Recently, though, their upgrades to the navigation and electronics systems have been two steps forward and one step back.

The navigation used to work with Sirius XM radio, and it provided live traffic conditions, but only on the major highways. That was an excellent product, which built the Toyota and Lexus brands.

However, they are now moving away from Sirius XM and changing to HD signal. This provides much better traffic and weather coverage where there is an HD signal. It shows traffic on more streets in the city.

The problem is, it drops traffic coverage altogether where there is no HD signal. So Toyota says to connect your smartphone to its app to continue to get traffic and weather coverage.

That works -- sometimes. When it does not work, you get no live traffic, even on the interstates. That means you do not get traffic coverage on some highways that used to be covered by Sirius XM. This is hurting the Toyota brand.

What Toyota should have done was adopted a scaled approach until the new HD service was proven. It should start out with HD signal. When no HD signal is present, it should utilize its smartphone app. If no service is available there, it should revert back to the Sirius XM signal.

The bottom line is that customers always should be able to access the information they need -- and used to be able to get. The problem is, they can't.

Every company should think about this from the customer perspective rather than a corporate perspective. Toyota is damaging its own brand by moving two steps forward and one step back.

Comcast and Time Warner Cable are two more examples. Users were happy being able to hit their channel up or down button and surf to find the show they want. Since we've been forced to update to a digital signal, however, it takes longer to change channels -- so there is no more surfing.

In addition, there are often problems with the new digital signal, which means users have to make regular calls to customer service to send refresh signals. Sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't. The bottom line is that these companies are damaging their brand relationships with their customers by thinking from a corporate perspective rather than a customer perspective. Two steps forward, one step back.

Hello, Service Bills, Hello Aggravation

What about all your home appliances? Yesterday your refrigerator, stove, oven and dishwasher used to last a good 10 to 15 years without service. Today you're likely to have service issues every year or two. Over the course of the next 10 years, your service bills may equal what it would cost to buy brand new devices instead.

Of course, that's not an option, because the new devices will have service problems every couple years as well.

So, companies like Frigidaire, Whirlpool, Maytag, Hotpoint and others are damaging their own brands with the customers who used to love them.

You would think Apple was bulletproof. It used to be -- but not anymore. Today, it screws up just like the rest of corporate America.

Remember a few years ago, when Apple wanted to move away from Google Maps for navigation? Its iOS update offered a new version of Apple maps and navigation. Do you remember reading the horror stories?

What about last year's iOS update, which changed the look and design? Did this do anything new or better? I don't think so. It was just different. Why?

People have their own lives and don't have time to relearn operating systems for no good reason. These updates damage Apple brand relationship with its customers.

Microsoft is another problem. Every time it upgrades its Windows operating system, it forces customers to figure out how to use the software. This is a time-consuming aggravation that most customers hate.

Microsoft should update and upgrade its software -- that's what customers expect. However, customers don't want to spend time every couple of years going through a learning curve.

So, Microsoft should keep its OS working the same so customers are not inconvenienced. The changes should be made behind the scenes. However, that means thinking about this from the customer perspective, and Microsoft is another company that doesn't do that. Instead, it thinks about it from the corporate perspective.

This hurts the Microsoft brand with its customers. In fact, every move described above hurts the company's brand relationship with its customers. Is that really what these companies want? I can't imagine that. However, they keep heading in this same direction, year after year.

Enough examples? Convinced? I hope so.

Corporations vs. Customers

Companies used to come out with updates and upgrades that made our lives easier and better. Today, they don't. Too often, they make our lives harder and more aggravating. The problem is that companies no longer think about the user.

That's why they continue to take two steps forward and one step back with their updates and upgrades. They continue to slap their customers in the face, yet expect good results.

Companies have executives, and they are people too. They should understand how much of a pain in the neck it is dealing with the products and services in their lives.

I see no solution. Every company must understand the problem and be concerned with solving it -- be concerned with the customer reaction. Every company should be concerned with building its brand, rather than causing harm to it.

Companies should be interested in taking two steps forward -- period. It's that one step back that will eat away at their brand relationships with customers.That's the last thing any company should want. 

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Are-You-There-Corporation-Its-Me-Customer-80747.html#sthash.wjj6K4cx.dpuf

 

 

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-what-next-for-aereo-and-tv

Jeff Kagan: Whatís Next for Aereo and TV?

By Jeff Kagan

July 10, 2014 3:31PM   

Tickers Mentioned: CMCSA  TWC  T  VZ  CTL

Aereo television model, Aereo television legal, don't count Aereo out, AT&T Uverse

Weíve watched Aereo challenge the traditional television model. However now that the Supreme Court struck down their business model, many think this newcomer will simply fade away. I donít. I think Aereo will surprise us once again with a new business model and continue to compete. Just wait. Youíll see.

I will bet that both Barry Diller and Chet Kanojia are busy rethinking Aereo. And to tell you the truth I would not be at all surprised to see Aereo come back with a slightly different and new business model that keeps them just inside the line of the law.

Maybe it wonít be as profitable, but it will be legal. The next question is can they still challenge the industry?

Aereo was a dynamic idea trying to provide television service without paying a traditional fee to the television networks. If this was something that Aereo could do, I am sure others like Comcast (CMCSA) and Time Warner Cable (TWC)  would be very interested as well.

However the Supreme Court said no. Since that time, reporter after reporter who contacted me thought that was the end for Aereo. I think that my response shocked most of them when I said donít count Aereo out. Not yet.

I say the nation's television model is broken. Customers pay too much and costs keep rising every year. In fact what customers pay for cable television roughly doubles every decade. Thatís insane.

A la carte has been kicked around for more years than I can remember, and still has not become an option. Strange.

Customers would love to choose the channels they want and pay less in total. The average customer may have access to hundreds of channels, but still only watches their same favorite five, ten, or 15 channels.

Telephone companies like AT&T (T) Uverse, Verizon (VZ)  FiOS, and CenturyLink (CTL) Prism use IPTV. They deliver television over the Internet connection. In markets where they offer service and compete with cable television, they are gobbling up market share.

I remember AT&T saying at their annual meeting a few months ago they had a roughly 50 percent market share in the Dallas area. Thatís powerful competition.

The only problem is telephone company IPTV is not everywhere yet. So cable television still has a strong hold.

However that may be weakening. Cable television companies are losing market share for the first time because their prices are too high and competition is growing.

Today customers have choices. Tomorrow they will have more choices.

Customers can actually get quite a few channels for free over the antenna today. And the quality is excellent. They can also use services like Netflix, Amazon.com, Hulu and countless others to watch more television and movies over the Internet. And that cost is very low.

As competition increases and technology explodes like the Internet, companies with the thinking of Aereo are going to keep bursting onto the scene, changing the customer opinion of where they get television from.

If the traditional cable television model wants to survive, they must offer low cost choices to customers who want it.

So this entire television space is broken. We need to destroy it and update the model going forward. That means what customers pay their service providers, and what they pay networks and content providers.

The marketplace will continue to get crazier over the coming years as we keep trying to squeeze the new marketplace of tomorrow into the tiny model from yesterday. It just wonít fit.

I look forward to seeing the rebirth of Aereo and root for reinventing the television model that we all grew up with, but which is so outdated.

What I want to see is choice. I want every competitor to have the fair chance to compete and to win. And I want to see every customers have the choice they want for low cost service with excellent quality.

Is that too much to ask?

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          July 10, 2014 3:31PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-what-next-for-aereo-and-tv#sthash.apWlFdBM.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80713.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Will-the-Smartwatch-Finally-Get-Hot-or-Not-80713.html

ANALYSIS

Will the Smartwatch Finally Get Hot or Not?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

07/10/14 5:46 AM PT

The Apple caterpiller may be getting ready to come out of it's cocoon as a butterfly: a new Apple brand and image. Imagine that. Will Apple start to position itself as a luxury brand going forward? Will it create a new industry segment -- something like tech jewelry? It would give Apple a chance to lead a young industry segment once again. It would be so Apple.

 

We've been hearing all about these amazing new smartwatches. They are the remote control for our smartphones. They make doing regular tasks quicker and easier. They are said to be the most exciting new product since the smartphone. If that's the case, then why have they not taken off yet?

Ah, the million dollar question: Are smartwatches going to be hot like the smartphone and tablet, or will they simply fade away like the netbook?

Yes, I see how potentially exciting the smartwatches from Samsung and LG are. Yes, I see why Apple and Motorola and countless others want to jump onto this space as well. The opportunity is huge -- but is it a sure thing?

The question is simple: Will smart watches finally get hot or not?

Smartphone or Netbook Path?

The wireless PR machines are all running at full strength, so you would think the answer is a resounding "yes!" Then again, we thought success would come to the netbook a few short years ago, didn't we?

If you recall, the netbook -- which is still around actually -- never really became a top seller. However, right after the netbook emerged, Apple's iPad became very successful, followed by Samsung's Galaxy Tab.

The netbook missed, but the tablet hit it out of the park. So what can we expect next?

Today's smartwatches are good -- just not different enough from smartphones. That's why only the very early adopters are buyers today. In addition, the current smartwatches are just not fashionable. They are not jewelry, like watches often are.

Some people do like to wear a nice Rolex on their wrist, not a mini smartphone. That means the market is much smaller than the traditional watch market.

However, the next generation of these smartwatches may surprise us. They will do more, and they also may be more fashionable. I see all the manufacturers and networks revving their engines.

If you recall, the first iPhone was exciting -- but compared with today's version, it's a real yawn. The first Android smartphone, offered by T-Mobile, was so boring it put most people to sleep.

However, every year smartphones improved, both in design and technology. So, could we be in for a sequel with the smartwatch? The first versions are not very exciting, but as the first few years and generations pass, will the smartwatch get better -- and even fashionable?

Perhaps.

Samsung's newest smartwatch is better than the first. It still has a long way to go before it starts attracting users in droves, but it is getting better.

Apple is not in the smartwatch business yet, but we are expecting its iWatch launch later this year. Apple may upset the apple cart with its smartwatch introduction.

Apple just hired Patrick Pruniaux who was Vice President for sales at luxury Swiss watchmaker TAG Heuer.

Apple has very recently hired Angela Ahrendts, previous chief executive at Burberry, to head its new retail and online sales.

Apple also has Paul Deneve, former leader of French fashion brand Yves Saint Laurent.

All of these are a major coup for Apple as it prepares to enter this new smartwatch space, and beyond.

Tech Jewelry

The Apple caterpiller may be getting ready to come out of it's cocoon as a butterfly: a new Apple brand and image. Imagine that.

Will Apple start to position itself as a luxury brand going forward? Will it create a new industry segment -- something like tech jewelry?

It would give Apple a chance to lead a young industry segment once again. It would be so Apple. It would separate the Apple brand from the growing list of competitors.

Will Apple's smartwatch be marketed as a fashion statement? Or will it be another electronic device? Or perhaps a little bit of both in the tech jewelry space?

There has been an extraordinary amount of attention being paid to the entire smartwatch segment, and quite a bit of money and manpower spent as well.

There are no real segment leaders today, simply because there is really nothing that excitingÖ yet.

The first efforts, by Samsung and LG, have been innovative, but are still a yawn. Apple and Motorola may enter the spotlight next.

Will the smartwatch become hot or not? As we get ready to enter the second year of this story, I get the gut feeling that things are starting to gel.

If smartwatch makers get this right, the segment could be as important as the tablet segment. Then, as these different devices sync and work together, they will attract a stable customer base for each handset maker and network.

 

It's important to remember that this industry continues to grow based on innovation. If we listen to the hardware makers and networks, the smartwatch is next in line.

Then the question will be, what comes after the smartwatch? Stay tuned.  

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Will-the-Smartwatch-Finally-Get-Hot-or-Not-80713.html#sthash.h3fMLrlq.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Shame-on-Facebook-80691.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80691.html

ANALYSIS

Shame on Facebook

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

07/03/14 1:50 PM PT

Go ahead, Facebook -- your future is up to you. Keep abusing your users. Keep invading their privacy. Keep breaking the trust of the marketplace. You eventually will pay a very high price: government control. Imagine getting into bed each night with the government right next to you. Talk about cold feet. Facebook, your future is being written by no one other than you.

 

Do you remember those snotty little kids who didn't seem to understand the difference between right and wrong? You know, the little brats who thought the rules didn't apply to them. The kids who thought they could get away with whatever they wanted -- rules were for somebody else. Well, that seems to be a fitting description of Facebook, as it repeatedly breaks customer trust and invades its users' privacy.

This is not new. I remember other occasions in recent years when Facebook has invaded our privacy. Everyone seems to hate this betrayal. What I don't understand is why Facebook continues to get away with it.

The most recent invasion came to light last week, with publication of a report that Facebook had manipulated users' News Feeds to determine whether they would make positive or negative posts based one what others already had posted.

That's an interesting question. However, answering it is not worth the cost of invading the privacy and breaching the trust of customers. There are certain lines we don't cross. This is one of those lines. We simply don't hurt people to get an answer. Who the hell does Facebook think it is?

When in Doubt, Agree

Why do Facebook's leaders think they can continue to break the common sense rules of doing business -- over and over again -- and get away scot-free? Well, one reason is that nobody slaps them down when they go too far. So they keep doing it, over and over.

Facebook's excuse is that it didn't know its research methods would pose a problem. Also, those methods were allowed under the terms and conditions everyone clicks on to start using the service. That's right. You gave Facebook permission to walk all over you when you agreed to those terms.

However, if you asked all Facebook users, I am certain you would find the vast majority never read the terms and conditions. They just clicked to start using. That's the problem, right there.

That problem is magnified by companies having terms and conditions that are much too long and much too confusing.

There are many reasons users don't read terms and conditions. Some simply don't care. Others care, but don't have the time. Terms and conditions are often too long to read. Others don't understand them, because they're often written in legalese. In fact, most users never read the terms and conditions they agree to in order to use any online service.

Why? They never expect in their wildest dreams that they will be abused. After all, they are the customers. Who would hurt their customers? Well, Facebook, it seems.

For one reason or another, the vast majority of users never read the terms and conditions -- and this is a problem with many services, not just Facebook. It's a problem that we can and should solve now.

Something has to happen, right? Facebook can't continue with this kind of user abuse, can it?

Perhaps the law should be changed. What about publishing terms and conditions in larger print, easy-to-read English, and keeping them very short? A simple paragraph would do just fine. Just get to the point, mister.

Doing the Two-Step

As it stands now, terms and conditions set up most users to fail. They are too long and too complex. That's why Facebook is not scared of the courts -- but it should be scared of the growing unease among its users.

Many companies are guilty of similar despicable deeds. It's just that Facebook keeps breaking the rules in a very flamboyant way. It catches our attention.

So what's the answer? There are two options.

Step one is user control. Simply leave Facebook. That punishment from the user base will make Facebook realize it stepped over the line.

The problem is that most users don't pay attention to the news. Even if they did, since there is no other Facebook in the marketplace, there is no other place to go. So it's unfortunate that users don't use their power.

In fact, most simply don't care -- until they get burned, that is.

That leads us to step two. If people don't protect themselves, getting the government to step in is typically required. The government has stepped in before -- many times, in fact. It steps in any time it considers a company or a monopoly to be abusing its power.

This is not perfect either, since the result is not good for innovation.

However, as Facebook dominates social networking and continues to grow in importance, and as it continues to abuse users, I think we are getting closer to the point where the government will step in and start to put significant controls on the company.

When that happens, Facebook will be pinched. It will cry out and look for support from the community. However the community will be full of people it abused on its way up. That's when Facebook finally may realize the extent of the damage it has done.

However, then it will be too late.

So go ahead, Facebook -- your future is up to you. Keep abusing your users. Keep invading their privacy. Keep breaking the trust of the marketplace. You eventually will pay a very high price: government control. Imagine getting into bed each night with the government right next to you. Talk about cold feet.

Facebook, your future is being written by no one other than you. So when the government steps in and clobbers you, remember you'll have no right to complain. It's just the next natural step in this game you started and are playing against all of us, every day. Good luck. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Shame-on-Facebook-80691.html#sthash.KiFSzur5.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-status-report-of-sprint-network-upgrade

Jeff Kagan: Status Report of Sprint Network Upgrade

By Jeff Kagan  

July 1, 2014 2:18PM   

Tickers Mentioned: S T   TMUS   VZ

Sprint, Sprint Wireless, Softbank, T-mobile merger, AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless

One of the more interesting stories this year is about the transformation the Sprint (S)  wireless network is going through. After Softbank acquired part of Sprint last summer they started pouring in billions of dollars ripping out the old network and installing brand new gear. So what is the status of the new Sprint update? Letís take a look.

Sprint held a conference in Chicago June 23 to update the community. While initial views of many going into this meeting were mixed, most were impressed with what they saw and heard.

So far, I like what I am seeing and hearing.

Sprint is continuing the build out of their new Network Vision and Sprint Spark. Based on what I am witnessing, I think things should continue to improve for the nationís number three wireless carrier in coming quarters.

At the meeting were CEO Dan Hesse, Chief Network Officer Dr. John Saw and others Sprint executives. Saw gave a rooftop cell site tour where he shows the Sprint network in action. He pointed to various features for voice and data for each Network Vision station.

It appears that in downtown Chicago, Sprint has consistently fast LTE upstream and downstream speeds. If this represents what Sprint will look like going forward, I think they could turn into a real competitor once again.

This was impressive. The next question I have is how quickly can they roll out this faster and better service to all their customers over their entire network?

Sprint Has Accomplished Much this Year

I would say the Sprint rollout will look similar to what we see with AT&T Mobility (T) , Verizon Wireless (VZ)  and T-Mobile (TMUS) . Carriers seem to start out in the center of cities then build out to cover the entire market area around each city.

With that said, when will you see service improvements? It depends where you live and work and spend time. Some cities will be earlier and others will be later, but the entire Sprint network is heading in the right direction. This entire build out should still take several quarters.

Itís important to keep things in perspective. Sprint and Softbank had a long road ahead of them when they started this journey less than a year ago. So far they have shown significant improvement in certain markets. However there is still much work to be done.

So if this meeting were a status report, Iíd say Sprint is doing the right things and getting better, faster and stronger, quarter-by-quarter.

We are starting to see the promise of what this new Sprint network will deliver to the industry meaning customers, partners and investors.

The network appears to be fast, it is high quality, it is clear, it is secure and it can handle quite a bit of voice and data traffic without getting bogged down.

Building From the Big Cities Out

This Chicago event said nothing about the potential T-Mobile merger. Instead it did shed light on where Sprint stands today and the direction they are heading in.

Sprint was impressive in Chicago.

There is still quite a bit of network build out that has to occur. Sprint will start offering this new service in the downtown areas of cities nationwide. Then they will spread further throughout the cities over time.

We must evaluate Sprint like we do AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile. Every wireless carrier takes time to continually upgrade their networks. No carrier updates the entire network all at once. They update bit-by-bit over several years.

Thatís what the build out from 2G to 3G to 4G and beyond is all about. Every carrier today is completing their 4G build out, but they still have plenty of locations on a variety of technologies including slower speeds in pockets around the nation. Thatís the way wireless builds out.

Itís the same with Sprint. Over the next few quarters we will start to see them offer this powerful and fast network in more locations around the country.

As customers use this service if the quality and speed and reliability continue to be as good as Chicago, things could start to improve pretty rapidly for Sprint.

DISCLOSURE: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and do not represent the views of equities.com. Readers should not consider statements made by the author as formal recommendations and should consult their financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-status-report-of-sprint-network-upgrade#sthash.2t5dwfTk.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Will-Nest-Get-Too-Nosy-80650.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80650.html

ANALYSIS

Will Nest Get Too Nosy?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

06/26/14 6:29 AM PT

Users should make sure companies stay on the right side of the privacy line -- or leave until they correct their mistake. If users don't hold a company's feet to the fire, governments will have to step in as a last resort -- and that's something no one really wants. The problem is that users almost get hypnotized. They love technology -- so they may complain about its abuses, but they don't leave.

 

Nest Labs may offer cool technology, but do we really want Google or anyone knowing everything that goes on in our homes? Home automation may indeed be a double-edged sword. Today, like children, we are excited and amazed at how tech can accomplish simple tasks. Will we still be happy down the road, when it crosses the line and invades our privacy?

This is the stuff that spooky sci-fi movies have been made of for years, but this is not fiction. Tech titillates us in the beginning, so we gobble it up. Only later does it start to invade our privacy. It starts out harmless and beneficial but, over time, it crosses the line. By then, it's too late. There is no turning back.

No, I am not warning that technology companies will take over our world. That's science fiction, or at least we hope it is. Who knows what the future holds?

The Boiling Frog

Not all companies or technologies are threats, but threats do develop over time as tech continually upgrades. We should start worrying now about what some companies will do with all the personal and private information they are gathering about us and will have at their disposal.

Everything starts out happy and exciting and innocent and helpful in a blissful la-la land.

Then, as technology improves and upgrades, at some point it may cross the line and start to invade our privacy. By then, users are already so entrenched, they don't leave. It happens little by little. It's like the allegory of the boiling frog -- if you turn up the heat on the stove gradually enough, the frog doesn't know it's getting cooked.

That's the problem. If customers fled when their privacy was invaded, then companies would think twice. However, users stay put. They complain, but they don't leave. So companies keep going further and further. Bit by bit, they turn up the temperature until we are cooked.

Just think about the increasing number of companies and cases in the news over the last few years. They are really starting to add up to a frightening story.

It's even getting to the point where governments are starting to push back. For example, the European Union recently ordered Google to delete links to personal or private information that hurts users, on request.

Facebook is another example. It started out as a way for friends to keep in touch, but over time many have complained about the ways it invades their privacy. People say terms of use have changed, allowing private information to become publicly available.

I am not saying Google and Facebook have no place. Actually, I really like them. They do provide excellent service and help users get information and stay in touch. But when your big, lovable dog nips at the neighborhood kids, it's up to you to do something.

There is always a line that should not be crossed, and users should make sure companies stay on the right side of it -- or leave until they correct their mistake.

If users don't hold a company's feet to the fire, governments will have to step in as a last resort -- and that's something no one really wants.

The problem is that users almost get hypnotized. They love technology -- so they may complain about its abuses, but they don't leave. Step by step, companies cross over more and more, until we are cooked.

Is Google's Nest another example?

A Spy Among Us?

Nest Labs makes smart home technology, and I love the idea. The company started with a smart home thermostat. It watches and learns and then programs itself so your house is comfortably heated or cooled whenever you're there. It also saves you money when you're not there.

Sounds great, right? It makes perfect sense. It lets technology solve problems and improve our lives.

Then what's the problem? Well, all advanced technology starts out that way -- making something about life better.

Nest was acquired by Google in February. Now Nest has announced a new collaboration with Google that may be the beginning of its learning even more about us.

Is it crossing the line yet? To some, the answer is yes. To others, not yet -- but it is right up to the line. The next step may be too far.

Would you want your thermostat learning about you and sharing that information over the Internet with Google or any other company? I can't imagine you'd say yes if you think about the next step, then the next.

Matt Rogers, a cofounder of Nest, said Google will start to connect some of Nest's app data so it knows when users are home, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Does that really sound OK to you? This is just the beginning with Nest. While innovation is key, invasion of privacy should always be guarded against -- and that is what is being ignored.

Rogers says Nest is not becoming part of the greater Google machine.

However, I would say that may be true today, but what about tomorrow? We have always learned the hard way that here are never any guarantees.

Bit by bit, we get cooked.

It's time to recognize that every technological breakthrough is a two-sided coin.

One side is an amazing technology that takes our breath away.

However, the other side takes our privacy away and leaves us as exposed as the naked king in the old Hans Christian Andersen story, The Emperor's New Clothes.

So who is in control? Is it us -- or are we getting cooked, bit by bit?   

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Will-Nest-Get-Too-Nosy-80650.html#sthash.vpsE0cQq.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-aereo-lost-broadcasters-should-not-think-they-won

Jeff Kagan: Aereo Lost, But Broadcasters Should Not Think They Won Either

By Jeff Kagan  

June 25, 2014 1:32PM   

Tickers Mentioned: CMCSA   AAPL    AMZN   NFLX

Aereo Video, Comcast, cable TV losing, Time Warner Cable, Netflix, Broadcast televsionThe idea of a small upstart called Aereo challenging the traditional television and broadcast model was struck down by the Supreme Court. However broadcasters and traditional cable TV companies shouldnít think the battle is over. In fact the battle has just begun, and is already raging.

The customer is now aware of new ideas, innovation and ways to cut costs. Competitors with new ideas are also coming to market. These are threats to the traditional business model we all know so well. Whether they like it or not, things are changing.

The next two questions are what will Aereo do next, and how will traditional TV answer this call?

We donít yet know what the future holds for video-sharing platform Aereo. Do they have a plan B? Will they pay licensing fees, stay in business and grow or will they just close up shop?

Regardless of whether Aereo is a competitor going forward or not, the door is now open and other new ideas and competitors will start coming through, one after the other in a relentless battle for the customer and market share.

Some ideas will be competitive and others will be cooperative. That means companies will start doing business with other companies and competing with those same companies on other fronts.

This makes for a confusing, but rapidly growing and changing marketplace. We have seen this in several other industries over the years. Broadcast television and cable TV is next.

Aereo Defeat Does Not Mean Cable TV is Problem-Free

So whatís the problem with the television broadcast and cable TV model? There are many. These problems came from the way the industry was set up a long time ago. Back then there was not the new technology or competition we see bursting out today. So while there were problems, there was no competition and no threat yesterday.

Prices continue to rise, year after year. Customers pay roughly twice as much this year as they paid ten years ago. The problem comes from the cable television industry, who users are customers of, and the networks and broadcasters who cable TV is a customer of.

The pricing model is broken and the industry keeps finding new ways to raise prices year after year. Thatís fine for customers who donít mind paying more, but many do have a problem.

Unfortunately that segment of the user marketplace keeps getting run over year after year by the runaway television bill.

Thatís one of the sources of customer demand for lower priced services. Innovation is another source. Cable television companies like Comcast (CMCSA) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) , Cox and others never really innovated. They never had to. They had no competition.

However now they are starting to see competition. Now cable TV is losing customers. Now they have to reinvent how they do business. They must improve customer service and customer care. They must improve reliability of their service. They must be innovative with new services so they can compete with the newcomers.

Traditional television and cable TV will both compete with and cooperate with others in the field like Apple (AAPL) TV, Google (GOOG) TV, Amazon.com (AMZN)  TV, Netflix  (NFLX) and countless other smaller, but rapidly growing companies.

The Door is Already Open for Change

The television world is changing. In fact if we look backwards a decade we can see it has changed quite a bit. And if we look forward another decade it will be unrecognizable. Weíll be watching live or taped television on all our devices including television, computer, tablet, smartwatches, screens on our refrigerators, car dashboards and more.

Weíll still have geographic restrictions for some tech like TVís in our homes, but a national ability to watch on our mobile devices. Things continue to change.

This is the fast changing and growing world in which Aereo was a player. Will they still be a player under different rules going forward? Weíll have to wait and see.

Either way however the door is opened and new technology and innovation and competition is coming.

In this new world the traditional businesses like television networks and broadcasters as well as traditional cable television companies face a big threat. These industries will be forced to reinvent themselves just to stay relevant going forward.

Who will be the winners and losers long term are impossible to say today. Letís just keep our eyes open as the ride will be fast and rapidly changing.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          June 25, 2014 1:32PM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-aereo-lost-broadcasters-should-not-think-they-won#sthash.sytmpFEW.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/How-Will-Regulators-Chaperone-the-Big-Merger-Dance-80617.html

ANALYSIS

How Will Regulators Chaperone the Big Merger Dance?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

06/19/14 6:37 AM PT

Whether all the now-pending mergers will be approved depends on how regulators view the big picture. Do they want to keep things as they are, or will they unleash the forces of change and let mergers reinvent their industries as they did 10 years ago? I believe the chances are much stronger today than six months ago that regulators will recognize the growing pains of a changing industry.

 

SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son may have new hope for a Sprint, T-Mobile merger. After SoftBank merged with Sprint last summer, Son set his sights on T-Mobile. There was early resistance from regulators, but that may be softening, with Comcast-Time Warner Cable and AT&T-DirecTV having joined the merger dance.

Trying to understand and predict what regulators will do is always a challenge, and merger activity may influence their decision making. Sometimes only two companies want to merge, while at other times several mergers are in play. The ways regulators decide whether to approve them can be very different.

There's been a recent change in the merger climate. It started with SoftBank wanting to merge with Sprint. Done. Next Sprint wanted to merge with T-Mobile. Pending. Now there are three mergers pending.

Single mergers and multiple mergers often are judged differently by regulators. When multiple mergers are in play, regulators often pull back the camera and look at the industry from a longer-term, historic perspective.

The key question is whether these mergers will transform the industry or just the companies.

Is a Merger Wave Building?

The last time the telecom industry went through this heavy-duty period of mergers and transformation was roughly 10 year ago, with deals like Comcast acquiring AT&T Broadband; SBC acquiring AT&T, BellSouth and Cingular; and Verizon acquiring MCI.

Those deals not only transformed the companies, but also the competitive playing field.

Before then, we had to deal with different companies that competed only in their own sectors -- like local, long distance, wireless, Internet, television and so on.

With the mergers, the companies became larger and began operating in multiple sectors, so we could get all or most of our services from one company and say goodbye to the rest. Although companies competed in multiple sectors, they still did not compete nationwide.

I think that kind of transformation is what we are starting to see. Mark my words, if these mergers are approved, I expect to see many more in the very near future.

More Competition Benefits Consumers

The industry is entering a transformative period. As companies expand, they can offer more services to a larger region. Regional companies will remain regional, but their regions will expand.

Comcast, for example, will be able to market in Time Warner Cable's region but not nationally. With DirecTV, AT&T will be able to market television nationally, but not its landline business.

As companies merge, they will become more national in scope, and more companies will start to compete. Companies that never competed before will go head to head. That's good for the consumer.

Everything changes. Think back 10 years ago. Local telephone companies did not compete with cable television companies. Now they do.

That's why I think regulators will say yes to an AT&T-DirecTV merger. It will allow AT&T to compete with the cable television industry outside its region, on a more national scale. Since it is not in the same business, the marketplace won't lose anything. DirecTV growth down the road would be limited without AT&T.

A Sprint-T-Mobile merger looks more likely today than it did last year. A combined Sprint and T-Mobile would still be No. 3, but it would be much closer in size to both AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless.

Comcast and Time Warner Cable may be the hardest to predict, since their merger would let Comcast grow to be the largest cable television company in the country. We'll have to wait and see what happens next with that one.

Regulators generally don't have a problem with one company expanding its region, but they may have a problem with one company controlling so much of the market.

Take a New Tack or Stay the Course?

If these mergers are approved, I think we will see others -- like Verizon or CenturyLink -- jump into the merger game as well. They are very similar to AT&T, and all companies need to continue to grow to keep shareholders happy.

Whether all of these mergers will be approved is still the question. I believe the chances are much better with multiple mergers on the table compared to just one.

However, it depends on how the regulators look at the marketplace. Do they want to try to keep things as they are, or will they unleash the forces and let them reinvent their industries as they did 10 years ago?

I believe the chances are much stronger today than six months ago that regulators will look at the bigger picture and recognize the growing pains of a changing industry.

If that's the case, I think all these mergers will be approved. However, we'll just have to wait and see what happens next. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80617.html#sthash.Ky3spxJC.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-will-amazon-com-fire-phone-be-a-success

Jeff Kagan: Will Amazon.com Fire Phone Be a Success?

By Jeff Kagan

June 19, 2014 6:30AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AMZN  T   NOK

Amazon.com (AMZN)  announced they are getting into the smartphone business with their new Fire Phone. This is big news for Amazon.com, AT&T Mobility (T)  as the exclusive carrier, and the wireless marketplace as a whole. However after the excitement of the announcement passes, the single question we all have is simple. Will the Fire Phone be a success?

Let me first answer the question, then explain why.

Itís important to note that this Fire Phone does not have to win the competitive battle with the Apple iPhone or Samsung Galaxy. Thatís not its purpose. Its purpose is simply to give customers more ways to buy stuff from Amazon.com, like the Kindle does.

So even if the Fire Phone only sells a fraction of what Apple and Samsung sells, it can still be very successful for Amazon.com. The reason is they use it, like the Kindle, to get customers to buy more stuff on Amazon.com. Period.

Looking at it through that point of view you can see how successful they really can be without having to sell a gazillion devices. Of course if they could sell a gazillion devices they would not complain.

Amazon is successful with their Kindle tablet, which they have sold tens of millions of devices over the last several years. That does not mean they have tens of millions of separate customers, since customers will typically upgrade devices over time. However itís still a big number.

Fire Phone Will Succeed Where Facebook's Didn't

A percentage of the Kindle users will be interested in seeing and trying this Fire Phone. Thatís why I think Amazon.com will be more successful than the Facebook smartphone flop from last summer.

However there are no guarantees. I have not seen or used this Amazon.com Fire Phone yet so I canít offer any insights yet. I will after I get one to use.

Success in smartphones is much different than success with tablets. So just because you are a success with one does not mean you will be a success with the other.

You have to effectively market smartphones. Smartphones are a very hot device. They are the center of the universe for users and carriers. However they are also one of the most hotly marketed and advertised devices we have ever seen. Success means you understand what your customers want and give it to them.

AT&T Mobility will be the exclusive provider of wireless service for the Fire Phone. This is good news because they have quite a bit of experience with these kind of launches. Remember, AT&T Mobility was the exclusive provider for the Apple iPhone for three years. And they havenít lost their customers since that time.

Of course they were also the exclusive provider for the Facebook smartphone flop, but that was Facebookís fault. It was a boring device that could not connect with users.

There are many smartphone makers, but there are only really two big success stories in mobile, Apple (AAPL)  and Samsung. The others are a very small slice of the pie, even Microsoft (MSFT) with Nokia (NOK)  which is number three.

Amazon Phone Looks to Reward Loyal Customers

So with this high level of competition in smartphones, why do I think Amazon.com could be successful with their new Fire Phone? Two reasons. One, they already have experience with devices like their Kindle. Two, they donít have to score as big a hit as Apple, Google, or Samsung with their devices to be successful.

In fact Amazon.com is not getting into the smartphone business to do better than Apple and Google. They are simply getting into the smartphone business to sell more of their online stuff. Thatís the point of the button to call up Amazon.com on screen.

Itís not about numbers of customers. Itís all about loyalty for Amazon.com. Itís all about Prime. Itís all about keeping customers happy and getting them to spend more money on Amazon.com.

So as exciting as this smartphone sounds, it is less about the device and more about another technology to let customers shop on Amazon.com.

Amazon says they have tens of millions of Prime customers. They say they have tens of millions of Kindle customers. Those are the customers they want to get a Fire Phone. They want to cement the relationship.

Amazon.com has a universe of customers they can sell this device to. The next question is can they sell more to expand their universe? Weíll see.

CEO Jeff Bezos doesnít have to worry about competing with Apple and Samsung. He just has to give the customer another channel to shop on Amazon.com. And thatís exactly what this Fire Phone will do.

So will the Fire Phone be a success? Donít know yet. Weíll have to wait and see. However looking at it from this perspective, I think the chances are strong it will indeed be.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          June 19, 2014 6:30AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-will-amazon-com-fire-phone-be-a-success#sthash.GkxEO4M1.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Apples-Crucial-Marketing-Challenge-80580.html

ANALYSIS

Apple's Crucial Marketing Challenge

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

06/12/14 6:50 AM PT

What's the difference between Apple and BlackBerry? Well, Apple users are fiercely loyal. They are addicted to the devices and technology. They can't wait to see the new devices and updates as soon as they come out. Wait, that sounds just like BlackBerry -- and that's my point. Why did BlackBerry fail? Why did it lose vast numbers of customers? Why is it a shadow of its former self today?

 

Apple grew from a small Microsoft competitor in the 1990s, to the tech giant of the 2000s. However, since Steve Jobs' passing a few short years ago, Apple has changed. At the same time, the industry has changed. Today, Google and Samsung offer strong competition. Apple now has to do something it never had to do before: market.

Let's roll the camera back for a minute. This sounds familiar -- like the same problem BlackBerry started having when the iPhone was born. I warned BlackBerry of the coming disaster, but its leaders thought I was crazy. If only they had listened.

This is actually similar to the way Barnes & Noble and Borders gobbled up the small booksellers in the 1990s. Remember the movie, You've Got Mail with Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan? That played out this business story on the silver screen.

Today, however, Barnes & Noble is struggling, and Borders is closed. Today, Amazon is king of the booksellers.

That's the story of the wave. A wave always rises, crests, then falls. Always. Waves of change are often larger and longer than we think -- but don't be fooled. They always have a life span.

Revving the Growth Engine

BlackBerry was different right? But think about it -- how different was it? Its customers absolutely loved its devices and technology. The customer relationship was beyond words. Customers were BlackBerry addicts. Remember the Crackberry.com website for avid BB users?

All this was before the recent smartphone revolution. All this was before the first iPhone was even a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye. Remember, this smartphone revolution is only a few short years old. That's it.

There were so many stories from so many different angles. BlackBerry was forever, we once thought. Yes, the addictive and seemingly unbreakable relationship that BlackBerry customers had was incredibly strong -- and it stayed that way until everything suddenly changed.

So what's the difference between Apple and BlackBerry? Well, Apple users are fiercely loyal. They are addicted to the devices and technology. They can't wait to see the new devices and updates as soon as they come out.

Wait, that sounds just like BlackBerry -- and that's my point.

Why did BlackBerry fail? Why did it lose vast numbers of customers? Why is it a shadow of its former self today?

Most importantly, what can Apple learn from BlackBerry? How can Apple avoid the BlackBerry pit? Coincidentally, they are both named after a fruit, and every fruit has a lifespan.

If I were having lunch with Apple CEO Tim Cook, I would simply tell him that he and all Apple execs must learn how to use marketing in order to see Apple continue to grow.

It's all about marketing. Period. It's actually more than ordinary or traditional marketing, though. You must get under the skin of the typical Apple user, investor, worker, competitor and partner -- just the way you always did over the last 10 years.

However, during the last 10 years you never really had to worry about marketing, did you? Good things just seemed to happen. Good for you, Apple -- but it's over. Get over it.

Now you have to change. You must quickly become an excellent marketer. Can you do this? It's not easy, but it's the crucial part of the puzzle.

Apple grew incredibly fast and large over a short period of time -- basically, since the iPod, iPhone and iPad changed each space. That was under Steve Jobs' reign.

Under Tim Cook's reign, there have been no earthshaking new product launches. Apple has done nothing to transform another industry or segment.

It has not used marketing well to retain and grow its position. That's the problem.

GE or BlackBerry?

When Jack Welch took the helm as CEO of General Electric, he transformed the company. Any business GE could not lead as No. 1 or No. 2, it exited. Period.

That was just one of the things that created an incredibly strong company in GE going forward.

Apple does not have forever to jump-start its growth engine once again. The longer it waits, the closer it gets to the BlackBerry moment.

Apple still has plenty of time to repair and start to grow and change a new or different industry segment, just like the good old days.

The big question is, will it? And if so, when?

BlackBerry lost its way because it never had to worry about marketing. However, that was wrong. It did have to be concerned about it -- the company's leaders just didn't know it yet.

Now Apple faces the same choice and challenge. Apple never really had to market before. It grew and was wildly successful without marketing. However, that was back in the growth days under Steve Jobs.

Now, under Tim Cook, Apple needs to restart its growth engine. It needs to focus on marketing -- that means advertising, public relations, media relations, analyst relations and all the other customer touchpoints.

I have worked with and watched many different companies over the last 30 years. Some are still around, strong as ever and growing. However, most are gone. They either have been acquired or, sadly, disappeared over time.

I hope Apple not only survives, but can start another growth wave. It is still one of the strongest companies, and it still has time. It is in an innovative space and has customers who love it.

However, it doesn't have forever. It needs to adapt and change -- like GE and IBM -- and not deny and follow the wrong path of a BlackBerry or a Palm.

Don't laugh. Nobody thought they would implode either -- yet they did.

It's time Apple had its GE moment. It's time Tim Cook had his Jack Welch moment. It's not too late -- not yet, anyway. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Apples-Crucial-Marketing-Challenge-80580.html#sthash.rQHSQBcB.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-netflix-says-verizon-slowest-of-all-isps

Jeff Kagan: Netflix Says Verizon Slowest of All ISPs

By Jeff Kagan

June 10, 2014 6:01AM   

Tickers Mentioned: NFLX  CMCSA  T  VZ

Now, now boysÖ calm down. Netflix (NFLX)  is complaining about how slow Verizon Internet speeds are. How it takes their customers so long to download movies and TV shows. In response, Verizon (VZ)  sent a cease-and-desist letter to Netflix. They apparently donít like when their weaknesses are pointed out. You canít blame them, but how far will this blood fest go before both companies realize they are hurting their own brand and just fix this problem?

Netflix Publicly Shaming Verizon, Hurts Both

Netflix works with many of the major Internet competitors like cable television companies and telephone companies, nationwide. They do this because this is how they deliver their programming to customers.

So apparently Netflix is a good judge of speeds between companies who offer Internet services. They say Verizon is slow. Granted, this perception is not good for Verizon, their brand or their image in the marketplace. This is harmful, but whose fault is it?

Perhaps Netflix wants to embarrass Verizon so they will speed things up. Or perhaps Netflix simply wants to let their customers know the frustrating delay is not their fault.

Whatever the reason, the customer is being hurt. That means the brand is being hurt. Both brands actually.

If the customer doesnít get fast Netflix service, whether itís because of Netflix or Verizon, the customer is dissatisfied. Thatís what needs to be fixed, quickly. Customers have very little patience today. Delay means both companies get hurt.

Result of Netflix Transition from Mail to Internet

This was never a problem until recently. Netflix used to be a smaller company competing with Blockbuster and Hollywood Video rental business, except they mailed videos to customers. The marketplace continues to change and the video rental marketplace has changed. Netflix won. Retail competitors disappeared.

At the same time Netflix has grown and changed as well. They are becoming a much larger and much different kind of company. They are creating their own content and shows.

Today Netflix delivers content over the Internet. And they use whatever connection the customer contracts for. So Netflix has suddenly found a fountain of youth. They can send tons of movies and television shows over the Internet, and not have to pay the US Postal Service to mail their DVDs any longer.

This is great for Netflix, but terrible for ISPs. This is the wave of the future, but at the same time this also changes the economics of the industry. And that is something that Netflix is fighting. Netflix wants things both ways.

Netflix Consumes Vast Majority of Bandwidth

As popular and successful as Netflix is, there is the other side of the coin. Netflix is responsible for roughly one-third of all downloads on the Internet every night. Thatís an incredible amount of data as they ship movies and TV shows over the net. This is more than any other single company by a long shot.

So there are two parts of the puzzle. One is Netflix, and the other is the Internet Service Provider or ISP. These are often telephone companies like Verizon, AT&T (T)  and CenturyLink (CTL)  and cable television companies like Comcast (CMCSA) , Time Warner Cable (TWC)  and Cox.

These ISPs must continue to invest in their networks so all their customers get fast Internet. Something that is threatened by Netflix dominance. Netflix can suck a network dry if not paid attention to.

If Netflix continues to try and squeeze as much out of each ISP without being a partner and helping with the investment, they will eventually pay the price. Just like the problem they are having with Verizon.

The way each ISP runs its business is different. However Netflix should be a partner with each since they use the vast majority of their bandwidth every night.

Netflix is a different kind of company, which uses more bandwidth than any other company. So the rules must be different for a company like this.

Netflix: Grow Up

However, Netflix does not seem to get that point, and thatís the problem.

So come on Netflix, grow up. You have customers and investors and workers who will all be hurt if you donít solve this problem and simply keep pointing fingers at each other.

And come on Verizon as well. Fighting this out with legal threats is not the answer. If you both continue down this path you will hurt your own brand in the marketplace and that is worse than this spat.

Long after this spat is over and done with the damage to the brand will last. Is that what you really want?

Itís past time for Netflix to financially and structurally work with every company that helps them deliver service to their customers. These should all be partners, not adversaries.

Come on you two, play fair. Everyone is counting on you. And everyone is watching.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          June 10, 2014 6:01AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-netflix-says-verizon-slowest-of-all-isps#sthash.ygdN8LHn.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/EU-Smacks-Google-Upside-the-Head-Over-Right-to-Be-Forgotten-80552.html

ANALYSIS

EU Smacks Google Upside the Head Over Right to Be Forgotten

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

06/05/14 5:00 AM PT

I would love to be able to feel sorry for Google; however this suffering is self-inflicted. If it didn't cross the personal privacy line, and if it respected the rights of users worldwide, then it wouldn't be faced with this big problem. Don't worry, though. This is not the end of the line for Google. This issue will play itself out over the coming quarters, and other countries likely will jump in as well.

 

I think the European Union often goes overboard, and I typically don't agree with its rulings. However, when the EU declared Google invaded privacy, it seemed to have struck a nerve. Countless users worldwide agreed. So, what impact will the EU have on Google with respect to a citizen's right to be forgotten?

This struggle is all about protecting privacy online. It's about residents of the European Union being able to request that Google exclude links to certain information about them from its search results.

Wouldn't you love to be protected like that? The EU just slapped Google down for not respecting the privacy and personal information of users and companies.

That Wiggly Line

True, Google does not create information. It only points to content published on other sites. While many users don't mind, many other users do -- and that is the crux of the problem. Google did not respect the concerns of users who wanted to be more private.

I can't say I disagree with the EU. To set the record straight, I love Google. I love its innovation and creativity. It has rewarded investors and users worldwide, and it continues to push the envelope.

That does not mean Google is perfect. There are areas where the company crosses the line and goes too far.

Invasion of privacy is one of those areas. Google has the attitude that all information should be easily findable. Plenty of users agree with that take. However, plenty others don't -- and Google does not seem to care about that sector.

People are different. Some like one thing, others do not. So companies always have worked hard to attempt to please everyone. That provides them with the biggest market to sell to.

Google doesn't play by those rules, though. It wants to find and make available all information with just a few clicks on a keyboard. That crosses the line of personal information and privacy for many users.

Not everyone wants everything out in the open. People are different. There are always people who are completely open about everything in their private lives. However there are also plenty of people who don't want to share anything.

Both are right -- neither is wrong, and this is the line Google crosses. It doesn't respect the position of the people who want to keep their personal and private information private.

Google Brought This On

Typically the EU is overprotective and tends to tie the hands of companies that would rather be innovating. However Google is one of those companies, and people both love and hate it.

I would like Google to keep growing and innovating and transforming industries. However I would also like Google to respect the privacy of those who want it.

What's next? Google has to work on developing a way to automate the process of eliminating certain links and information at users request. Toward that end, it just launched a request form on its Right to be Forgotten Web page.

However, this also opens all sorts of new doors and raises plenty of questions.

I would love to be able to feel sorry for Google; however this suffering is self-inflicted. If it didn't cross the personal privacy line, and if it respected the rights of users worldwide, then it wouldn't be faced with this big problem.

Don't worry, though. This is not the end of the line for Google. This issue will play itself out over the coming quarters, and other countries likely will jump in as well.

Although this won't kill Google, the problem could grow and become a much bigger thorn in Google's side. That would not be good. Google is too valuable and too important. We want Google. We need Google.

That said, we want Google to play by the rules when it involves personal and private information of people and companies. That is the fair thing to do. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/EU-Smacks-Google-Upside-the-Head-Over-Right-to-Be-Forgotten-80552.html#sthash.IsC3coHS.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-what-s-special-about-samsung-curved-tv

Jeff Kagan: Whatís Special About Samsung Curved TV?

By Jeff Kagan   

June 5, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: BBY

I remember when Samsung (SECL) introduced their new curved display, big-screen TV. It sounded new and innovative and exciting. However as time passed and the more I thought about it, the more confused I got. Whatís the point of this curved screen anyway? What does it do that our flat screen TVís donít do, and will it be successful?

Now donít get me wrong. I like Samsung. I think they are one of the most innovative and rapidly growing industry leaders in several different industries. They hit home runs more often than Willie Mays.

But with all that behind them, I just donít get whatís the big deal behind a curved screen TV. Will customers and investors like this? Will it be successful?

Curved Screen TV vs. Flat Screen TV

I visited Best Buy (BBY) , several times in fact, and talked with assorted sales reps. I wanted to check out the new devices. They are great, high performance, high quality TVs. Iíll give them that. However whatís the point behind the curved screen?

There were several different curved screen TVís sitting right next to regular big screen TVís. The picture was the same and the quality was the same. They both looked gorgeous.

In fact a salesperson told me the two I was comparing at the time were the same television. So, I said, these are the same TVs except for the curved or flat screen? The answer was simply yes.

I simply said, ďI donít get itĒ. Why then would people spend more to buy the same television set, and one that is more delicate? They couldnít answer me.

Curved screens are more expensive. Curve screens are more delicate. However, after all is said and done, curved screens may be a big hit. Just know that from what I could see, curved screens donít do anything special compared to flat screens.

Luxury vs. Everyday Purchase

So whatís the point? Ah, the question no one is asking. Is this all about marketing and positioning? Perhaps.

Maybe itís like the difference between buying a Chevy and a Cadillac. I donít know for sure. Every person I have asked simply has no answer to what makes a curved screen different or better or worse than a regular flat screen TV.

Both Chevies and Caddies drive, but there is a difference, right? Maybe itís the same here. Maybe curved screen TVís donít do anything special. Maybe itís just that curved screen TVís are more expensive and can be a bragging purchase. The way some people buy a Rolex watch and others buy a Timex.

However, letís imagine what the future holds for these curved screen TVís. Is it about more than just high priced bragging rights? There has to be some innovation that we are not aware of yet. Doesnít there?

Perhaps Samsung has something up their sleeves down the road. Perhaps they are simply paving the road before they start rolling out more advancement available only on this curved screen TV.

You know, like good ole Doc Brown on ďBack to the FutureĒ said, ďRoads, where weíre going we donít need roadsĒ.

However, for today, we still need roads. And in this world there really doesnít seem to be any advantage of a curved screen versus flat screen TV. So for now I guess all we have to focus on are bragging rights for those who want to pay the extra dough.

The curved screen TV from Samsung is an incredibly good quality picture with all your favorite features. In fact itís the same as some of their most popular flat screen TVs, just more expensive.

Vertu vs. Samsung Galaxy S4 Smartphone

There are companies that develop luxury versions of every day devices. Consider Vertu who makes smartphones at close to ten thousand dollars and up. I donít think these devices do anything more than a standard Samsung Galaxy S5 handset, but itís made of luxury fittings and has a luxury price tag too.

So whichever you choose, keep your eyes on Samsung and other TV makers to see if this curved screen world is a big success or a big flop. Stay tuned.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          June 5, 2014 6:00AM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-what-s-special-about-samsung-curved-tv#sthash.fYifnJYU.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80520.html

ANALYSIS

Destination Cloud: Are We There Yet?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

05/29/14 6:50 AM PT

The cloud may seem confusing, but as we become more comfortable with it, it will make more sense. The good news is, you don't have to jump in yet. Those who want to already are experiencing both the wonder and the problems. The cloud will only get better as time passes. Most are still holding back, but mark my words, you will be a cloud customer some day. In fact, you may already be one.

 

There is growing interest in the cloud. It sounds absolutely perfect for both consumers and businesses. Some are jumping in -- so why isn't everyone? There are many pros and cons. Many use it successfully to build and manage their growing business, but many others fall victim to problems.

What, exactly, is the cloud? That's the first problem. "The cloud" is a general term that means many different things. The cloud actually has been around for years.

Back up your computer to Carbonite or Mozy? You use the cloud. Store e-books on Amazon? You use the cloud. There are countless other examples. The cloud is growing -- and we are using it, although we may not even realize it.

Today, people use the cloud as their hard drive. Instead of storing data to the hard drive of a device, they store it to their cloud account. You can set up a cloud account with a variety of different providers including Apple, Google, Amazon and many others.

Security and Reliability

The cloud is online. That means you need to have a live Internet connection to store and retrieve your info. No connection, no access to data -- that's one problem.

On the other hand, you can choose a cloud service that lets you save your information to your device, but then regularly backs it up whenever you're online.

That's what services like Apple's iCloud do. You can start something on your laptop, for example, and then later resume working on it on your tablet or smartphone.

This sounds great, but there is another problem: security. When you store your information on someone else's server, how secure is it? All cloud services are not created equal. Some are very secure, while others are pretty much wide open.

Even the very secure sites have problems. You may remember stories about problems that large, respected companies have had with their cloud business over the last couple of years. There are other cloud services experiencing worse issues, seemingly on a regular basis.

So, outages and security are two big areas of concern, whether the cloud user is an individual consumer, a small business with a dozen users, or a large business with tens of thousands of users.

Although the cloud has been around for at least a couple of decades, the way we are using it today -- as a virtual hard drive for individuals or companies -- is brand new.

Any time we are talking about anything brand new in the tech world, it can be both innovative and wonderful, but it often is like Swiss cheese -- full of security and reliability holes.

Early adopters take the arrows. They get the benefits of new technology, but they must deal with all the problems as well.

That's where we are today -- we are still in the time of early cloud adopters. The companies that are using the cloud typically are the first to jump into everything.

Over time, the next wave jumps in and then the next. As the months, quarters and years pass, we identify weak links and strengthen them. That means for everything -- like staying online and staying secure.

I have heard that many companies that use the cloud today actually use several different cloud services and technologies. They know things can go wrong, so they are hedging their bets.

This is exactly what happens with every good, new technology as it goes through the wringer. Over time, it gets better, more secure -- and less expensive.

Early Adoption vs. Wait and See

So what kind of customer are you? Whether you are an individual or a company, are you an early adopter willing to take the arrows, or are you more conservative -- preferring to wait a while before jumping in?

We all own and use many different devices, such as desktop computers, laptops, tablets and smartphones. We like to have access to our files no matter which device we're using -- and that's true even if we are using a computer that is not ours for a one-time purpose.

Most of us, whether individuals or companies, still store our information the good old-fashioned way -- on our devices. Then we can sync with our company servers.

Some cloud services are open to the public, and some are owned and operated by individual companies for their use. When you own and operate your own cloud, it sounds perfect and private -- but it's up to you to make sure it's always on and always secure. That's a large commitment of manpower and money.

There's a growing number of cloud services available to store your information -- like Apple's iCloud, the Microsoft Cloud or Amazon Cloud Drive. Or you can buy an inexpensive Chromebook that stores data to Google's Cloud rather than on the laptop, a clever new idea.

Going forward, the meaning of the term "cloud" likely will expand to encompass more things from more companies, solving more problems.

Ready or not, we have to get up to speed on what different cloud services can do for us.

Every cloud service is not created equal. This new area will be confusing in the early years, but as we become more comfortable with it, it will make more sense.

The good news is that you don't have to jump in yet. Those who want to already are doing so and experiencing both the wonder and the problems. The cloud will only get better as time passes.

Most still are not using the cloud yet -- but mark my words, you will be a cloud customer some day. In fact, you may already be one.

Do you use iCloud to back up your iPhone, iPad or MacBook? Do you use a Kindle or a Google Chromebook?

They, and many others, are examples of the cloud. You may already be in the cloud and not even know it. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80520.html#sthash.INPAJ5yE.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-hedge-funds-and-investors-want-to-know-what-s-next

Jeff Kagan: Hedge Funds and Investors Want to Know Whatís Next

By    Jeff Kagan   

May 28, 2014 1:37PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T  CMCSA  TWC

My phone has been ringing off the hook lately. Assorted investors, investment companies and hedge funds are looking to better understand the changing telecom, wireless, television and Internet marketplace. They are not looking for investment advice, which I donít give, but they are looking to better understand the changes that are occurring.

Letís take a quick look at how these different industry segments are changing and the opportunities and risks they present for workers, customers, competitors and of course, investors.

From Competition to Mergers and Acquisitions

Twenty years ago, in the 90s, there were a variety of competitors in each of these spaces. They were smaller companies and didnít compete outside their region or specific product mix.

Ten years ago, in the 2000s, the companies had changed. There was a wave of M&A activity and the result was fewer and larger companies that competed more nationally and in more segments. Example: the Baby Bells didnít just sell telephone, they also sold high speed Internet, and wireless services.

During the 2010ís we are going through another wave of change, which will transform the industry once again. We will end up with even fewer and larger companies, competing even more nationally and in more segments.

Taking the example one step further, there are fewer Baby Bells, they are even larger, they offer more services in a bigger geographic footprint. Now they are even selling television and competing against new companies like the cable TV industry and Internet based competitors for voice and data services.

Next Wave: The Biggest Companies Head-to-Head

Now we see the next wave starting. More consolidation. This will mean fewer actual companies, but it will allow more of them to compete more nationally for the first time.

Consider AT&T (T)  as the most recent example. They want to acquire DirecTV. The reason is they will be able to compete for television on a national scale and not just in their region of the country. This will give them a much bigger growth opportunity. That means they will be able to compete against companies like Comcast (CMCSA) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) , Cox and more.

A few months ago Comcast said they wanted to acquire Time Warner Cable for similar reasons. Size. And a few months before that Sprint said they want to merge with T-Mobile for similar reasons. Size.

They say size will let them compete much more effectively. This is what regulators are wrestling with right now.

The reason all these companies are changing and expanding is simple, growth for the investor. They need to keep growing to keep the investor happy.

How Will this Affect the Intersection of Investor and Consumer Needs?

Investors are only concerned with one thing. Profits. Consumers are concerned with a different thing. Good quality, and innovative and affordable service.

So expect this wonderful world of wireless and telephone and Internet and television to continue to grow and change over time. Companies need to continue to grow. Itís like taking their next breath. That means they will continue to merge and eventually become national competitors.

I cannot predict which of these mergers will be a grand slam home run, and which will be strikeouts if any. What I can say is this is the next step in the evolution of these industry segments and because of that regulators will likely approve some or all of them.

Investors will love this because the company and their investments should continue to grow.

Consumers will love this as well. As these companies become more national in scope, they will compete more intensely. In that world, increased competition should mean prices should come down and innovation should go up.

And after all, as a consumer, wouldnít you prefer it each year not to get your notice that your cable television prices are going up again, year after year. We can only hope.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          May 28, 2014 1:37PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-hedge-funds-and-investors-want-to-know-what-s-next#sthash.5E8wNYRJ.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-Catches-a-Wave-80492.html

ANALYSIS

AT&T Catches a Wave

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

05/22/14 6:36 AM PT

Mergers do put pressure on the existing framework. While that is a challenge to traditional competitors, it is also a good thing. That pressure typically results in better quality, happier customers, lower prices and more competition. The companies under the most pressure going forward seems to be the cable television companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox.

 

Change is good. Industry consolidation seems to come in waves, and the next wave seems to be starting. Together, AT&T and DirecTV will be a strong new competitor in the pay-television space. That's great. Unless traditional cable-TV companies get their act together, this merger could be another nail in their coffin.

This is a busy time in the industry. If we pull the camera back and take a longer-term look, however, we see a much clearer picture. In the 1990s, cable television companies, telephone companies and wireless companies were smaller, and they competed in different sectors. There were many companies, and they all had different footprints. Competition among them was not robust at the time.

Then, in the mid-2000s, we saw a wave of consolidation begin when Comcast acquired AT&T Broadband and went from being one of the smallest cable television companies to becoming one of the largest -- even bigger than Time Warner Cable.

We saw other mergers -- like SBC, a small local phone company from San Antonio, Texas, acquiring AT&T, Bellsouth and Cingular. It grew from one of the smallest to the largest on the telephone side, almost overnight. There were several other mergers of small and large players that reshaped the industry.

The Heat Is On

This time around, the wave began with last year's acquisition of Sprint by Softbank. Next, Softbank would like to merge Sprint with T-Mobile. Then came the Comcast, Time Warner Cable deal. Now AT&T is merging with DirecTV -- and more are coming.

Which companies will merge is the question? Another question is will all of these mergers be approved? We don't know yet. However, typically when there is this kind of wave, approvals are given, if for no other reason than to level the playing field.

The question is always whether a particular deal will be good for the marketplace, customers, investors, prices, innovation and so on. That's what the regulators will be mulling over the next year.

Mergers do put pressure on the existing framework. While that is a challenge to traditional competitors, it is also a good thing. That pressure typically results in better quality, happier customers, lower prices and more competition.

The companies under the most pressure going forward seems to be the cable television companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox.

The latest American Customer Satisfaction Index, released earlier this week, shows that in the customer service area, the cable television industry's performance is pretty darn bad.

Companies like Comcast and Time Warner Cable are improving, but they still have a very long way to go in order to make customers happy.

That means this AT&T-DirecTV merger could put significant pressure on the traditional cable television industry. While the companies might not like it, customers will.

A National Platform

One of the main reasons for this merger is to keep investors happy. It will be another growth engine, which will keep stock prices high. That's all investors care about -- and this, in fact, is one of the main reasons any merger is undertaken. Growth keeps investors happy.

This will be a real growth opportunity for AT&T. DirecTV is a satellite television company, but it has no real broadband operation, so it can't compete moving forward into a broadband-centric world.

AT&T has broadband and is a successful marketer of a variety of different service platforms. It already sells U-verse television, which is IPTV. In the markets where it competes with traditional cable television, it is very strong. In the Dallas area, for example, AT&T U-verse has captured roughly 50 percent of the market.

I hope that is what we can expect going forward with DirecTV in many more markets nationwide.

The problem is that U-verse is not available to all AT&T customers. DirecTV may be. DirecTV will open up a national marketplace to AT&T, which is a huge growth opportunity.

I expect to see DirecTV's traditional service continue for those who want it. However, I also expect to see AT&T supercharge its service offerings with DirecTV as part of a bundle for those who want more.

Customers like to buy in bundles -- deal with one company and pay one bill. DirecTV will help AT&T build its bundle and make it even more attractive to customers.

The race is not over, however. This merger will help AT&T compete on a national scale in some service areas. However AT&T -- and in fact, all telephone companies like Verizon and CenturyLink, and all cable television companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox -- are still not national companies.

So I expect to see more mergers and more waves of change in coming years. The industry looks very different today than it did 10 years ago, and it will look just as different 10 years from now. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-Catches-a-Wave-80492.html#sthash.6d20Qe90.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-next-wave-in-mergers-and-acquisitions-has-begun

Jeff Kagan: Next Wave in Mergers and Acquisitions Has Begun

By Jeff Kagan 

May 22, 2014 7:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: S  CMCSA  TWC  T  DTV  CTL  WIN

The next merger, acquisition and consolidation wave looks like it is beginning once again in telephone, television and wireless. The industry and its different segments will all grow and change once again. This is the next step toward moving to a national scale. If you pull the camera back you will see this has happened before.

This time it may have started with last yearís deal between Sprint Softbank. At that time we were not thinking the next acquisition wave was beginning. We just thought Softbank was jumping into the US marketplace and Sprint (S)  was rebuilding their networks. We just thought it was a Sprint and Softbank story.

However since then the waters have been starting to churn. Now Sprint and T-Mobile want to merge. Comcast (CMCSA)  and Time Warner Cable (TWC)  want to merge. And finally, AT&T (T)  and DirecTV (DTV)  are set to join forces as well.

To tell you the truth, I think this is just the beginning of this new wave. We appear to be entering the next wave of mergers and acquisitions.

That means I expect to see more mergers being brought to the table. And there are still plenty of other companies who want or need to grow, and acquisitions are one key way to make that happen.

The Acquisition Wave is Just Beginning

I think the more of these mergers and acquisitions that are announced, the more likely they will all or mostly all, be approved.

Single mergers are looked at on an individual basis. However with groups of mergers like we see building today, regulators must look longer-term and at the changing marketplace. They wonít let one competitor have a giant edge over others. They try and keep everyone of similar size and scope.

Thatís why I think approvals are more likely the more mergers are brought to the table. However they will all take time and require companies to jump through hoops.

Mergers donít seem to happen all the time. However when they do happen, it seems there are quite a few that happen. Itís like a wave. It grows, crests, and then falls over a few short years. Then things calm down for a few years before the next wave starts.

The last wave may have been roughly ten years ago. Prior to that there were many more, smaller companies competing in different geographic sectors.

SBC was the smallest Baby Bell headquartered in San Antonio Texas. They acquired AT&T, Bellsouth and Cingular within a couple short years. They then took the name AT&T, and reinvented themselves. They became the largest competitor in their space. Others Bells merged as well.

Time Warner Cable was the largest cable television company and Comcast was one of the little competitors. Then Comcast acquired AT&T Broadband, which was the largest in the United States. That turned Comcast into the largest cable television company in the country.

So both SBC and Comcast went from being among the smallest competitors to the largest in their segments. They did not really compete at that time however. They were both starting to roll out their high-speed Internet, but there was no fierce competition.

Companies Joining Forces to Get the Competitive Edge

Over the last decade they have started to compete fiercely. The marketplace is changing. However these wire line competitors are still regional so mergers make them more national in scope as well as bigger. And national in scope is the goal of every company.

Companies like AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox operate a wire line network, which is limited by region. They are not national. Mergers will help them move closer to national.

Competition on the wireless side of the house is national. AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless (VZ)  do compete nationally with other wireless carriers like Sprint, T-Mobile, US Cellular and C Spire Wireless.

This is the direction I see all competitors moving in. We will eventually end up with huge, national providers, and many smaller and regional providers as well. And both large and small will continue to do strong business with different focuses.

So if we pull the camera back we see that this merger wave happens from time to time. Each wave makes the competitors larger and more national.

And timing is everything. I think we are seeing the stars start to line up once again. The same kind of industry reshaping mergers and acquisitions could be getting ready to happen once again.

There are many reasons companies merge. However one of the primary reasons is to keep investors happy. Investors only care about making money. That means companies must grow. Thatís why these companies are so focused on this acquisition game.

Mergers and acquisitions are one of the fastest ways to grow. With that said, there are plenty more companies like Verizon, CenturyLink (CTL) , Windstream (WIN) , US Cellular and many more who may jump into this game sooner rather than later.

This is a huge new opportunity for the investor. Keep your eyes open.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          May 22, 2014 7:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-next-wave-in-mergers-and-acquisitions-has-begun#sthash.5UQMQlxX.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Pulling-Google-Back-to-the-Right-Side-of-the-Privacy-Line-80458.html

ANALYSIS

Pulling Google Back to the Right Side of the Privacy Line

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

05/15/14 5:13 AM PT

 

Should the EU be focusing on Google as the only problem? No. There are countless sites that Google points to. If Google should be responsible for not violating privacy by pointing to other sites, shouldn't those other sites be responsible for taking down data? Of course. That's where this whole EU argument get's very sticky and much more complicated.

I don't usually agree with the European Union. However, it has demanded that Google help to protect the privacy of citizens rather than exposing everything, and I tend to agree. The latest EU ruling doesn't solve the whole problem, though. In fact, it raises more questions -- but it is a good start.

Remember a few years ago, in the very early days of Google, when we were having the raging debate about how Google was violating privacy? Well, this week's EU court decision is all about privacy.

We have been losing our privacy bit by bit over the last few decades, but Google seems to have upped the ante. Its purpose seems to be to expose everything about everyone. It crosses the line, in many people's opinion.

Restarting the Fire

This was a heated debate a few short years ago, but people have a tendency to get tired of fighting and just give up. If that should happen in this case, Google would win, even though we might not like it. However, this EU decision could rekindle dying embers.

Don't get me wrong, I think Google is a great company and has created many great products -- like its search engine and its Android mobile phone operating system. However, every great company has areas where it may cross the line and go too far.

Google thinks it has the right to do whatever it wants with people's private information -- and that is, very simply, none of its damn business. What gives it the right to impact and affect everyone's lives, without permission? And why is it allowed to get away with it?

This EU decision will be hated by Google and other search engines but loved by end users. If this happens, I can see other countries jumping on the bandwagon as well, creating a very difficult playing field for Google.

Where the Data Lives

This won't hurt Google, but it will feel a pinch. However, it's really Google's own fault since it decided it was OK to breach privacy. So it should be responsible for fixing the problems that resulted because it crossed the line.

That said, I'm afraid just forcing Google to conform to new rules might not be enough.

First of all, there are other search engines. More importantly, Google doesn't create the data -- it just links to it. It is simply a search engine. The problem data exists on other sites that Google just points to.

So should the EU be focusing on Google as the only problem? No. There are countless sites that Google points to. If Google should be responsible for not violating privacy by pointing to other sites, shouldn't those other sites be responsible for taking down data? Of course.

That's where this whole EU argument get's very sticky and much more complicated. It raises some very important questions. If we pull back the camera, we see there are many more layers that need to be addressed.

So good job, EU, but this is only a first step in a much longer journey. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Pulling-Google-Back-to-the-Right-Side-of-the-Privacy-Line-80458.html#sthash.pgDE6arl.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-is-at-t-directv-the-next-big-merger

Jeff Kagan: Is AT&T-DirecTV the Next Big Merger?

By Jeff Kagan 

May 14, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: TWC  T  VZ  CTL  CMCSA

The next wave of mergers and acquisitions is trying to begin once again. First Comcast (CMCSA) and Time Warner Cable. Now it sounds like AT&T (T) and DirecTV may join the party. So will these mergers be approved and what does this next wave mean to the investor and consumer?

First we should pull back the camera and take a look from a longer-term historical perspective. Mergers tend to happen in waves. Then after that wave there is quiet for several years until the next wave starts. We are seeing this next wave try to start once again.

A decade or two ago there were many smaller competitors competing in smaller geographic areas. Then there was a wave of consolidation and those smaller regional players became much larger providers. This next wave will make them even larger and even closer to national.

Is there any reason these mergers should not happen? Not really, as long as there remains competition and available resources like spectrum, we should let companies get larger and stronger. That will mean they will invest more, offer better quality, more innovation and competitive pricing.

This will make their investors happy and thatís an important piece of this puzzle. Keeping consumers happy is a different question. However if a company can do both, a merger is generally a good thing. If it canít, well thatís where some problems arise over time.

We are moving toward a world of larger and national competitors. Itís important to note that size is not the only signal for success. There is still plenty of room for smaller providers to do very well in smaller footprints. There are many smaller firms who are really kicking butt and doing themselves proud.

However, for larger companies to keep their investors happy itís important for them to continue to grow. Thatís one important reason. Another is to have more scale and spend more on innovation.

In fact if these two mergers are approved I see others jumping in as well. Companies like Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL) , Cox ($COX), Windstream, tw Telecom and more.

Will regulators approve is the next question? Generally speaking, mergers are easier under a Republican President. So under a Democratic President it will be more difficult. Not impossible by any stretch, but it will be more difficult.

So thatís why today in 2014, I think more will be required of companies who want to merge. There is less to be concerned about with an AT&T-DirecTV merger than a Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger simply because they are in different businesses.

However, I have a feeling that if one is approved, the other will be as well. Likewise if one is blocked, the other will be as well.

Investor Perspective

Investors generally think these mergers make good sense. They will reward the companies. Turning both AT&T and Comcast into larger and more national companies would be a home run.

Customer Perspective

Generally speaking, the AT&T DirecTV merger would make sense. It would let DirecTV customers see much more innovation. And AT&T would be able to bundle more together making customers happier. Since these are not the same kind of company I donít see any negatives.

Comcast and Time Warner Cable customers may be a different story. Comcast seems to pay more attention to their investors than their customers and that could be a source of friction.

One example is when Comcast upgraded to a digital network and put digital converter boxes on all televisions, they then turned off the analog network quickly. Time Warner Cable also upgraded their technology to digital and put boxes on all televisions, but left their analog signal on.

What that meant was customers who had problems with the digital boxes could just go back to analog on Time Warner Cable and stay happy. Comcast customers did not have that escape hatch.

So customers who have problems with digital boxes, like many do especially in the early days of this transition are taken care of better by Time Warner Cable than they are by Comcast.

Based on this it seems Time Warner Cable cares more for the customer than Comcast does.

With all that said, I think Comcast will have a higher price to pay than AT&T in getting their merger approved. They have already said they would so some. It will be interesting what more regulators will ask.

At this point the chances of winning approval for both mergers are 50Ė50, but I tend to think they will both go one way or the other. If one is approved I think the other will be approved as well.

We just better get used to a world with larger and national providers. However if you donít want to stick with a huge national company full of innovation and loads of television commercials, there are always smaller competitors who take great care of customers just waiting for your business.

As long as we have real, strong, vibrant, competition, where everyone has access to the same spectrum and technology, I think these mergers may indeed be approved.

By Jeff Kagan  May 14, 2014 6:00AM   

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-is-at-t-directv-the-next-big-merger#sthash.iA4vKtTO.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/New-Car-Tech-Smartphones-In-Privacy-Out-80416.html

REVIEW

New Car Tech: Smartphones In, Privacy Out

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

05/08/14 6:39 AM PT

My previous Toyotas always provided live traffic info without a smartphone connection, but the 2014 Highlander seems to require one, at least some of the time. When I drive around my home town, the system seems to work fine with no smartphone connection. However, once I drive outside of the metro area, the live traffic signal and weather data simply disappear. Not good.

While the new 2014 Toyota cars have a lot to love with their advanced technology and navigation, there is also, very surprisingly, something to hate. This tech comes at a high price: loss of privacy. Toyota knows exactly where you are at every moment of every day -- period. Is that what we want?

Don't get me wrong -- I have been a big fan of Toyota for many years. It has always been rock solid and very reliable. Toyota cars are full of modern technology, and they make driving fun.

However, the latest version of its tech often requires a smartphone data plan to work.

There are two problems with this:

ēOne, only half of us have a smartphone. That means many won't be able to use the technology. Also, many smartphone users don't have an unlimited data plan -- so they might be hit with overage charges every month.

ē Two, Toyota knows exactly where we are at all times.

Unanswered Questions

The 2014 models have been rolling out, and I have been driving a brand new Highlander. I have been very happy with the major changes.

This is a powerful, smooth-riding and quiet vehicle, loaded with room for passengers and stuff in a very attractive package, inside and out. The Highlander sits lower -- more like a car. It's easier to get into because it sits on a car frame. The 4Runner is roughly the same size, but it sits higher and is on a truck frame. I really like most features of the Highlander.

Much of this advanced tech comes from Lexus, which is Toyota's luxury brand. Lexus is similar to Mercedes Benz and Cadillac. Lexus does offer more features; however, it costs more as well.

The new technology in the 2014 Toyota Highlander and many other next-gen cars is truly amazing. Some of the new tech is the information on the dashboard. There is a speed limit graphic on the dash, which changes to a new number every time the speed limit on the road changes. Very cool.

The advanced navigation system provides traffic information not only on the main streets and highways, but also on many secondary roads. It also predicts what is coming, so you can see what the traffic will look like in the next hour or so.

Live weather reports are available for many cities around the country, with information from the Weather Channel. You can view a map to check the weather in front of you or anywhere in the country.

The radio and entertainment system lets you replay the last minute or so of what you just heard on the radio, which is helpful. However, the same system accommodates only one CD or DVD. You can watch a movie, so that's a plus.

All this new technology -- and much more -- makes this Toyota a vehicle to die for.

However, this advanced technology doesn't come without a price. There are lots of hiccups and questions that no dealer has been able to answer -- not so far anyway, and I have asked many dealers to date.

That is part of the problem with this new technology. No one at the Toyota dealerships seems to have the answers. This is a problem Toyota needs to fix. It must train its dealers better.

It also should provide a toll free number and website with live chat to answer confused customers' questions.

New technology is great, but it generates tons of simple questions. Answer these questions quickly for your customers, and you continue to build the brand relationship. Confusion will negatively impact that customer relationship.

The Privacy Dilemma

So how does this new navigation system work? While previous versions always worked with live traffic and no smartphone connection, this new version seems to require a smartphone connection, at least some of the time.

When I drive around my home town, the system seems to work fine with no smartphone connection. However, once I drive outside of the metro area, the live traffic signal and weather data simply disappear. Not good. In previous versions, the traffic information never just disappeared from the screen.

When the system seems to work well without a smartphone, I've noticed there is an HD connection indicated on the screen. So maybe the car receives an HD signal from Toyota in certain places, like inside metropolitan areas.

However, as soon as I leave the metro area and lose the HD signal, I lose the ability to receive live traffic and weather.

With my smartphone hooked up, the live traffic and weather reappear, although it takes several minutes. I imagine this will eat up data allowances, so make sure you have an unlimited plan on your smartphone before you jump in.

If you don't have a smartphone, you may not be able to get this live traffic and weather information. Too bad Toyota does not allow you to fall back to the old system in this case.

Another problem is that once you are connected with your smartphone and need to make a call, you must talk over the car speakers. Sound quality is often distorted. You can disconnect your smartphone to make the call, but when you turn the connection back on, it does not always reconnect.

In that case, you are out of luck until you stop and turn the car off and then on again. This same problem exists when you dictate an email or text message, or use a service like Apple's Siri.

So how does Toyota connect to your car? It appears it uses multiple ways. It uses the HD signal in big cities, but in other areas, it uses another technology -- some other wireless network, like AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless or Sprint, or maybe a satellite radio signal like Sirius XM, or maybe a lesser-known wireless network.

There is one big issue that seems to be ignored: invasion of privacy. Remember when I described how the speed limit icon on your display changes as soon as you cross into a different speed zone?

On one hand, this is great. On the other -- how does it know exactly where you are to display new information? Good question. Apparently Toyota knows where we are every minute of every day, period. Is that good? Neither I nor the people I have asked think so.

However, we are losing privacy in all aspects of our lives -- from our smartphones to our cars, so this is just part of our future. What's next?

This new Toyota technology -- and in fact, tech from other carmakers as well -- is rolling out, and it takes your breath away. You'll love what it does for you.

Just remember a piece of advice offered by my grandparents when dealing with the loss-of-privacy issue: Keep your nose clean, and don't drive to or park anywhere you wouldn't want to be seen if your picture should show up on the front page of the local newspaper.  

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/New-Car-Tech-Smartphones-In-Privacy-Out-80416.html#sthash.HFran5lP.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-companies-are-rushing-to-the-cloud

Jeff Kagan: Companies Are Rushing to the Cloud

By Jeff Kagan

May 8, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: GOOG   AMZN    HPQ    MSFT

Youíve heard of the cloud and how it is going to change everything. How it will impact every company, every corporate customer and every consumer over the next several years. So what is the current state of the cloud? Itís changing. Letís take a look.

It started out with lots of small companies competing in the space. Then during the last couple years we have seen some big name companies moving into this space as well. Companies whose well-known brand names get lots of attention. Companies like Google (GOOG) , Amazon.com (AMZN) , Microsoft  (MSFT) , Hewlett Packard (HPQ) , Facebook (FB)  and more.

I see this cloud opportunity evolving similar to the way we watched the Internet grow and change since the mid 1990ís. Back in those early days the big companies selling access to the Internet were actually smaller, growth companies like AOL, Earthlink and Mindspring. They were tiny, often started on the kitchen table, but very rapidly growing.

However when the technology was advanced enough things started to change. The telephone companies starting selling DSL and cable television companies started selling their high-speed access as well.

Then they started selling access to the customer. Once that happened, they quickly became the leaders and things have not changed that much ever since.

Today while the leaders are telephone and cable television companies, the old leaders are still around, but not as important a piece of the pie. Smaller companies have remained that way.

The cloud is similar. It started with lots of smaller or lesser-known companies offering cloud based services. They have been growing as the cloud is an important growth sector.

However we have seen other big name companies enter this cloud space and things are changing. Today cloud leaders are no longer the smaller, lesser-known companies. Today they are the big guys. And more big companies are moving into this space as we speak.

Donít be surprised to see many more big name companies jumping into this cloud space. We are still in the very early innings of this new game.

HP announced earlier this week they are launching their HP Helion Portfolio of Cloud products and services. That is their brand name for this opportunity. HP says they will offer cloud products and services that enable organizations to build, manage and consumer workloads in hybrid IT environments.

One question. What the hell does all that mean anyway?

And thatís part of the problem. The mysticism around this entire cloud opportunity is hard to put into regular words so regular people can wrap their mind around it and really understand it.

Yet putting into understandable English is key because regular executives, customers and investors have to have a solid understanding going forward to make this whole thing work.

HP says they are investing more than one billion dollars to support and deliver new open source cloud products and services.

While thatís great, itís important to realize that competitors like Google, Amazon.com, Microsoft, Facebook and others may be investing much more than that. In fact each may be investing that amount every quarter.

Any way you slice it the cloud will be an important part of our future. And it will be huge. However there is no single cloud leader today. Thatís the target however for all these big name companies.

I think the marketplace will grow over the next several years and new ideas will drive more growth. The direction is always the question. Just like with the Internet, itís impossible to see clearly years down the road.

Who will lead in the next few years is less important because this is still the very early days of the cloud.

We have to hope there are plenty of companies, big and small, who are in the mix and continuing to stir things up. Thatís will keep this new segment growing.

I donít believe anyone knows exactly what the future of the cloud opportunity will look like a few years from now. But thatís OK because we really didnít know what the Internet opportunity would look like in the mid-90ís.

The technology and new ideas will continue to change the map. However companies who want to be leaders tomorrow must plant their flag in the ground today. Thatís what these companies are all doing.

The cloud is not perfect. It may never be. Once your information is out there it is vulnerable. However you can also do so much more in a cloud based world than we ever could otherwise.

So as the next few quarters pass the cloud will become increasingly robust and secure. Until then letís keep our eyes on the cloud opportunity and watch the direction that these different companies want to take us.

Just like the Internet was back in the 90ís, the cloud is just that exciting.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          May 8, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-companies-are-rushing-to-the-cloud#sthash.kx5tcdUr.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-In-Flight-WiFi-Could-Soar-80380.html

ANALYSIS

AT&T In-Flight WiFi Could Soar

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

05/01/14 6:16 AM PT

AT&T has not provided details about its in-flight WiFi plans, other than to say it will do it much better and faster. That's all fliers need to hear. If it works well, it could be a huge success. I imagine GoGo won't take this new threat in stride, but its stock price has fallen, and it is definitely in a weakened position. Its choice is simply to improve and compete -- or say "bye-bye."

 

AT&T just announced it will be getting into and improving the in-flight WiFi business. It will be next year before this service is available, but if it's better than the current GoGo WiFi service, I think it will be a big success.

Back in the days before in-flight WiFi, stepping onto an airplane meant we were pretty much cut off from the rest of the world until we landed. It was quiet and peaceful, and it gave us a rare chance to think, read, sleep or watch a movie.

Then Apple and Google changed everything with the iPhone and Android. Today we are always connected. When we are not, it's like we are holding our breath. The problem was that there was no good-quality WiFi connection up in the air.

In recent years, a company called "GoGo" brought us in-flight connectivity, which sounded great. Unfortunately it didn't work great.

I have used it several times and have never had a good quality signal -- and the countless people I casually ask all say the same thing.

Gotta Be a Better Way

First, you have to choose which device you want to use. Will it be your smartphone, tablet or laptop? You can choose more than one, but you are charged for each.

Second, no matter which you choose, the signal always fluctuates. I get several hundred emails every day. So when I try to download my current batch, the signal is always lost and the process has to restart.

Restarting means I end up with many duplicate emails, since those downloaded before the signal faded will be downloaded again at the next attempt. Talk about frustrating.

Third, the speed is agonizingly slow. Remember the 1990s with dial-up? GoGo does let you surf the Web at a slower speed, and at least that's something -- that is, until the signal is lost.

So, as you can tell, I have not had a good experience yet with the GoGo service.

That leaves a huge opportunity for a company like AT&T to do it better.

GoGo Gone?

AT&T has not provided details about the technology or the cost or the speeds or the connection, other than to say it will do it much better and faster.

That's all fliers need to hear. AT&T is planning a next-generation in-flight broadband service. If it works well and satisfies the user, it could be a huge success.

I imagine GoGo won't take this new threat in stride, but its stock price has fallen, and it is definitely in a weakened position.

Its choice is simply to improve and compete -- or say "bye-bye." I have not yet heard what its plan is going forward.

This should be very fertile ground for AT&T. The marketplace is full of countless users who really want and need good quality high-speed WiFi broadband in-flight -- the kind of service they always wanted, but just have not been able to get.

Any way you slice this, you have to admit competition is a good thing, don't you think? 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/ATT-In-Flight-WiFi-Could-Soar-80380.html#sthash.rGDYJylv.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-3d-printing-is-huge-new-opportunity

 

Jeff Kagan: 3D Printing is Huge New Opportunity

By Jeff Kagan 

May 1, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: ONVO   GE   HPQ

 

Every once in a while we see a new market created. 3D Printing is one of those markets. We are still very early in the lifecycle, but there are so many brand name companies and exciting ideas around you just have to take a serious look.

Weíve all heard about 3D printing, but most of us donít really have a good understanding what this new industry is all about and how it will grow and impact the world. However when Meg Whitman CEO of Hewlett-Packard (HPQ)  talks about 3D printing on CNBC as a potential growth industry they are focusing on, weíd be foolish not to listen.

3D printing is moving from talk to prototype and now itís start toward actual production. This is where the rubber meets the road. The 3D market is rapidly growing and is expected to reach more than $10 billion over the next decade. Thatís a huge growth opportunity.

3D printing has a lot of different meanings. It will make or print actual, very complicated parts for a variety of business and industries around the world. This will impact every industry from wireless to telecommunications and cable television and the Internet. 3D will also impact the health and medical field. Donít forget electronics, manufacturing, automakers and much more.

In fact 3D printing, if it works the way the industry promises, will impact nearly every industry and every business, worldwide. Thatís the enormous size of the opportunity.

However we still have a big crevice ahead between prototype and actual production. Will we build a bridge over that crevice or will we fall in as the industry collapses? That is the million-dollar question.

At this point I am very impressed with what I am seeing and hearing. So far I have confidence in this new space. I think we can indeed print a 3D bridge over that crevice and get to the other side safely.

When we do that, we will see an explosion of companies and ideas and technologies enter the space in high gear. We will see countless workers moving to this exciting new space with new companies, or existing leaders. We will see countless investors jump into the space, still having little real knowledge of the industry itself.

Remember, 3D printing is a brand new space so there are no real regulations in place yet. So, like the Internet of the 1990ís, 3D printing is the next Wild-Wild West. And all of us will suddenly be very interested in this complicated space.

In the early days every company will grow and look very innovative. Every company will attract workers and investors. Over time, many smaller companies will be acquired by larger firms. Many will make it and others will fail.

Choosing correctly is always important. Years later we become smarter about this potential opportunity. As we work our way down the funnel we will get pickier on the companies we actually invest in, work for or partner with.

3D printing is actually a great idea. It letí you create, very inexpensively and very quickly a model to see whether something works or needs changing. Then finally when we are ready, we can send it to the printer for manufacture. This will help create better products more quickly and more economically.

Perhaps we wonít 3D print toaster ovens, but we will use it to build computers or make customized medical devices for each patient, or parts of a body, as companies like Organovo (ONVO)  are working on. Say you need a new artery or organ because yours are damaged or clogged. Just 3D print it.

There will be countless very complicated and also very simple things that 3D printing will be able to do for us. It will be faster and cost less money. It will provide solutions that simply are not available today.

Hewlett Packard, General Electric (GE) and so many other companies are entering this space. There are also a wide variety of mid size and small companies in the space. And there are always a wide variety of smaller startups.

That means an entire industry is being created as we speak. This is a very exciting opportunity for the future.

I will be writing more about this 3D opportunity because I believe in its potential to turn the world on its head, for the good of all mankind. There are countless companies and ideas that are trying to break through the noise of a chaotic industry.

Weíll work our way through the noise and find some of the interesting stories. More to come.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          May 1, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-3d-printing-is-huge-new-opportunity#sthash.0I0FSyQt.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Is-Square-Mobile-Payments-in-Trouble-80348.html

ANALYSIS

Is Square Mobile Payments in Trouble?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

04/24/14 6:37 AM PT

 

Success in the financial sector is tough. While Square may be available everywhere, that does not automatically make it successful. It takes time for customers to understand and develop trust. Square lost around $100 million in 2013 -- more than it lost in 2012. Square says it is not in acquisition talks, but how long can an upstart keep this up?

 

The story of Square mobile-payments may surprise you. Imagine swiping customer credit cards on your iPhone, iPad or Android. We have all heard the magical stories about a brilliant idea sketched on a napkin that turned into the next big success in business. While these things do happen, more often the bubble bursts. It's just a matter of when. Is that what is starting to happen with Square?

Much too often, short-term brilliant ideas seem to fade and long-term success is fleeting. Square is a great idea. It seems to be available everywhere and has an incredibly strong and well-known founder and business backers. It solves a problem by letting small businesses take credit cards, quickly and easily.

If you are a business, all you do is buy one of those square card readers and slip it into the port on your iPhone, Android or iPad. Then, when you want to ring up a sale, you simply launch the Square app and swipe the customer card. The receipt is emailed to the customer. It's as easy as that.

Early Innings

The system actually works well. It should be a big hit. Square was going to rewrite the model of how we pay for things. This was a bigger-than-life goal, but the company had many heavy hitters behind it. So what's the problem?

Losses are widening, and cash on hand is slipping through Square's fingers, according to a report this week in The Wall Street Journal. So Square has been discussing a sale to more robust competitors. That's a big surprise to many.

Apparently, companies like Google, Apple and eBay already have talked with Square about this opportunity. However, one has to ask why Square seems to be in such poor financial shape when it seems to be such a success.

Jack Dorsey had the original idea for Square. Dorsey is also the cofounder of Twitter. I remember a couple years ago when Dorsey and Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, first appeared on CNBC talking about this incredible Square opportunity. That really helped put Square on the map. Now you see Square everywhere.

They talked about walking into a Starbucks store and paying for your cup of coffee with Square. Since then, the WSJ reported, Square has been having rough financial times. Starbucks, on the other hand, is in the process of reinventing itself. It is working with a variety of different payment systems.

You can download a Starbucks app and assign your credit card number to it. That way, all you do is swipe your smartphone in front of the electronic reader to pay. It is actively looking to expand into other new areas as well.

Is this part of the problem with Square? If it were the only choice, that would be one thing. However, there are lots of choices.

We are in the very early innings of this brand new game. Ideas are coming at us faster than you can imagine. Many are good ideas, however each only seems to carve out a small slice of the pie. No single idea seems to be running away with the market yet.

In addition, users are confused by all the choices. They don't yet feel comfortable setting up these strange new systems. So if they do anything, typically they choose one new way to pay and stick with it.

However, if you recall, the same thing happened when the ATM cards issued by our banks were introduced. It takes us a while to develop a high-enough comfort level. We have to trust when it comes to our money. That takes time.

Today, ATM cards are wildly successful. Will the same thing happen here? I think so -- but it will take time.

This new competition seems to have caused tough times at Square. After all, there is only one Twitter. There are other social sites, like Facebook, but they are all different -- and that has kept each doing strong business.

With financial tools like Square, however, the rules seem to be different. One issue is time. Another is increasing competition in a space where there is not one really strong success story.

Wait and Watch

Success in the financial sector is tough. While Square may be available everywhere, that does not automatically make it successful. It takes time for customers to understand and develop trust. Square lost around $100 million in 2013 -- more than it lost in 2012, according to the WSJ. Square says it is not in acquisition talks, but how long can an upstart keep this up?

Over the years, I have been briefed by many banks and wireless carriers getting into this business. The idea always sounds great. However, the results are still not strong enough.

Now we see new ideas, like Google Wallet, trying to break in -- but even the "Google" name is not enough for rapid success in this space. It is struggling for growth in this area as well. Of course, Google has the financial strength to perhaps be more patient than Square.

So, the bottom line is this: I think, long term, this will eventually be a good area. It will be a successful sector of the financial world. However, when that will happen is the question. Another question is how many great ideas will we burn through before we get there?

Will Square be among the winners? Good question. I like Square. I hope it sticks around. I think it is a good product with a strong management team and a well-known brand because of that team. However, even that may not be enough to guarantee success in the business world. We'll have to keep our eyes on Square and see what happens. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Is-Square-Mobile-Payments-in-Trouble-80348.html#sthash.lL8CJsj3.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-at-t-verizon-sprint-connected-car-opportunity

Jeff Kagan: AT&T, Verizon, Sprint Connected Car Opportunity

Jeff Kagan 

April 22, 2014 3:55PM   

Tickers Mentioned: VZ  S  T

We have watched the wireless space grow and change over the years, and change other industries as well. Healthcare, for instance, and especially automotive. AT&T ($T), Verizon ($VZ), and Sprint ($S) see this as a huge, new opportunity. The next question is when will other wireless carriers stick their toes in this water? Now is the time.

The AT&T Drive Studio is under their Emerging Device Organization. At Verizon itís called Verizon Telematics after they acquired Hughes Telematics, a competitor to OnStar. Sprint Velocity is handling their connected vehicle platform under the Sprint Enterprise Solutions business.

AT&Tís looks like they are in the lead with a current lineup for connected cars including Volvo, GM, Audi, Tesla, BMW and the Ford Focus Electric. They also have SiriusXM for their mobile connectivity with Nissan and Audiovox for their Car Connection Elite telematics device.

Verizon currently works with carmakers such as Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz. They provide assorted services like emergency services, navigation and remote vehicle diagnostics.

Sprint says they provide a solution for auto OEMís including the telematics platform, development and integration of complex components. They currently partner with Chrysler supporting their Uconnect Access service.

This is such an exciting new space, and we are still in the very early stages. The connected car is one of the greatest growth opportunities for the wireless carriers.

Glenn Lurie, President of Emerging Devices at AT&T Mobility says, once you add high speed broadband, wirelessly to cars, the car becomes a smartphone on four wheels.

And that says it all when it comes to this brand new, enormous opportunity for both the wireless and automotive space.

Cars will be able to automatically send data and download updates to its software. That means the car will always run better and the customer doesnít have to take the time to drive to the dealer. Customers love this. So do the automakers.

The connected car also provides all sorts of user features like live traffic, weather, email, text messaging, finding destinations, surfing the web, watching live television or downloaded movies and so much more.

The mobile Internet in the connected car is the birth of an entirely new growth segment. By the end of this decade we are expecting to see 65 to 75 percent of all new vehicles to be connected. It will start as an add-on feature with some carmakers for higher end vehicles, and then over time become standard for most.

Itís about automotive performance and communicating with the factory. Itís about next gen infotainment. Itís about working together with smartphones. Itís about automotive apps. This is the exciting new world that lies ahead.

This is all an enormous opportunity for the wireless industry and for the automotive industry.

Expect to see marketing and advertising in the auto sector start to change. While we are used to seeing them talk about safety, power or gas mileage, they will start to talk about being connected and how that will change our lives.

It will create a desire in the marketplace for the connected car. Something the average user has no idea about yet. However it will hit them right between the eyes in coming quarters.

However along with this opportunity there is also a risk. This connected car is one more area where the automakers must continue to hit the nail on the head. They must connect with the customer and give the customer what they want and need, even before they know it.

They must improve their conversations with the customer. There will be lots of home runs and lots of strikeouts. Live traffic reports and weather on the dash are winners. Self-parking cars, not so much.

Remember however that this is a brand new sector. We are still in the crawling stages. Just wait for this kid to get up and start to walk and run. Watch out. We still have to build the entire industry segment. It will take time. Yet it will be rapid growth.

Either way I think itís important to keep your eyes on this space. We will see enormous growth in this space for both the wireless carriers, and the auto industry. It will start with the high end cars then move into the mass market.

This is a long-term growth opportunity that will continue to change over time. And this is the kind of change that we can see the wireless carriers like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and all sorts of smaller companies really sink their teeth into going forward

Jeff Kagan    +Follow          April 22, 2014 3:55PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-at-t-verizon-sprint-connected-car-opportunity#sthash.J1qpdcvW.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-why-did-google-disappoint-and-what-s-next

Jeff Kagan: Why Did Google Disappoint and Whatís Next?

By Jeff Kagan   

April 17, 2014 2:35PM   

Tickers Mentioned: GOOG  AMZN  FB  T  VZ

We knew it had to happen. Google Inc. ($GOOG), one of the tech industryís largest and fastest growing companies, missed Wall Street expectations. So what went wrong? And should we expect more disappointments, or is this just an occasional blip on the long-term radar? These are important questions whether you are an investor, worker, or partner with Google.

You notice I didnít mention customers. Thatís because customers continue to be blown away by the tech giant. Users and customers still love Google. However, this miss could make others queasy.

To answer the question quickly, let me start by saying I donít worry about Google. Not yet anyway. I simply see nothing wrong that hasnít been there for a long time. They are still a rapidly growing company that is changing industry after industry.

Google is not like other companies. Google does not just have one target product or one target audience. They may have started out as a search engine, but Google is so much more than that today. They ride multiple waves.

They are into so many different industries and business that is can make your head spin. Think of Google as a special kind of company who throws lots of ideas against the wall, quarter after quarter. Whatever falls away they forget about.

Whatever sticks they build into a powerful business. And the successes are typically new sectors with little in the way of real competition, at least in the beginning.

Google ideas are not typically in traditional sectors. They like to play on the edge. They like to build new sectors. They like to change things. Create new growth paths. And they are not alone.

Amazon.com ($AMZN) and Facebook ($FB) do the same thing. If you recall Amazon.com started selling books online in the 1990ís and Facebook was a social messaging service until a year or two ago.

Today however Google, Amazon.com and Facebook lead the transformation of the entire tech sector. They all keep acquiring other companies and adding to their power base.

One important thing to know is all these companies continue to throw stuff against the wall. Itís a messy practice, but it works. Whatever sticks they build into new business segments and they lead.

They seem to be transforming the every slice of the tech sector, one by one. How long can they continue? Thatís the question that no one has an answer to. Eventually they will reach their peak, but that does not seem in sight yet.

Slowdowns do happen to every leading company. Just look at all of yesterdayís leaders who are struggling or even dying today. New competitors, new technologies and more change the space and take over the leadership.

Today that is Google, but for how long?

Sure, there are other companies as well who fit into that mold. Many started out doing the same thing then fell aside. Plus many other leaders of tomorrow arenít on the list yet. This is part of a very robust business economy in the tech sector.

Thatís what makes this so exciting to be part of. In that world, we canít be concerned with any particular quarter. We canít really think like day traders. Google, Amazon.com and Facebook are three examples of hot tech companies, which will continue to grow for many years to come.

Remember, Google is into not only search engines, but different search engines in different businesses or sectors. Some work and continue and others fail, but they keep growing as a company.

Example, I remember Google Health, which was a health care search engine. It made so much sense, but it is now gone. It didnít stick to the wall. So Google closed it down. Not everything works.

However plenty does work. Google is also in the smartphone and tablet business with their Android operating system. Not only do they make their own handsets, but they also are the operating system on a variety of competitors devices like the Samsung Galaxy.

Google is also many other businesses like Google Glass, smartwatches, apps like Google Maps, Gmail and countless other businesses.

In fact Google Fiber is also building one-gigabit high-speed data networks in what looks to be a growing number of cities competing with companies in this sector like AT&T ($T), Verizon ($VZ), CenturyLink ($CTL), Comcast ($CMCST), Time Warner Cable ($TWC) and Cox ($COX). This is another brand new sector for them.

AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL) , Comcast (CCS) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) - See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-who-will-win-the-1-gigabit-ultra-high-speed-internet-race#sthash.qAI3gdOf.dpuf

AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL) , Comcast (CCS) , Time Warner Cable (TWC) - See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-who-will-win-the-1-gigabit-ultra-high-speed-internet-race#sthash.qAI3gdOf.dpuf. This is another brand new sector for themWith all these growth opportunities, I see Google still on the solid growth track, even though quarters can vary.

So Google is not slowing down. Instead they are accelerating. And I expect to see this continue for many years to come based on what I see so far. No matter what happens in any particular quarter.

That is until the time comes when, like Apple, they change from a growth company to just a very large and successful non-growth company. Unfortunately that does happen, but I donít think Google is anywhere close to that yet.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          April 17, 2014 2:35PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-why-did-google-disappoint-and-what-s-next#sthash.4mv4wehX.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Ultra-High-Speed-Internet-Race-Is-On-80315.html

ANALYSIS

The Ultra High-Speed Internet Race Is On

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

04/17/14 12:07 PM PT

We are in the very early stages of an ultra high-speed Internet revolution that will benefit everyone: carriers, cities, companies and customers. Cities want it because they see it as a way to attract companies. That means they increase their tax base and have a strong growth economy. Companies want it because they see this as a competitive advantage, at least for a while, until everyone has it.

 

Want to watch a new tech race? Keep your eyes on the new 1 Gbps ultra high-speed Internet race. Over the next few years, this will continue to grow and become one of the hottest races around. So who will the leaders be? Today, entrants like Google, AT&T, C Spire and CenturyLink already have started their race for the gold.

First, it's important to understand this race, so let's pull back the camera. We can see that this race actually has been running for quite a long while. It is not new. Every year, local telephone companies like AT&T, Verizon and CenturyLink continue to increase Internet speeds. So do cable television companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox.

However, as fast as these speeds are -- and they are extremely fast -- Google wanted more. Google pointed to other countries where Internet speeds were even faster. Google wanted to speed up the process. So in typical Google fashion, it entered the race in Kansas City with its 1 Gbps service and challenged the existing providers.

Trend in the Making

Google did not do anything the others weren't already moving toward. It just turned up the competitive heat. Remember, the other competitors have huge national infrastructures to maintain. They each spend many billions of dollars upgrading their networks and increasing their speeds. All of that takes much more time than rolling out service to just one city, like Google did.

Kansas City was a success. Customers loved it. The media loved to write about it. Kansas City gained a competitive advantage, and suddenly many other cities wanted to be next on the list.

Over the last few quarters, we have seen a handful of other big-time companies jump into ultra high-speed race:

ēAT&T announced it would bring GigaPower to its first ultra high-speed city, Austin Texas;

ēCenturyLink announced its first ultra high-speed service in the Las Vegas area; and

ēC Spire jumped into the race by offering its Fiber to the Home ultra-fast Internet service in several Mississippi cities to start.

However, many competitors -- including Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox and others -- havea been silent. Will they eventually join the ultra high-speed race? I would hope so, since this is the future.

However some companies are leaders and others are followers. In this case, the leaders are Google, AT&T, CenturyLink and C spire. The others fall into the follower category -- hopefully, anyway.

The excitement is far from over. A few weeks ago, Google announced expansion of its Google Fiber to a few other cities. That news started getting lots more cities interested. Last week, AT&T announced its moves in North Carolina. It will roll out its ultra high speed U-verse Internet service with GigaPower to six communities in the Research Triangle and Piedmont Triad regions of North Carolina. It will begin as soon as it gets final approval.

What's next? AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said they would roll out this service to markets around the country. What this says to me is stay tuned, there is much more to come from AT&T. I would say AT&T looks like it is about ready to put the pedal to the metal on growth in this area.

So today it looks like AT&T and Google are the two largest and most aggressive players in this new race.

Here is a nagging Google question. Will it stay in this game as a player? I don't know. Initially I thought it wanted to use Kansas City as a showpiece to help jump-start the industry to a much faster speed. However it is now expanding.

Will Google Fiber stay in the competitive game to keep others building faster, or will it jump out at some point? We'll have to wait and see.

I also watched how Mississippi cities did their research, wrote their proposals, and created compelling arguments to win the first cities in the C Spire region for ultra high-speed service.

What this says to me is ultra high speed, 1 Gigabit Internet service is going to be one of the strong growth engines going forward.

Which Companies Will Catch the Wave?

Cities want it because they see it as a way to attract companies. That means they increase their tax base and have a strong growth economy. Companies want it because they see this as a competitive advantage, at least for a while, until everyone has it -- that will take years. Consumers want it, because they will be attracted to ultra high-speed cities for work and as great places to live and raise their families.

The first stage of this new growth opportunity looks like it will be individual companies moving into individual market areas. I don't yet see multiple operators competing in the same space yet. It will likely be this way for several years, until at least the first wave of cities have one ultra high-speed provider. As the future unfolds, we will see more companies moving into each market space.

That could mean prices for this service will start out higher. However, we can't blame companies for trying to recover their very high build-out expenses. This is the way it has always worked over time. Eventually, as competition grows, prices will come down.

Do you remember how expensive cellular phone service was 20 years ago? I predict the same thing here.

It looks like we are in the very early stages of an ultra high-speed Internet revolution that will benefit everyone: carriers, cities, companies and customers. It seems like everyone will win in this new environment.

Everyone who is a player will win, anyway. That's why sooner or later I see every service provider moving into this ultra high-speed race. It will be interesting to watch other companies jump in and join the fray -- and it also will be interesting to watch the companies that don't.   

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/The-Ultra-High-Speed-Internet-Race-Is-On-80315.html#sthash.X578kU68.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Which-Wireless-Network-Is-Best-for-You-80273.html

ANALYSIS

Which Wireless Network Is Best for You?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

04/10/14 6:28 AM PT

 

The top two carriers today are very different from the bottom two. Each is different -- that's why choosing the right carrier for you is so important. Whichever you choose, make sure it offers a strong signal, fast speed, and good-quality voice connections where you spend time. If it doesn't, don't wait. It may be time to ask for a refund and try the next network on your list.

 

Every couple of years, it's time to buy a new wireless phone -- and every couple of years, we go through the same decision-making process. What should be the most important part of that process? The answer is not in the advertising. It's not about choosing a phone. Rather, it's choosing the right network -- and there is a difference between major carriers.

The four largest U.S. wireless carriers are AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile. Which is best for you? When it comes to quality, strength of signal and network footprint, you may be surprised. They are not all the same. There is quite a bit to consider.

Top Dogs

AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless are at the top. They are not the least expensive, but they do have the most customers. That fact alone speaks volumes. They have the widest national coverage and fastest networks in more locations. So, is either AT&T or Verizon right for you?

Remember, a wireless handset is nothing more than a paperweight unless it's connected to a network. So having network connection where you spend time is first and most important on the list of things to consider when choosing a carrier. While AT&T and Verizon are not perfect, they do offer the largest network footprints in the U.S.

There is also a difference in the quality of connections. You want a strong connection with four or five bars of network coverage. Having only one or two bars of coverage can cause quality and speed problems.

Generally speaking, both AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless have the broadest network coverage for voice and high-speed data in more locations. However, they have different hot spots. They don't offer exactly the same strength in all locations.

There are plenty of locations where one has much stronger coverage than the other. Make sure you choose the strongest connection where you spend most of your time. AT&T is better for some and Verizon is better for others.

In addition, AT&T and Verizon use different network technologies. They both have strengths and weaknesses, but one of the most important that I hear about is AT&T lets you talk and surf the Web and use wireless data services all at the same time. Verizon does not. With Verizon, you have to hang up a call to use the Internet, and so on.

On the innovation side of the coin, AT&T is strongest. It tends to try new things first. There is a reason its leads the change in the industry. One example is that it was the only carrier to offer Apple's iPhone for several years.

Let's say several networks offer you strong, high-quality connections. Lucky you. What is the next step in choosing the best network for you?

Fast Speed, Wide Coverage

Based on their television commercials, they all seem to offer the best quality with the most coverage and highest speeds, right? What each is saying may be accurate based on the words they carefully use. However, that's not the way to choose which is best for you.

Generally speaking, all networks offer good quality and high speeds today. However, some offer more than others. One test is how many of their customers would admit to having great wireless service. That's the real question.

The answer depends on where customers spend time. Network coverage is key to this part of the decision. Generally speaking, both AT&T and Verizon offer the fastest speeds in the widest coverage areas. Sprint and T-Mobile are fast too, but in fewer locations.

If you are in the middle of a city, that may not be an issue. Many carriers will do just fine. However, if you are located in the suburbs or travel between cities, this often becomes more of an issue.

AT&T and Verizon have the most-extensive network coverage. That means they offer the best quality calls and highest-speed wireless Internet in more areas.

While Sprint is not up to that point yet, it has been acquired by Softbank and is undertaking a multiyear upgrade that will transform its network.

When Sprint is done, it will have the newest network in the industry offering all sorts of new services. This is great news for Sprint customers. While it sounds very exciting, it's still down the road over the next couple of years.

Until about a year ago T-Mobile was struggling for its life, but it has been turning things around during the last year and actually is seeing growth. That's the good news. It has a new CEO and is marketing differently. It offers lower cost plans and markets directly to the youth of America.

While T-Mobile does have a few great spots in its network, its coverage and speed are not yet equal to competitors, generally speaking -- not yet, anyway. It is building and working to improve.

So, today AT&T and Verizon offer the widest network coverage, fastest service and best quality. They also impose higher costs, but based on their success in the marketplace, that does not get in their way.

In addition, they both continue to invest billions of dollars, year after year in their networks. Things are always getting faster and better.

But Wait, There's More

Wireless is only part of what AT&T and Verizon offer. They also offer telephone, high-speed Internet and television services, with their IPTV-like Uverse and FiOS. They are both heavily into other areas, too -- like healthcare and automotive, for example. They are strong competitors to cable television companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox and others.

So, the very large AT&T and Verizon are in a completely different league than standalone wireless carriers Sprint and T-Mobile.

Over the last several years, both Sprint and T-Mobile were struggling in third and fourth place. However, both have started repairing during the last year. If that continues, I expect to see both growing as meaningful wireless competitors over the next few years.

The top two today are very different from the bottom two. Each carrier is different -- that's why choosing the right carrier for you is so important. Whichever carrier you choose, make sure it offers a strong signal, fast speed, and good-quality voice connections where you spend time.

If it doesn't, don't wait. It may be time to ask for a refund and try the next network on your list. Just remember, you only have a few weeks to return a phone. Make sure you ask about return policies before you walk out of the store.

I wish there were an easy way to choose the best carrier for you. Sorry -- it's not about watching a television commercial. It's all about where you spend time -- that's the secret sauce that really matters. 

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Which-Wireless-Network-Is-Best-for-You-80273.html#sthash.JKvsQ4ej.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-microsoft-yahoo-sony-follow-netflix-into-tv

Jeff Kagan: Microsoft, Yahoo, Sony Follow Netflix Into TV

By Jeff Kagan

April 9, 2014 6:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AMZN   MSFT   YHOO   NFLX

Television seems to be turning into the new competitive playing field. Iím talking about the kind of TV that you suddenly find offered by Netflix (NFLX) , Amazon.com (AMZN)  and HULU. Companies like Microsoft (MFST) , Yahoo (YHOO)  and Sony seem to be next in line. Television is changing. What can we expect?

Iím not talking about cable TV, satellite TV or even IPTV from the phone companies, but Internet based television. This is either a brand new sector or a reinventing of the entire television space. This will either threaten or work with traditional television leaders.

We are still in the very early innings of this new ballgame so there is no way we can say who the winners and losers will be long-term. All we can do is stare with awe at the changes that are sweeping across the screen. And those changes will continue. We are still in the very early stages of a very different television industry looking forward.

First we have to understand this new industry. What the sectors are and who is playing in which. We have to ask whether these new companies are in the delivery business like cable television and IPTV companies. Or if they are more like the networks who create programming. Or perhaps like independent producers.

At this early stage itís hard to tell. Consider Netflix as an example. They are changing.

Netflix has been in the more simple delivery business for most of their lives. First they mailed DVDís to customers. Now they stream movies over the Internet. That means they are in the delivery business.

They are not cable television or telephone companies with IPTV, but they still deliver programming over the Internet connection most customers buy from these other companies. So will they eventually be a competitor or compliment existing services?

However today Netflix is expanding and creating new programming. I am talking about the highly successful ďHouse of CardsĒ series. This is not released on a more traditional model like we are familiar with on traditional TV.

This is a big first step for Netflix, which seems to be successful. So what is Netflix? Do they deliver movies to customers over the Internet? Yes they do. Do they create their own programming? Yes they do.

And they do all this without the traditional television model. Thatís the change agent.

While I cannot tell you exactly what the marketplace will look like ten years from now, I can say this. It will be different. Very different. It changes on a regular basis and will continue to do so.

That could mean more traditional companies will acquire or partner with some new companies. Or it could mean the more traditional model will have a larger competitive challenge.

Which companies will continue to lead and which will fail is the big question.

So while no one knows what the future will look like, it is advisable to buckle your seatbelts because the road ahead is not paved. Like when we created the commercial Internet in the 1990ís, the bumpy road will cause many companies to fail for every one that succeeds.

As excited as we can get over this new space, and the companies that are paving the new road, we must be careful choosing the right companies to invest in and work for and partner with. They wonít all be successful, but the ones who are could become very successful indeed.

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          April 9, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-microsoft-yahoo-sony-follow-netflix-into-tv#sthash.bgR2RmBJ.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/BlackBerrys-Coca-Cola-Moment-80240.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80240.html

ANALYSIS

BlackBerry's Coca-Cola Moment

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

04/03/14 9:41 AM PT

Coca-Cola did something very unusual for a corporate giant. Its executives said they were wrong. They admitted the customer knew best. They apologized for screwing around with the brand, and they brought back the good, old-fashioned Coca-Cola recipe. Those executives gave in to mounting customer pressure. If they hadn't, that may have been the end of the company.

 

BlackBerry CEO John Chen is trying to turn the company's fortunes around, and something it has in common with Coca-Cola could help. This is something very important, if BlackBerry realizes it. It's something that if done correctly could help the company succeed once again.

I have followed BlackBerry for many years, watching its ups and predicting its downs. I believe that if its leaders are alert -- and if they can learn -- the company can recover.

Coca-Cola has been around forever. It has been one of America's best-known and most loved brands for more years than most of us have been alive. It inspires a special emotional connection with customers, sort of like Apple does.

However, in spite of all its success -- which took decades to build -- Coca-Cola execs almost flushed it all down the drain overnight. A company's path can change directions, from success to failure, in a heartbeat.

Eve of Destruction

Remember several years ago, when Coca-Cola executives thought they knew the product better than the customer? They changed the recipe. They thought they were making a big move -- and it was indeed very big. It was one big punch in the nose.

Coca-Cola had been around forever. It had been on many consumers' taste buds since they were kids who walked to the corner store for a bottle of pop. It was part of America.

Many adults knew and loved the classic taste of Coke. It brought back memories of childhood, and they wanted to extend that relationship to their children. That nostalgia was something that benefited both the family and the Coca-Cola brand.

The customer feedback on the recipe change was immediate, negative and intense. Customers did not like anyone messing around with the Coca-Cola they loved. Customers wanted to know who those executives thought they were.

The bottom line was that Coca-Cola owned the secret recipe and could do anything it chose. However, that didn't mean customers would buy the new Coke. The change was a disaster.

That was the colossal mistake Coca-Cola's execs made. The feedback it generated may have been the worst any company has ever received -- to date. The executives were stunned. They didn't know what to do. They were like deer frozen in the headlights as traffic approached. If they stayed rooted to that spot, they would have been mowed over, and that might have been the end of Coca-Cola.

However Coca-Cola did something very unusual for a corporate giant. Its executives said they were wrong. They admitted the customer knew best. They apologized for screwing around with the brand, and they brought back the good, old-fashioned Coca-Cola recipe.

Those executives gave in to mounting customer pressure. If they hadn't, that may have been the end of the company. That move not only saved it, but also propelled it forward once again.

Coca-Cola's customer relationships were very close and special lifelong bonds. They took years to build, but they were almost destroyed overnight.

So how does this fit in with BlackBerry?

Batter Up

BlackBerry's story is so similar it is scary. Initially, customers loved the company, and it grew. It had a very strong brand and a special relationship with the customer. BlackBerry led the smartphone sector for years.

Then the marketplace suddenly changed. Apple debuted the iPhone, Google introduced the Android operating system, and Samsung took over leadership almost overnight, neck-and-neck with Apple. It happened so quickly BlackBerry didn't see ut coming.

BlackBerry was not the only company struggling to survive this change. Palm died. Nokia was pummeled. The entire industry changed over the last few years.

The call for new leadership and new vision came. Long-time BlackBerry CEOs who founded the company were forced to resign. A new CEO came in with radical ideas that looked as though they could be successful. However, when BlackBerry 10 launched, it was a dismal failure.

BlackBerry changed leadership once again, and now John Chen is at the helm. So far, I like what I see. However, there are still many questions. Will he take the company in the right direction?

Chen didn't immediately steer away from BlackBerry 10. To my way of looking at this situation, BB10 was a disaster. I have been saying since the beginning that the company should pull the new devices and go back to the old, faithful and successful design of BlackBerry 7.

It would have to update the software and operating system and speed of the devices, of course, but if it did, I believe it could continue to win and grow.

So my recommendation to BlackBerry is to do what Coca-Cola did. Say you are sorry. Say you now understand BB10 is a disaster. Say you will go back to BlackBerry 7 and keep improving that operating system and the devices that run it -- just like Apple, Google and Samsung do every year.

Is this what John Chen is finally starting to do? It's not clear, but I sure hope so.

Coca-Cola won in the end. So can BlackBerry, if John Chen understands and takes the right next steps.

BlackBerry, turn this into a big marketing and public relations event. Say you were wrong, and that you are listening to your customers and going back to BlackBerry 7, the software your customers really liked, modernizing it to keep it fresh. Then, maybe, just like Coca-Cola, you can hit a home run.

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/BlackBerrys-Coca-Cola-Moment-80240.html#sthash.2fUrO4MI.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-status-report-on-vonage-voip

Jeff Kagan: Status Report on Vonage VoIP

By    Jeff Kagan   +Follow          April 2, 2014 5:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: GOOG   TWC    VZ   VG

Vonage (VG)  is one of the older VoIP companies that entered the scene more than a decade ago. At the time we didnít know whether or not they would become a long lasting option. Now a decade later they are bigger than ever on the consumer side and making aggressive moves into the business side of the market. So what can we expect Vonage going forward? You may be surprised.

When Vonage started about a decade ago they were, well, an annoying little company buzzing around the faces of the major Baby Bells, offering a new-fangled ďvoice over the InternetĒ service. Quality was so-so. Customers signed up for the service to cut their phone bills a bit, but it was a trade-off.

I met CEO Jeffrey Citron at a trade show and we spoke about the future of the industry and the future of Vonage. He saw Vonage as a glowing success story, which it was as an investment, but at the time it also had loads of quality issues and problems. I liked his spirit, but thought it would be a while before Vonage would ever grow into a meaningful competitor.

However as VoIP improved over the years, so did Vonage. Sure they still have problems, which I will discuss, but as years passed the problems had less to do with Vonage and more to do with limited bandwidth of some customers.

The question back then was simple, was it worth the savings if you didnít have a good quality call? Today I still get many calls from reporters using a VoIP service. Sometimes the quality is good. Sometimes it is terrible. None are ever as good as a local phone line.

I learned VoIP quality issues came from two areas. One was the VoIP provider and the technology they use, and two with the slower Internet connections many customers use. This Internet connection does not come from Vonage.

Some customers have a very fast, very high quality Internet service. Others have a much slower and less expensive service. The more expensive and faster service is better for VoIP. Slower, less expensive service can cause real quality problems with VoIP.

In recent years as Internet connections sped up from all the phone companies and cable television companies, things did get better. And as speeds continue to increase, things should continue to get better.

Certain VoIP services that had better quality began to stand out. Vonage was one of them. Not all competitors are. Today Vonage continues to grow. Perfect? Of course not. But they are better than ever and improving every year.

So VoIP, while not perfect, is going to continue to be a growing part of the market. Not every VoIP carrier has the same quality problems.

Cable television companies like Comcast ($CMCST), Time Warner Cable (TWC)  and Cox offer great quality VoIP services. So do the telephone companies like AT&T (T)  Uverse, Verizon (VZ)  FiOS and CenturyLink Prism who also sell VoIP services in addition to their regular telephone lines. They also combine television, Internet and phone.

These big competitors offer excellent quality VoIP telephone service because they offer their own high-quality and high-speed Internet lines. That can make the different between a poor or good quality call.

Vonage is not a cable television company. Vonage is not a telephone company. So Vonage does not offer high-speed Internet lines. Yet they require high-speed lines to operate with good quality.

Where do you get this high-speed connection? Thatís up to the customer. Customers with good quality and fast connections have better quality VoIP calls. Customers with poor quality or slower connections often have worse quality calls.

So when you complain about a lousy connection, first try and decide if itís the VoIP service, or the high-speed connection. 

Vonage has worked to improve their quality over the years and has had success. Not perfect, but better every year. If a customer has a fast and good quality Internet connection, then Vonage can be a good choice.

And as Internet speeds continue to increase, things should continue to get better for companies like Vonage.

Today we are starting to see companies offering ultra high-speed Internet connections like Google (GOOG) , AT&T, CenturyLink, C Spire and more. This will make a big difference as well.

Now Vonage is getting into the business side of the marketplace. This is helpful to them because most businesses do have a more expensive, better quality and faster connection than most consumers. They do this because quality and speed are a reflection on their business. They also have multiple people who use the service.

So when Vonage business service is hooked up to a business, the majority of their customers are still small and mid size businesses. Thatís good.

So having enough bandwidth is still key to a good quality call for consumers or business customers. Thatís where this ultra-fast Internet will be very helpful as it begins to roll out.

With all that said, Vonage Holdings Corp. acquired a company called Vocalocity in the Atlanta area last year for $130 million. Now Vonage is also a business services company.

Vonage is growing. Their new Business Solutions (Vocalocity) is staying put in Atlanta. They are hiring and rapidly growing. Atlanta has a powerful high tech business community.

The opportunity is huge in the business market on a nationwide basis if they do things right going forward.

Marc Lefar is Vonage CEO now. I knew him back in the Cingular days. Cingular today is called AT&T Mobility. He still lives in Atlanta and commutes to the New Jersey HQ of Vonage. Now Lefar has a reason to spend more time in Atlanta. They are rapidly building out this business solutions segment.

They must continue to work to improve and solve the VoIP problems, the need for high-speed network connections, and build their brand both on the consumer side and the business side of the fence.

VoIP is a large and growing business segment. It is full of large companies and small companies. So if Vonage can continue to build its brand, there is an opportunity. Of course this same opportunity is there for all Vonage competitors as well. There are many, small companies in the same space like RingCentral, 8X8, Jive, VoIP.com, Magic Jack and more.

So in this space full of small companies competing with each other and bigger competitors like the baby bells and cable television companies, building a competitive service and well known brand name and relationship with the marketplace is key.

This means VoIP is in flux, as always. However Vonage seems to remain on the growth track. Weíll keep our eyes on them and see how well they all do going forward.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          April 2, 2014 5:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-status-report-on-vonage-voip#sthash.C4jdMJsT.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/HTC-Needs-to-Turn-Up-the-Heat-80204.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80204.html

ANALYSIS

HTC Needs to Turn Up the Heat

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

03/27/14 5:58 AM PT

There are two key ingredients to success in the wireless space -- the steak and the sizzle. Both have to be perfect. The steak is the actual technology, and I think HTC has a great steak. The sizzle comes from the marketing, advertising, public relations and brand. This is HTC's weak area. I hope the company has learned some from last year and is more successful this time around.

HTC this week announced the HTC One M8, a new model of its flagship smartphone. When the HTC One made its debut last year, AT&T Mobility sent me one to test drive. I thought it was very well designed. However, what it had in substance, the HTC One lacked in brand recognition, marketing, advertising and public relations. Let's face it, HTC is not a well known and loved brand that customers walk in and ask for. Will it be different this year?

HTC is trying once again. Will it be more successful this time, or will it continue to be invisible in the marketplace? Just think about what HTC has done during the course of the last year to build its brand and name recognition... . OK, I can't think of much either. That could be a problem. Sure, it's a correctable problem, but it's still a problem.

HTC makes good Android smartphones. In fact, the HTC One -- both last year and this year -- is a solid device capable of doing anything an Android user wants.

So why didn't it succeed last year? Simple. It could not make a dent against the marketing and branding power of Apple's iPhone and Samsung's Galaxy. That is one hell of a wall to climb. So what will HTC do differently this time, and will it matter?

Where's the Brand?

The HTC One is now available at AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless and Sprint. T-Mobile and others will get it over the next several months.

This could give its marketing, advertising and PR more focus. Lack of focus was a problem last year, since the phone was introduced at different times by different carriers without a big coming out party.

The HTC One's marketing was weak last year. Advertising, marketing and public relations are all key to success in the wireless business. I have not seen much on the M8 front yet.

HTC makes very good devices, but it has struggled with building its brand, marketing and advertising. I am not quite sure the company really understands the importance of this part of the business.

Brand-building is key to success, and branding is something that HTC simply does not yet have. It could remedy this, by spending enough time, money and energy to build the brand. It needs to create a special halo over its head, which it could do very quickly if it does it right.

Not Sizzling Yet

HTC is up against two heavy hitters -- Apple and Samsung. These two capture most of the attention and soak up most of the oxygen in any room.

In addition, there are other companies that are trying very hard this year to make a dent in the marketplace and raise their own brand recognition: Microsoft, with its Nokia Lumia; Google, with the Nexus 5; Sony, with its latest Xperia; Motorola; LG; BlackBerry; and many more.

I hope HTC understands the marketplace and the importance of marketing and building its brand. I would like to see it succeed going forward. Meeting that challenge is up to the company.

There are two key ingredients to success in the wireless space -- the steak and the sizzle. Both have to be perfect. The steak is the actual technology, and I think HTC has a great steak. The sizzle comes from the marketing, advertising, public relations and brand. This is HTC's weak area.

I hope the company has learned some from last year and is more successful this time around. Let's hope it really can make some progress this year. One thing that's good is that it launched the HTC One M8 prior to the Samsung Galaxy S5 hitting the streets. Stay tuned. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/HTC-Needs-to-Turn-Up-the-Heat-80204.html#sthash.S4SsYIhf.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-every-company-rides-wave-up-and-down

Jeff Kagan: Every Company Rides Growth Wave Up and Down

By Jeff Kagan  

March 27, 2014 5:00AM   

Tickers Mentioned: AAPL    NOK   GOOG

Growth companies are always the place to be. However it depends where they are on the growth wave. Companies ride the wave up, then it crests, then it falls. Every company is somewhere on the growth wave. The only question is, are they on the way up, or the way down? Knowing this makes all the difference whether you are a worker, partner or investor.

To make my point let me share some examples.

Apple (AAPL) is the first. In the 1990ís Apple was not a rapidly growing success story. They had computers like the Mac, but their growth was not stellar. Then in the late 90ís they came up with their first growth wave, the iPod. The iPod changed the direction of the entire company.

Then before that growth wave crested and fell, they created the next growth wave, the iPhone, and then the next, the iPad. So Apple was growth company through the 2000ís.

However we havenít seen anything new in the last few years from Apple. That means the growth company has slowed. It wonít start its growth engines again until it creates new products or new categories.

So Apple is a great illustration of the course of a company on the growth wave. They created several and they continued to grow. Until they stopped creating the next wave, then they stopped being a growth company.

AT&T (T) is another great example of a company transforming and creating the next several growth waves. However, they are a bit more complex than Apple.

AT&T was a growth company through the 1990ís. It rode the growth wave and looked very strong. Then it lost its way, crested on the wave, and started a rapid drop.

It eventually spun off the AT&T Wireless business. It sold off the cable television business to Comcast ($CMCST). Then it lost its consumers to the ďBaby Bells.Ē What was left after a few short years was a much smaller and weaker and dying business services companies.

Thatís when SBC, the Baby Bell from San Antonio Texas acquired AT&T and took the name. At the same time SBC also acquired BellSouth and Cingular. That changed everything.

SBC executives now ran AT&T. Over the next several years they did a great job of integrating all these companies into the new AT&T. They updated the image and shined up the tired old brand.

Today AT&T is one of the fastest growing industry giants. This is a huge success story. Sure there were bumps in the road, but after the acquisitions they started a new growth wave which they are still riding today.

The local phone business and the long distance business days were numbered. Sure they are still around, but they are not the growth parts of the business.

Today the growth parts of AT&T business are wireless with AT&T Mobility (previously Cingular), broadband, television with IPTV and new services like wireless security and home automation, wireless healthcare, wireless automotive, and helping other industries use wireless to meet the future.

So AT&T is a company who continues to ride wave after wave. They donít wait for the first wave to crest and fall. Instead they continue to introduce new waves to the mix. AT&T continues to grow.

Motorola is another example. Motorola was the first, best and biggest in the handset business, for generations. Then they missed the move from analog network to digital. Nokia (NOK)  took over the lead for the next decade.

Motorola, which had been riding their multi-decade long wave up, had crested and was now on the downside of the wave. Finally after years they came up with the Razr. This should have been the beginning of their recovery.

Instead the Razr was a one hit wonder. It was a wave they rode up, then when they had nothing to replace it with, Motorola started to fall once again. Then the company was a mess for years to come.

Finally Motorola got together with Verizon and marketed the Droid wireless phone. This kept them alive. Then the company split up. They were eventually acquired by Google (GOOG)  not long ago. Now Lenovo wants them.

I hope they can ride the growth wave once again, but who knows what the future of Motorola is at this point.

Apple, AT&T and Motorola are just three examples of the wave. Itís important when choosing a company to work with, partner with or invest in, to find one that is on the growth side of the wave.

Unfortunately most people just look at the brand name and the products in the market today and that is simply not enough. Sometimes it takes a bit of time for reality to catch up and bite you in the rear end.

Choosing the right company on the growth side of the wave is always a much better place to be, hands down.

By Jeff Kagan     March 27, 2014 5:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-every-company-rides-wave-up-and-down#sthash.Pt5ADBGK.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-cloud-based-computing-winners-and-losers

Jeff Kagan: Cloud Based Computing Winners and Losers

By Jeff Kagan

March 20, 2014 7:30PM   

Tickers Mentioned: T

 S

 AMZN

 GOOG

 AAPL

 CARB

 ORCL

Cloud based computing is getting lots of attention lately. It is one of those brand new technologies that is very chaotic. There are winners and losers and they will continue to change. However it is not really new. What we see now is new thinking, new ideas, new technology and expansion in new areas. Today, only some companies seem to be doing well in this space.

Cloud computing itself is not new. Companies have been using it for many years letting their workers log on to the network. Data and software are stored on the network. Users simply log on and work.

The cloud is also not new in the open consumer marketplace. There are countless examples, but just think of Amazon.com (AMZN)  and Carbonite (CARB)  to understand. These are e-commerce and automatic backup services. And there are many more.

The cloud has been with us for a while, but now it is growing and changing and expanding. As an example, think of the smartphone side of the wireless business. Smartphones have been around for a couple decades already. Think Blackberry and Palm. However the smartphone segment changed and expanded rapidly a few short years ago when Apple iPhone (AAPL) , Google Android (GOOG)  and Samsung Galaxy hit the streets.

The entire smartphone segment rapidly changed. Carriers now focus on providing fast access to data and apps. And the app market has exploded from a few hundred to nearly a million in just a few short years. So smartphones may have been with us for a while, but this new expanded smartphone market changed everything.

Thatís what is happening with cloud computing. There are well-known, older companies and technologies that are trying to ride this wave and continue to lead. At the same time there are brand new ideas and companies whose technologies are dramatically changing the world.

Not every company in this space does well. During the last few years, anything having to do with cloud computing seemed to be a hit. However now it seems things are shifting. Many older and more established companies and ideas are having a tougher time staying in the sweet spot.

The real hits seem to be the new ideas and companies and technologies. Some of these come from new companies who want to change the world. Others still come from existing players.

Today some existing brand name players seem to continue hitting home runs, while others are struggling.

So what is the cloud? Itís actually many different things depending on the company, the technology and the marketplace they serve.

The cloud can be software as a service. Rather than buying software at a store on a disk, you just log on and use it. It is always updated automatically.

Or the cloud can be a platform as a service. Think of the Apple iCloud where users store all their data on the iCloud rather than on their devices.

Or it can be infrastructure as a service. This is a wide-ranging offering.

And that is just today. The cloud continues to expand. What will the cloud be in the next few years as it continues to grow and change and expand?

Today there are private cloud and public cloud services customers can use, plus there are hybrid cloud offerings as well.

Some of the bigger names in the cloud space are Amazon.com, Google, Oracle Cloud (ORCL) , Microsoft Azure (MFST) , Salesforce (CRM) , Zoho and many others.

There are also service providers who I believe will be important players in this cloud space like AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink (CTL) , Sprint (S) and C Spire on both the wireless and wire line side. This is also an opportunity for companies like Windstream (WIN)  who are service providers and already have the kind of corporate customer that can use the cloud.

Thursday a company called Q2 went public. CEO Matthew Flake said in an interview on CNBC that Q2 is a smaller and newer company breaking into the rapidly growing and changing cloud space. They seem to see a very bright future.

At the same time consider Oracle Cloud. Oracle is a well-known, long time brand name yet it seems to be struggling in this cloud sector currently. Can they recover? Yes of course. ďWill they?Ē is the real question.

What this means is there are no guarantees. Some well-known brand name companies will do well while others will struggle. And many newcomers have the chance to rattle the cages and really breakout in this new and fast growing space.

So who will lead? Will it be smaller and newer technologies who are the nimble ones? Or will it be existing brand name leaders who either continue to grow or successfully regroup and recapture their growth waves?

Good questions. The answer is some companies from both groups. All I can tell you right now is the cloud is the future. There will be public and private and hybrid clouds that will touch every aspect of our business and personal lives.

The cloud is one of those spaces that is young and developing and changing. Often it takes small and nimble companies to make sharp turns and continue to open markets. Then again look at how well established companies like AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless have done with their cloud offerings supporting the new smartphone world.

By Jeff Kagan   +Follow          March 20, 2014 7:30PM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-cloud-based-computing-winners-and-losers#sthash.prWk47zV.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Why-Didnt-Fliers-on-Malaysia-Airlines-Flight-370-Call-or-Text-80169.html

ANALYSIS

Why Didn't Fliers on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Call or Text?

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

03/20/14 5:00 AM PT

If there were no messages received, does it mean the plane experienced a sudden catastrophe? Based on the latest news accounts, the answer seems to be no. The plane flew off course for several hours. So why didn't anyone send messages? Were they unable to? Were they unconscious? There's speculation that a sudden elevation change could have knocked everyone out quickly. Is that what happened?

There has been quite a bit of media speculation on the loss of Malaysia Flight 370. However, many important questions simply are not being answered yet. One that many people are wondering about is this: Why didn't anyone on board that plane call or text message anyone?

During the last week I have appeared on many news shows -- NBC, CNN with Wolf Blitzer, FOX News with Megyn Kelly, and an assortment of other shows on national networks. The same questions repeatedly come up, but there are no answers.

One I've been pondering is this: Why didn't the passengers on Malaysia Flight 370 call, email or text any messages?

Deceptive Ringing

Some family members have been upset because when they called the cellphones of their loved ones on the flight they would hear several rings before the call attempt would fail. Unfortunately, that means nothing. If you're calling a landline, when you hear it ring, it is ringing.

However, cellular calls don't work that way. When you dial and press send, you start to hear ringing -- but that does not mean it's ringing on the other end. It simply signifies the network is searching for the phone you are dialing.

If both phones are on the same network in the same country, the connection can be made on the first ring. If there are two different networks involved, it can take another ring or two. If the two networks are from different countries, the number of rings can stretch out longer.

To give you an example, my wife and I use two different wireless networks. When she calls my wireless phone from her wireless phone, she often hears several rings before I hear it ring once. Hearing the sound of a phone ringing on the other end means nothing, unfortunately.

If a plane is flying high, or over the ocean or a non-populated area, there are likely no cell towers to log onto. If a wireless phone is not logged on to a cell tower, it's not connected. If it's not connected, then it's no better than a paperweight. It simply won't work.

There are other ways to message, however.

Sat Phones and WiFi

There are phones in many planes today. These are not traditional cellphones. Instead, they connect to the airplane, then to a satellite, and then to the ground. These are expensive, but a great way to call from the air.

Were phones like these on the Malaysia Airlines plane? If so, were they used? Why has there been no answer to this question as yet?

What about WiFi? Many U.S. domestic flights offer Internet access through Gogo In-flight and other services, allowing users to send email and chat messages.

Was WiFi available on Flight 370? Were any messages received? Why no answer to this question yet?

If there were no messages received, does it mean the plane experienced a sudden catastrophe? If you believe the latest news accounts, the answer seems to be no. The plane flew off course several hours. So why were the passengers not sending messages? Were they unable to? Were they unconscious?

There's speculation that a sudden elevation change could have knocked everyone out quickly. Is that what happened?

Then there is cellphone jamming technology. Sure, it's illegal, but so is hijacking a plane. It could have rendered every phone and computer on the plane unable to communicate.

I'm raising questions, not suggesting answers. I have no answers. I am not an aviation expert, but I have been following wireless technology for decades. Someone must have at least some of these answers, right?

Malaysia Airlines should answer these questions. Did this plane have wireless phones or WiFi for fliers to use? Families and international searchers need answers.

Sat Tracking Overdue

For the future, we can learn many lessons. One thing we must do going forward is make sure every plane that flies has every bit of technology help available.

For one thing, it should not be possible for pilots or anyone on a plane to turn off its tracking technology.

Every plane should be equipped with satellite tracking technology. U.S. planes will have it -- but possibly not until as late as 2020. The timetables for other countries to adopt this tech is unknown.

We need Malaysia to be more open with the world so we can fill in the blanks. Let's start with whether this flight was equipped with satellite phones or WiFi service. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Why-Didnt-Fliers-on-Malaysia-Airlines-Flight-370-Call-or-Text-80169.html#sthash.GPhwCA7j.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-sprint-chairman-on-ultra-fast-internet-and-t-mobile-merger

Jeff Kagan: Sprint Chairman on Ultra Fast Internet and T-Mobile Merger

By  Jeff Kagan 

March 12, 2014 6:00AM  

Tickers Mentioned: S

 T

 TMUS

 VZ

Masayoshi Son was not on anyoneís radar a year ago, but he is punching his way onto the US wireless map these days.

He is the new Chairman of wireless carrier Sprint (S) . Son was on CNBC the morning of March 11 talking with reporter David Faber, and had some very eye opening and industry reshaping things to say.

Son says wireless Internet speeds are too slow and too expensive. He says he wants to change that in the USA. He says other countries are faster and less expensive and wonders why this is not the case here as well. He has a plan to remedy this situation.

Son is head of Softbank, a very large and successful wireless and technology company in Japan. Softbank acquired 80 percent of Sprint last summer. Now he is Sprint chairman and Dan Hesse is Sprint CEO. Son flies to the US on a regular basis and meets with Hesse and other execs and plan their strategy.

First Hesse says they are ripping out every last piece of equipment on the Sprint wireless network and replacing it with brand new technology that can handle much faster speeds and much more innovation. This will take a few more years to compete, but they are moving very rapidly.

Next, Son wants to merge with T-Mobile (TMUS) . US regulators are not so excited about this idea. They already said no to AT&T (T)  a few years ago. What will they say to Sprint?

The question is simple. Will the US marketplace remain with four top competitors, AT&T, Verizon (VZ) ,Sprint and T-Mobile, or will he make his case and we will have three major competitors?

There are good points on both sides. I guess itís a matter of which way the US regulators want the wireless industry to develop going forward. And even if the answer is no today, Softbank could still win T-Mobile under another government administration a few years from now. So either way this is not a short story.

This is the case Masayoshi Son is making to the American people. Of course the American people donít vote one way or the other. Thatís the job of regulators like the DoJ and the FCC. However Son wants T Mobile and is willing to take his story to the people of this country and try and win support.

The more I see Masayoshi Son, the more I like him. He may be the wealthiest man in Japan, but he also has what it takes to shake things up in the US wireless industry. Whether he can persuade US regulators is another question. Weíll see.

One example he discussed on March 11 was how in other countries the wireless Internet speeds are getting faster and price is falling. This is the typical technology path by the way. The longer something is in the market, the better and faster and cheaper it typically gets.

Son says it does not work that way with wireless Internet in the USA. Here our Internet speeds are still slow and prices continue to rise compared with the rest of the world. He says in the US market the price keeps going up.

When we say Internet, itís important to realize there is more than one kind. There is the wire line Internet from the phone company or cable television company, and there is the wireless Internet provided by wireless carriers. Son is talking about the wireless Internet where speeds are slower and more expensive than wire line.

However, with or without Son I would say that this whole space is beginning to change. Example, ultra high-speed wire line Internet is starting to expand around the country. We see large and small companies stepping into this new space.

Wireless carrier C Spire is building and will roll out ultra fast, wire line Internet in cities throughout Mississippi. This is very interesting, a wireless carrier moving into a wire line space.

Ultra high-speed moves from a growing list of companies like AT&T and Google is very exciting. And we are still on the very early steps of this very fast new world.

Masayoshi Son and Sprint want to be part of this world. They want to drive it. They want to bring this ultra fast Internet to the wireless world as well. He says in the USA, wireless Internet speeds are in the 5 Ė 10 megabits per second. Landline broadband is 20 Ė 30 mbps.

He then says they would like to provide up to 200 mbps speeds. Thatís the target they have. He did not mention price, but either way thatís pretty impressive.

He says in Japan they already have 20 Ė 60 mbps and they are testing in Tokyo a speed of 700 mbps on the street. He says nationwide coverage at this speed will take several years.

So one way or another, tomorrow will be very fast indeed because as I mentioned above, we already see competitors jumping into this same area on the wire line side.

Son says he is throwing a stone into the pond. The wake-up call. Will he be successful? Who knows. Weíll just have to wait and see. But tomorrow seems very exciting indeed. Stay tuned.

 By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow        March 12, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/telecommunication/jeff-kagan-sprint-chairman-on-ultra-fast-internet-and-t-mobile-merger#sthash.UVSg0GyC.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Malaysia-Airlines-Flight-370-False-Hope-in-the-Sound-of-Ringing-Phones-80116.html

ANALYSIS

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370: False Hope in the Sound of Ringing Phones

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

03/11/14 9:13 AM PT  

If the calling phone and the receiving phone are on the same network, the call can connect more quickly. If they are on two different networks, it can take a bit longer. If the two networks are in different countries, it often takes even longer to connect. When you hear the sound of a phone ringing several times, that does not mean it is ringing at the other end.

 

I received a call from NBC News on Monday about an interesting angle on the Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 mystery.

Relatives of passengers on the missing aircraft apparently said they had dialed the cellphone numbers of loved ones on the flight and reported that the phones rang -- several times in fact. Then the calls were terminated. What could this mean?

Nineteen family representatives signed a statement affirming that when they dialed their loved ones, their phones rang rather than immediately going to voice mail, according to a report published in China.org.cn. That has raised quite a few questions.

Many Variations

We all know that sometimes a call goes directly to voice mail. Other times, the network says the party you are calling is unavailable. There are all sorts of possible responses or messages, depending on the network and the circumstances. There is no common way every network handles every different attempted call.

This has caused confusion among friends, family and others following this event. I am sorry to say that when you hear ringing, it means nothing.

The way the wireless industry works is that each cellphone carrier simply chooses what happens when a call is placed. It is often different depending whether the calling party and receiving party are on the same network, on two different networks, in the same town or in different countries.

The missing Malaysia Airlines plane was flying over open water, far from any towers transmitting cellular signals. Smartphone batteries typically don't last several days -- however, the batteries in ordinary cellphones can last up to a week or so.

Many cellphone carriers worldwide have set up their systems to start the ringing sound immediately after the caller dials the last number and presses send. The idea is to signal that the call is being connected.

What happens next is that the network tries to find the phone being called in order to complete the connection. This lasts several seconds, during which the phone may ring several times. If the party you are dialing is found, the call is completed. If not, the call is disconnected.

No Connection

When my wife calls me, she says it rings several times before I answer. However, when my phone starts ringing, I pick it up on the first ring. That difference is the time is takes the two different networks to talk together and connect the call.

If the calling phone and the receiving phone are on the same network, the call can connect more quickly. If they are on two different networks, it can take a bit longer. If the two networks are in different countries, it often takes even longer to connect.

The reason I'm writing this is just to provide clarification about what can be a very confusing process. When you hear the sound of a phone ringing several times, that does not mean it is ringing at the other end.

This missing Malaysia flight is one of the biggest mysteries we have ever seen. How does an airplane simply vanish? My prayers are with the travelers and their families who are anxiously waiting to learn what happened and what happens next. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Malaysia-Airlines-Flight-370-False-Hope-in-the-Sound-of-Ringing-Phones-80116.html#sthash.76lrArgd.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/consumer-discretionary/jeff-kagan-can-radio-shack-recover-before-it-s-too-late

Jeff Kagan: Can Radio Shack Recover Before Itís Too Late?

By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow        March 7, 2014 6:00AM  

Tickers Mentioned: RSH   EBAY   BBY    S

Radio Shack (RSH)  said on Tuesday they will close roughly 20 percent of their stores. What does the future hold for this long time electronics giant? Weíve seen this story before. Best Buy (BBY)  is just one of many examples as they struggle to recover. Circuit City wasnít so lucky. So what is the future of Radio Shack?

We all know how the Internet has changed everything. Companies like Amazon.com (AMZN)  and eBay (EBAY)  grow like crazy, eating everyoneís lunch, while it seems more traditional retail stores struggle and even disappear one after the other.

This has been a story we have been discussing for 20 years. The Internet started its mainstream push to reinvent the entire retail establishment, worldwide around that time. There were plenty of Internet failures, but there were also plenty of successes and they are changing the way people compare and shop.

We continually watch big name retailers lose, one by one to the Internet giants. However not all lose. There are also plenty of traditional retailers who are still growing like crazy and doing strong business. These come from every corner of the marketplace serving both the high and low end.

So what is the problem at the companies like Radio Shack who struggle? And what can they do in order to recover?

Thatís the million dollar question and the answer is not all that complicated. Find the right leadership who understands the new challenges and opportunities, and who is willing to change the company thinking and update the brand image in the marketplace.

Let me give you one clear example. AT&T (T)  and the Baby Bells were the leaders in the telephone business for well over 100 years. AT&T handled long distance nationwide and the baby bells, local phone service in regions. Of course they had no competition so it wasnít as difficult to maintain that position.

Then the world changed. Competition came. First it was companies like MCI and Sprint (S)  on the long distance side. They were tiny competitors aimed at AT&T. The baby bells saw this and in the early 1990ís decided to prepare. So they focused on improving their relationship with their customers and freshening their brand and offerings. It worked. Today they enjoy a much stronger customer relationship.

AT&T decided since it was going to go into competition with the baby bells they had to change as well. However they changed by modernizing their offerings. They didnít focus on repairing their relationship with customers and refreshing the brand. That was the mistake.

Through the 1990ís, AT&T was under attack, yet it still got into other businesses and continued to grow. They got a new CEO, became the largest wireless company and the largest cable television provider when they acquired TCI out of Denver. This helped them compete with the brand new Americast television service from the Baby Bells.

We thought things looked good. Then the Telecom Act of 1996 set up the rules for competition moving forward. It said both AT&T and the baby bells would be able to sell the same local and long distance services and compete with each other.

That was the world we thought was coming. That was before anyone knew the Internet and wireless revolution were about to transform the entire industry virtually overnight.

We all thought everything was looking good at AT&T until we suddenly realized it wasnít. AT&T was failing. Losing to the Baby Bells. So over the next few years they spun off their wireless business, which then became Cingular. They sold their cable television business to a small cable TV company called Comcast. They lost consumers to the baby bells as well.

So all that was left at AT&T was a small, business services company. The company had failed, had shrunk, and was now lying on its deathbed. It was a sad and depressing time.

Actually it was sort of like the Radio Shack story today. What happens next to Radio Shack is what is most important.

In AT&Tís case, one of the small Baby Bells, SBC out of San Antonio Texas decided to make a play. They acquired the failing AT&T, but they didnít stop there. They also acquired BellSouth and Cingular over a couple short years. They seemed to transform from the smallest to the largest of the Baby Bells.

What happened next was a stroke of genius. SBC changed its name to AT&T. It changed the Cingular name to AT&T Mobility and kept the headquarters in Atlanta. It moved the San Antonio HQ to Dallas for more good workers, more growth potential, and then it started to rapidly grow.

AT&T CEO Ed Whitacker retired and was replaced by another SBC fire starter Randall Stephenson who has grown the company to incredible heights during the last decade. He updated and refreshed the brand and the entire experience with the customer. The two of them transformed AT&T from dying on the vine to one of the two largest and most powerful companies in the United States.

So a weakened company lying on the deathbed does not mean itís over. It just means itís time for some major changes. Itís time to transform the company to compete and win going forward before itís too late.

Look at Best Buy as an example. Best Buy has too many very large stores. They must shrink their store footprint and increase sales. Something they do indeed seem to be making progress at. It takes too long, but they are heading in the right direction.

The same solution could work at Radio Shack. Except they have small stores. So they have to increase their tiny store sizes. Which means they may have to close more, smaller stores and replace them with fewer, larger stores. And reinvent their Internet and online presence. Then they can grow from there.

Is Radio Shack finished? No they are not. Not as long as they believe they are not finished. Not yet at least.

It all depends on what they do going forward. They still have one of the oldest and best-known brands in the business. Just like AT&T did. However it needs to be updated and refreshed, just like AT&T did.

Radio Shack tried to become the number one retail environment in the wireless space. It didnít work. Customers didnít know that. Customers follow their marketing noses. And Radio Shack simply never busted out above the ambient noise of the industry.

They can do it. It takes new and fresh thinking. New ideas. They must modernize the brand. They must become important to the customer for some strategic reasons. That means they have to spend to reinvent. And they must be bigger and bolder and louder than the industry noise so they can be noticed.

So can they do it? Of course. The real question is ďWill they?Ē

By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow        March 7, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/consumer-discretionary/jeff-kagan-can-radio-shack-recover-before-it-s-too-late#sthash.dbN77vkN.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Sprint-Softbanks-Jockeying-for-the-Inside-Track-80093.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80093.html?rss=1  

ANALYSIS

Sprint Softbank's Jockeying for the Inside Track

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

03/06/14 6:15 AM PT

A Sprint T-Mobile merger may appear almost impossible because of early regulator pushback, but I expect Softbank's Masayoshi Son to pull out all the stops as he continues to work with regulators. I am not saying the deal will absolutely get done. However, Son has demonstrated that he is willing to bend until he wins approval. I think that's exactly what's happening behind the scenes right now.

 

What is going on with Sprint Softbank? What will the company look like when it finally emerges from its cocoon? Who else will it merge with? Where will it be based? There has been quite a bit of transformational work going on.

Sprint and Softbank won U.S. government approval after months of vigorous debate and got together last summer. It once seemed doubtful the merger would happen, yet it did. Then Sprint Softbank went quiet. It started rebuilding the Sprint network. It said that it would emerge as one of the industry's leaders.

In addition to rebuilding Sprint's existing network, Softbank seems very interested in making other acquisitions in the U.S. marketplace. T-Mobile may be a target, although no official offer has been made. So far, it appears T-Mobile would be a willing participant in such a deal. U.S. regulators, though, are another story.

Give In Until You Win

Today, U.S. regulators seem opposed to a Sprint, T-Mobile merger. That typically would be enough to convince most companies to drop the idea and move on. However, that's not what I think will happen here.

The same kind of negative talk surrounded the Sprint, Softbank merger. No one thought it stood much of a chance -- yet it did happen. Why? Masayoshi Son, CEO of Softbank.

Faced with regulator push back once again, Masayoshi Son, the man who doesn't know the meaning of the word "no," is about to make his case directly to the American people, business community and regulators. His mission: to convince everyone that further consolidation would improve the wireless industry.

Son has met with pushback before and has won. He painted such a rosy picture of the future of the wireless industry that it became very persuasive. Although he has not been shy in painting Softbank as the leader of that new world, Son understands the importance of getting the deal done. He is willing to bend in ways most CEOs aren't. The bottom line is that often surprisingly, he gets deals done.

The T-Mobile deal may appear almost impossible because of early regulator pushback, but I expect Son to pull out all the stops as he continues to work with regulators. I am not saying the deal will absolutely get done. No one knows what the future holds. However, I have watched Son in the past, and he is willing to bend until he wins approval. I think that's exactly what's happening behind the scenes right now.

With or without a T-Mobile win, Softbank will be on the hunt for the next acquisition. Son's success in closing the deal with Sprint set Softbank on a new course in the U.S., targeting the No. 1 position. Son wants to reinvent the entire wireless industry in the U.S., and he wants to win.

Expect Softbank to be an important player in the U.S. market going forward.

Out of the Gates

Son takes a very long-term view of the industry. By "long term," I don't mean quarters or even years, but decades -- many decades.

Today, Sprint is a million miles away from AT&T and Verizon; however, Softbank wants the new Sprint to lead the next wave of wireless growth. Softbank is investing billions to update the Sprint network. It is working hard behind the scenes right now to reinvent the company.

Sprint is going through a complete reinvention, said Sprint CEO Dan Hesse, during an appearance last week CNBC's Mad Money with Jim Cramer. It is ripping out every component of its existing network and replacing it with brand new technology. This is very costly and takes time, but what Sprint ultimately will have is a very fast, very reliable and very competitive wireless offering.

Over time, I have learned not to dismiss what Dan Hesse says.

Like AT&T and Verizon, Sprint is moving rapidly into new areas of wireless -- areas like mHealth, automotive, retail and many others. There are plenty of growth opportunities in the wireless industry, and Sprint Softbank wants to take advantage of all of them.

Ultimately, the deal depends what regulators have in mind. Sprint has argued the deal would transform the industry into one with a three top competitors. That may be the only reason I think it has a chance -- and with Masayoshi Son and Dan Hesse leading the charge, this deal may indeed stand a chance.

The question then boils down to the regulators' vision of the industry. Is it one with three big competitors, or do they see two big ones and two smaller, yet rapidly growing players, possibly leading to a big four?

There's a lot of speculation about whether Sprint will move to California's Silicon Valley. Sprint and Softbank have been meeting in Silicon Valley on a regular basis to report and plan. That will continue.

However, I don't believe Sprint will leave Kansas City. Moving the headquarters to California and going through the massive chaos dealing with people is just not likely to happen. I have followed Sprint forever, and I can almost guarantee it will stay put.

I can't tell you who will lead the wireless industry five or 10 years from today. No one can. No one can say what the industry will look like that far out. Remember, the iPhone -- which transformed the entire industry -- is only a few years old. However, a real horse race has begun.

The exciting part of this story is that this is just the beginning. Stay tuned. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80093.html?rss=1#sthash.pnFYHcer.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Comcast-Netflix-Deal-Watershed-Moment-for-Web-Content-80053.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80053.html 

OPINION

Comcast-Netflix Deal: Watershed Moment for Web Content

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

02/27/14 5:00 AM PT

The average customer may not notice a difference resulting from the Comcast-Netflix deal. However, the companies that are involved in providing services to those customers surely will notice. The entire economic model of the industry is being rewritten, to a certain extent. The opportunities are incredible. This deal may even have an impact on the Net Neutrality tug-of-war.

 

The Comcast Netflix deal represents a completely new and refreshing direction for the industry. It clears away much confusion and illuminates a clearer path for growth for all companies in the battle. This deal represents a watershed moment for Web content providers.

Congratulations to both Comcast and Netflix on reaching this agreement. It may indeed play an important role in jump-starting the next wave of change and growth in the industry, setting new standards and perhaps helping to resolve the Net neutrality debate that has been raging for years.

Netflix has grown rapidly over the last few years. It started out as a competitor to companies like Blockbuster renting video DVDs. It mailed them to customers, sending the next rental in the queue whenever the one outstanding was returned. It was an interesting model early on.

Today Netflix is an entirely different company. Growth in recent years has come from its direct online connection to customers. For a monthly fee, Netflix makes its movies and TV shows available through a direct streaming connection over the Internet. Those shows can then be watched on a Web-connected TV like regular television shows, or on a computer, tablet or even smartphone.

Begin the Beguine

However, Netflix's rapid growth caused some problems. Along with success came far greater bandwidth requirements. In fact, Netflix is responsible for roughly one-third of all U.S. Internet traffic every evening. That's incredible for any one company.

Netflix never paid a toll to ride on the information superhighway. As it continued to grow, it must have known this deal would not last forever. When the Net neutrality decision recently fell on the service provider side, that gave Comcast some room to make a point.

Netflix couldn't afford to have its streaming content delivered slowly. That was something it wanted to avoid at all costs. The party was over. The need for high-quality performance brought Netflix to the table.

Comcast was just the first. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings likely is having conversations with every other major Internet service provider as well.

Netflix currently does business with other companies that put their stuff up on the Web. This deal with Comcast means it can work directly rather than through a middleman of sorts.

Of course, that will still be the rule in markets other than Comcast's, but new deals likely will change things in the next few quarters.

I see Netflix striking similar deals with every Comcast competitor, including other cable television firms, satellite-TV providers and telephone companies. Time Warner Cable, Cox, AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink and many smaller companies are likely to be next.

Netflix won't be the only one paying for high performance -- other companies with high bandwidth requirements will be jumping into the fray as well.

Change Is the Only Constant

Remember, this whole Internet world is brand new. It was only 20 years ago, around 1994, when consumers started sending email and surfing the Web in droves. Service at the time was very slow, and video was sparse. That was back in the days when AOL and Prodigy were the two big ISPs.

Two decades is just the blink of an eye for a major industry, but even in that short time, the structure of the Internet has undergone radical changes. It's always changing. Who deals with whom is changing. At this early stage, the very heavy hitters are running the show, but over time the industry will expand to envelop everyone.

The average customer may not notice a difference. However, the companies that are involved in providing services to those customers surely will notice. The entire economic model of the industry is being rewritten, to a certain extent.

The opportunities are incredible, as industry after industry adopts the Internet and it changes their basic operations. We are just in the very early stages of this new world -- and this will encourage more change. It may even have an impact on the Net Neutrality arguments and help to settle the issue one way or the other.

So expect this new agreement Netflix struck with Comcast to be the first of many similar agreements -- and expect other content providers to jump in to forge deals as well. Expect the world to keep changing. 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Comcast-Netflix-Deal-Watershed-Moment-for-Web-Content-80053.html#sthash.lHTLhca7.dpuf

 


 

http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-will-facebook-whatsapp-voice-calling-be-a-winner

Jeff Kagan: Will Facebook WhatsApp Voice Calling be a Winner?

By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow        February 27, 2014 6:00AM  

Tickers Mentioned: FB   VZ   TMUS   S    TWC

Last week Facebook (FB)  made news with their announced acquisition of WhatsApp. Then at the Mobile World Congress show in Barcelona a few days ago they announced WhatsApp would start offering a voice service. What impact will this have on the telephone industry?

As an industry analyst I have followed this space for decades. I have watched consolidation, changing regulation, new technology and new competitors change the space, time and time again.

This industry has changed and continues to change both rapidly and dramatically over the years. So can WhatsApp make a dent in this robust industry?

Bottom line, while Facebook may see WhatsApp as some sort of Holy Grail, and while it may have a positive impact for them, I donít see this changing the direction or leadership of the industry.

Telephone was a growth engine until around the year 2000. Then with new regulation, new competition and new technology from things like wireless and VoIP, plain old telephone service or POTS started to decline from all the major providers.

This was simply innovation at work. We see providers like AT&T (T) , Verizon (VZ) , CenturyLink and many other smaller telephone companies losing traditional market share. So they started expanding and growing into other areas. Today they are the leaders in wireless, Internet and more recently television with their IPTV offerings called Uverse, FiOS and Prism. They are also moving into other segments as well like home security.

Over the last ten to fifteen years, other companies have entered this voice space as well. Companies like Comcast ($CMCST), Time Warner Cable (TWC) , Cox and other cable television providers sell their VoIP telephone service over the Internet. Other VoIP providers as well like RingCentral, Skype, Vonage and others. Plus the wireless industry is exploding with many competitors to choose from like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint (S) , T-Mobile (TMUS) , US Cellular, C Spire and many others.

Facebook has been interested in entering and reinventing the wireless space for a while. Their first attempt a year or so ago was a complete flop. They introduced their first Facebook phone, which only lasted a few months before it was pulled.

Facebook sees mobile as important for their future so expect to see more movement. Their Apps are successful, and now with WhatsApp they should be more successful in theory.

However where does WhatsApp fit into this new voice world? They are not a phone company. They have no experience with telephone or VoIP service. They will be competing with many companies who have plenty of brand recognition. So what kind of opportunity will they really have?

The plan is during the second quarter of this year, they will add a free voice-calling feature to its text-messaging app for both the iPhone and Android. Next will come Blackberry and Windows Phone if all works well.

They say this voice feature will be free and let people talk all over the USA and in fact the world. They see this as the next step.

While it is impossible to say what the world will look like five or ten years from now, and while this all sounds good and may indeed be a growth platform for WhatsApp and Facebook, I donít see it having any kind of major impact on the telecom market.

Today there are many competitors in this space. Some are doing very strong business while others are not, but the marketplace is bustling with competition. In that space what kind of impact can a new competitor have on the industry?

While this is a growth opportunity, it wonít impact the industry.

So I would like to congratulate Facebook on doing this deal, which they think is important for their growth going forward. And I would like to congratulate WhatsApp on the deal of a lifetime. And I would also like to congratulate both on adventuring into the wild world of voice communications.

While this may be a growth opportunity for Facebook and WhatsApp, I donít think it will impact the competitive lineup of the telecom industry. If it is successful it will just be one of many players.

By  Jeff Kagan   +Follow        February 27, 2014 6:00AM 

- See more at: http://www.equities.com/editors-desk/stocks/technology/jeff-kagan-will-facebook-whatsapp-voice-calling-be-a-winner#sthash.1jXB9Xzt.dpuf

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Comcast-TWC-Merger-Is-All-About-Investors-80005.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/80005.html

ANALYSIS

Comcast-TWC Merger Is All About Investors  

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

02/20/14 5:00 AM PT

In order to be successful going forward, cable-TV companies must become customer-focused. Any company that is unloved by its customers will surely die. So, is the cable television industry becoming lovable to its customers? Not yet. At this point, the Comcast, Time Warner Cable story is less about the customer than the investor. It's about making Comcast larger and stronger.

 

What's most unexpected about the acquisition of Time Warner Cable is that the buyer is Comcast. Will the regulators give their blessing or block the deal? If approved, what changes can we expect as investors, customers and workers? If it is not approved, then what comes next?

The cable television industry is completely different today from 10 years ago. This business model originally was set up with one company offering service in each market. There was no competition -- the same way the local phone business was operated.

Over time, several serious problems developed. One was that customer care was terrible. Without the risk of losing customers, cable television companies didn't take good care of them, and service was terrible.

Do you remember the old TV comedy Laugh-In, with Lily Tomlin playing Ernestine -- a telephone operator with a sour attitude? She would sit in front of a terminal and dial up customers -- "one ringy dingy, two ringy dingys."

Most phone customers could relate -- they'd had their own unfortunate experiences with phone company employees like Ernestine. The Baby Bells had a lousy reputation -- and did we ever complain about phone service. Back then, they faced no competition, though, so they didn't care.

In fact, one of Ernestine's favorite lines was "we don't have to care -- we're the phone company." Well, that's the line cable television employees could be using today.

Merger Madness

Then change came. In the early 1990s, the telephone companies woke up. They saw competition coming, and over the years, they transformed themselves. Today's phone companies take great care of their customers. Are they perfect? No -- but customers today are very happy with most telephone companies' service.

The cable television industry is following the same path. Cable companies are beginning to recognize there is a customer care problem. They are improving their relationships with customers, but they have a long way to go.

Companies like Comcast, Time Warner Cable and others are losing customers and market share to the new competitors like AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS, CenturyLink Prism, and satellite-TV players DirecTV and DISH Network.

As the cable television industry tries to deal with this new competitive pressure, merger mania has begun. Ten or 15 years ago, the cable-TV industry was full of small competitors. Then Comcast acquired AT&T Broadband, the largest cable TV company in the United States.

Today there are fewer and larger cable television competitors. However, they are still losing business and market share -- and the merger wave continues.

The Comcast, Time Warner Cable deal is attracting a great deal of attention because these companies are No. 1 and 2, and the deal affects so many customers and investors.

Regulators still have to weigh in. One line of thought was that Comcast never would be allowed to acquire Time Warner Cable. No. 1 acquiring No. 2 is never allowed. On the other hand, these two companies are not really competitors. They operate in different markets.

So a merger may not change the competitive landscape. It could, however, change the power structure going forward.

Perhaps regulators will approve this merger. However, Comcast would have to agree to concessions -- and that's the sticky part.

Investors Rule, Customers Drool

Among those conditions might be a requirement to take better care of all customers -- not just the top-of-the-line customers who buy all the new services, but all customers -- even basic service customers. The company would have to increase lower-cost options and let the customer choose.

The cable television customer pie has many slices, and each slice wants something different. Some want everything and are willing to pay for it, while others want a basic package and want to pay less. Some simply can't afford to pay much each month for cable television.

I don't know if senior management at Comcast understands how unhappy many of its customers really are. Then again, it may not care.

Comcast does not focus on the customer -- it focuses on the investor. So, investors are happy, while many customers are not. That's the reason so many leave and go to competitors like the local phone company's IPTV television service.

The cable television companies either can react by becoming more customer-focused or by trying to shut down the competition. Unfortunately, they are trying to shut down new competitors like Aereo.

In order to be successful going forward, however, they must focus on the customer. Any company that is unloved by its customers will surely die. So, is the cable television industry becoming lovable to its customers? Not yet.

At this point, the Comcast, Time Warner Cable story is less about the customer than the investor. It's about making Comcast larger and stronger.

Time Warner Cable customers already use the same services as Comcast customers. The services just have different names. After the merger, they all will be called "Xfinity," but very little will change for the customer.

Prices have been rising steadily in this industry, year after year. Every 10 years, we pay roughly twice as much. That won't change. I don't necessarily see this merger causing prices to rise faster -- but Comcast is not shy about increasing prices as fast as it can.

What will Time Warner Cable customers get that they don't already get today? Not much. As the industry continues to grow and change, all competitors move in the same direction.

Does Comcast need to acquire Time Warner Cable? Well, since it is the largest cable company and also the owner of other channels and networks, like NBC, the answer is no.

Perhaps it would make more sense for Time Warner Cable to merge with and strengthen another cable television competitor.

Many expected Liberty Media CEO John Malone to jump in and acquire Time Warner Cable. If Comcast does not win regulator approval, Malone may be waiting in the wings. This story is not over. 

 

E-Commerce Times columnist Jeff Kagan is a technology industry analyst and consultant who enjoys sharing his colorful perspectives on the changing industry he's been watching for 25 years. Email him at jeff@jeffKAGAN.com

 

- See more at: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Comcast-TWC-Merger-Is-All-About-Investors-80005.html#sthash.rXuows6i.dpuf

 

 


 

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/Cable-TVs-Chilly-Customer-Relationships-79970.html

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/79970.html

OPINION

Cable TV's Chilly Customer Relationships

By Jeff Kagan

E-Commerce Times

02/13/14 5:00 AM PT

Many customers cannot fire their cable television company and move to the competition yet. Too many can't get AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS or CenturyLink Prism in their homes. That is one of the reasons cable TV does not really care about the customer relationship. Whether the cable television industry does well or fails tomorrow depends on how it takes care of customers today.

Quality and reliability problems have been increasing with the new digital services from the cable television industry. I am a customer of both Comcast and Time Warner Cable and have noticed the issues, and it's safe to assume other cable-TV providers are having similar problems. This may cause further harm to the cable TV industry. Can it fix what is broken in time?

First, it's important to separate the investor and the customer. My focus here is on the customer -- and generally speaking, the customers I have talked with are not happy with cable television since the switch from analog to digital.

As an industry analyst, it's interesting for me to watch cable-TV challenges. For example, Comcast acquired the service a decade ago from AT&T broadband, which years earlier acquired it from TCI out of Denver. At that time, service was analog, not digital, but it was good quality. That was before digital cable, and before phone company services like AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS and CenturyLink Prism started competing with IPTV.

After Comcast took over from AT&T, its service was actually pretty good as well. Now things are changing. It recently upgraded from analog to digital, and since then quality and reliability have suffered.

The upgrade from analog to digital is a problem not only for Comcast, but for Time Warner Cable as well -- and in fact, many other cable TV companies.

Competitors Gaining Traction

Having made the digital conversion, Comcast has stopped the analog signal in the Atlanta suburb where I live, so I have no alternative there. At another home location, though, Time Warner Cable has not yet turned off the analog network. All I had to do there was pull the digital boxes out and plug the TV back into the wall to restore good service -- for now, anyway.

Why do companies put their customers through such pain? If a company cares about its customers, it gives them options. In this case, based on what I have seen and experienced, Time Warner Cable is offering a choice, but Comcast is not.

There is a disconnect with how the cable companies interact with their customers. Sure, they are better than before. They do try. However, the bottom line is that problems do not go away. Old service is cut off, and that leaves customers high and dry -- and that hurts the brand.

Today, growing competition from the telephone companies with IPTV, satellite television like DirecTV and DISH Network -- as well as others like Aereo, Netflix and Amazon -- have caused cable television to lose market share. In order to better compete, the cable television industry has been trying to improve the way customers see it.

That's one reason it is upgrading its analog customers to digital. While that sounds great in theory, the reality is it causes quality and reliability problems. In addition, it increases the price customers have to pay.

In recent years, IPTV services from the phone companies have been rapidly growing. Suddenly, AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS and CenturyLink Prism are in direct competition with cable television providers like Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox, Charter and so on.

At a recent analyst meeting, AT&T gave an example of how its U-verse service in Dallas had already won roughly 50 percent market share competing with cable TV. That's incredible -- and it speaks to the problem customers have with their cable television services and the threat to the cable-TV industry in general.

Failure to Communicate

Another problem the cable TV industry has is in communicating with the customer. For example, even after I've scheduled an in-person appointment to fix a problem, I never know if anyone will show up. The company may fix the problem a few blocks away but not get around to filling me in until a few days later.

That means I must stay at home, even though no one shows up. That is a lack of care and courtesy toward the customer. That means the company doesn't respect my time. That further hurts the brand.

Cable television companies also warn customers they will be charged to fix problems under certain instances. That's an uneasy feeling for a customer, since the company controls everything.

If that's the case, then customers should be able to charge the cable-TV company for wasting their time and not showing up, don't you think? After all, courtesy is a two-way street.

Another problem: When I call Comcast for service, the appointment typically is more than a week out. Enduring for that length of time with a service problem is unacceptable.

These are some of the reasons cable TV companies are losing business to new competitors. Their customers are screaming for someone to take better care of them. That's why competitors like telephone companies actually are doing strong new business selling IPTV.

Unfortunately, competition is not everywhere yet. Even though customers I've talked with sound happier, too many customers still cannot get AT&T U-verse, Verizon FiOS or CenturyLink Prism in their homes.

Many customers cannot fire their cable television company and move to the competition yet. That is one of the reasons cable TV does not really care about the customer relationship.

Whether the cable television industry does well or fails tomorrow depends on how it takes care of customers today. Companies that focus on keeping their customers happy would never force those customers to a digital option, then cancel the analog escape hatch.

These problems are souring the cable-TV brand relationship and causing customers to leave in droves. This is countering the benefit the cable television companies were trying to achieve with this digital conversion.

Disaster is what the cable television industry is experiencing right now with lost market share. This problem will continue to grow until the cable television industry starts focusing on the customer and delivering great quality service and customer service -- something I hope it can do before it's too late.